Intrathecal Nalbuphine and Dexmedetomidine as Adjuvants to Bupivacaine versus Plain Bupivacaine for Orthopedic Surgeries under Subarachnoid Block: A Comparative Study.

Anesthesia, Essays and Researches Pub Date : 2022-07-01 Epub Date: 2022-12-09 DOI:10.4103/aer.aer_127_22
Bindu Nagaraj, B R Vinay, N V Vani, V P Dayananda
{"title":"Intrathecal Nalbuphine and Dexmedetomidine as Adjuvants to Bupivacaine versus Plain Bupivacaine for Orthopedic Surgeries under Subarachnoid Block: A Comparative Study.","authors":"Bindu Nagaraj,&nbsp;B R Vinay,&nbsp;N V Vani,&nbsp;V P Dayananda","doi":"10.4103/aer.aer_127_22","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In long bone surgeries, the severity of pain is more, demanding good intraoperative anesthesia, and prolonged postoperative analgesia. This is achieved in spinal anesthesia with adjuvants to local anesthetics, which act synergistically.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of nalbuphine and dexmedetomidine as adjuvants to bupivacaine versus bupivacaine alone in lower limb orthopedic surgeries under the subarachnoid block (SAB).</p><p><strong>Settings and design: </strong>This is a prospective, randomized, double-blind control study conducted on 60 patients belonging to the American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status Classes I and II, undergoing lower limb orthopedic surgeries under SAB.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Sixty patients were divided into three groups by computer-generated randomization. Group A received 2.7 mL of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine with 1.5 mg nalbuphine, Group B received 2.7 mL of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine with 10 μg dexmedetomidine, and Group C received 2.7 mL of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine with 0.5 mL of normal saline (total volume made to 3.2 mL in all groups with normal saline). Time of onset of block, duration of sensory, and motor blocks were noted. Changes in hemodynamic parameters, postoperative first rescue analgesia requirement, and side effects were recorded.</p><p><strong>Statistical analysis used: </strong>Data were analyzed using SPSS 22 version software. <i>P</i> < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was no significant difference in the onset of sensory or motor blocks in the three groups. However, the time taken for regression of sensory block was longer in Group B that was statistically significant.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Intrathecal dexmedetomidine acts as a better adjuvant with bupivacaine in providing quality anesthesia, prolonged sensory and motor block, and good postoperative analgesia with less incidence of adverse effects compared to nalbuphine and bupivacaine alone.</p>","PeriodicalId":7798,"journal":{"name":"Anesthesia, Essays and Researches","volume":"16 3","pages":"381-385"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9813996/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anesthesia, Essays and Researches","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/aer.aer_127_22","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/12/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: In long bone surgeries, the severity of pain is more, demanding good intraoperative anesthesia, and prolonged postoperative analgesia. This is achieved in spinal anesthesia with adjuvants to local anesthetics, which act synergistically.

Aims: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of nalbuphine and dexmedetomidine as adjuvants to bupivacaine versus bupivacaine alone in lower limb orthopedic surgeries under the subarachnoid block (SAB).

Settings and design: This is a prospective, randomized, double-blind control study conducted on 60 patients belonging to the American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status Classes I and II, undergoing lower limb orthopedic surgeries under SAB.

Materials and methods: Sixty patients were divided into three groups by computer-generated randomization. Group A received 2.7 mL of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine with 1.5 mg nalbuphine, Group B received 2.7 mL of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine with 10 μg dexmedetomidine, and Group C received 2.7 mL of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine with 0.5 mL of normal saline (total volume made to 3.2 mL in all groups with normal saline). Time of onset of block, duration of sensory, and motor blocks were noted. Changes in hemodynamic parameters, postoperative first rescue analgesia requirement, and side effects were recorded.

Statistical analysis used: Data were analyzed using SPSS 22 version software. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results: There was no significant difference in the onset of sensory or motor blocks in the three groups. However, the time taken for regression of sensory block was longer in Group B that was statistically significant.

Conclusion: Intrathecal dexmedetomidine acts as a better adjuvant with bupivacaine in providing quality anesthesia, prolonged sensory and motor block, and good postoperative analgesia with less incidence of adverse effects compared to nalbuphine and bupivacaine alone.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

蛛网膜下腔阻滞下,鞘内注射纳洛酮和右美托咪定作为布比卡因与普通布比卡因的佐剂用于骨科手术:一项比较研究。
背景:在长骨手术中,疼痛的严重程度更高,需要良好的术中麻醉和延长术后镇痛时间。这是在脊柱麻醉中通过局部麻醉剂的佐剂实现的,这些佐剂具有协同作用。目的:本研究的目的是比较纳尔布芬和右美托咪定作为布比卡因佐剂与单独布比卡因在蛛网膜下腔阻滞(SAB)下下肢骨科手术中的疗效,对60名属于美国麻醉师学会一级和二级身体状况的患者进行双盲对照研究,这些患者在SAB下接受下肢骨科手术。材料和方法:60名患者通过计算机生成的随机分组分为三组。A组接受2.7mL 0.5%高压布比卡因加1.5mg那布芬,B组接受2.7ml 0.5%高压布哌卡因加10μg右美托咪定,C组接受2.7mL0.5%高压布吡卡因加0.5mL生理盐水(所有生理盐水组的总体积均为3.2mL)。记录阻滞开始的时间、感觉阻滞的持续时间和运动阻滞。记录血液动力学参数的变化、术后急救镇痛要求和副作用。使用统计分析:数据使用SPSS 22版本软件进行分析。P<0.05被认为具有统计学意义。结果:三组患者感觉或运动障碍的发生率无显著差异。然而,B组感觉传导阻滞消退所需的时间更长,这具有统计学意义。结论:与单独使用那布芬和布比卡因相比,鞘内右美托咪定与布比卡因在提供高质量麻醉、延长感觉和运动阻滞以及良好的术后镇痛方面具有更好的辅助作用,不良反应发生率较低。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信