Intrathecal nalbuphine vs. buprenorphine as an adjuvant in lower limb orthopedic surgeries: a prospective randomized controlled study.

IF 3 Q2 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL
Sankalp Kaushal, Maya Kamlakar, Jamale Parbati Baburao
{"title":"Intrathecal nalbuphine <i>vs</i>. buprenorphine as an adjuvant in lower limb orthopedic surgeries: a prospective randomized controlled study.","authors":"Sankalp Kaushal,&nbsp;Maya Kamlakar,&nbsp;Jamale Parbati Baburao","doi":"10.4103/2045-9912.318856","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study aimed to compare the efficacy of intrathecal nalbuphine and buprenorphine as an adjuvant to heavy bupivacaine (0.5%) for spinal anesthesia in lower limb orthopedic surgeries to improve the quality of spinal anesthesia (onset, duration, and side effects) and prolongation of postoperative analgesia. Sixty patients were recruited into this single-centered, double-blinded, hospital-based, prospective, comparative study conducted in 2017-2018. They were randomly and equally (n = 30) allocated into two groups: nalbuphine group which received 0.5 mL (0.8 mg) of nalbuphine with 3 mL of heavy (0.5%) hyperbaric bupivacaine and buprenorphine group which received 0.5 mL (60 mg) of buprenorphine with 3 mL of heavy hyperbaric bupivacaine. Intraoperatively, onset and duration of blockade (motor and sensory), and time for first dose of rescue analgesia were recorded in both groups at regular intervals. Heart rate, blood pressure, Visual Analogue Scale score and side effects were also recorded postoperatively for 12 hours. The demographic parameters, time of onset of sensory block and motor block, and duration of motor block were comparable between nalbuphine and buprenorphine groups. The duration of sensory block in the buprenorphine group was longer than in the nalbuphine group. Time to the first dose of rescue analgesia was delayed in buprenorphine group as compared to nalbuphine group. In both groups maximum patients achieved maximum height of sensory block at 90 minutes. There were significant differences in the mean heart rate and blood pressure between buprenorphine and nalbuphine groups. Nalbuphine group patients achieved a Visual Analogue Scale score > 4 earlier as compared to buprenorphine group. Few side effects were observed in both groups. Intrathecal buprenorphine is a better adjuvant to 0.5% bupivacaine in the spinal anesthesia for lower limb orthopedic surgeries, as it provides longer sensory block and delayed administration of first dose of rescue analgesia with negligible side-effects. The study was approved by Institutional Ethics Committee of Krishna Institute of Medical Sciences (approval number: KIMSDU/IEC/03/2017) on November 23, 2017.</p>","PeriodicalId":18559,"journal":{"name":"Medical Gas Research","volume":"11 4","pages":"126-130"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/a9/3b/MGR-11-126.PMC8374458.pdf","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Gas Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/2045-9912.318856","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

This study aimed to compare the efficacy of intrathecal nalbuphine and buprenorphine as an adjuvant to heavy bupivacaine (0.5%) for spinal anesthesia in lower limb orthopedic surgeries to improve the quality of spinal anesthesia (onset, duration, and side effects) and prolongation of postoperative analgesia. Sixty patients were recruited into this single-centered, double-blinded, hospital-based, prospective, comparative study conducted in 2017-2018. They were randomly and equally (n = 30) allocated into two groups: nalbuphine group which received 0.5 mL (0.8 mg) of nalbuphine with 3 mL of heavy (0.5%) hyperbaric bupivacaine and buprenorphine group which received 0.5 mL (60 mg) of buprenorphine with 3 mL of heavy hyperbaric bupivacaine. Intraoperatively, onset and duration of blockade (motor and sensory), and time for first dose of rescue analgesia were recorded in both groups at regular intervals. Heart rate, blood pressure, Visual Analogue Scale score and side effects were also recorded postoperatively for 12 hours. The demographic parameters, time of onset of sensory block and motor block, and duration of motor block were comparable between nalbuphine and buprenorphine groups. The duration of sensory block in the buprenorphine group was longer than in the nalbuphine group. Time to the first dose of rescue analgesia was delayed in buprenorphine group as compared to nalbuphine group. In both groups maximum patients achieved maximum height of sensory block at 90 minutes. There were significant differences in the mean heart rate and blood pressure between buprenorphine and nalbuphine groups. Nalbuphine group patients achieved a Visual Analogue Scale score > 4 earlier as compared to buprenorphine group. Few side effects were observed in both groups. Intrathecal buprenorphine is a better adjuvant to 0.5% bupivacaine in the spinal anesthesia for lower limb orthopedic surgeries, as it provides longer sensory block and delayed administration of first dose of rescue analgesia with negligible side-effects. The study was approved by Institutional Ethics Committee of Krishna Institute of Medical Sciences (approval number: KIMSDU/IEC/03/2017) on November 23, 2017.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

鞘内纳布啡与丁丙诺啡在下肢骨科手术中的辅助作用:一项前瞻性随机对照研究。
本研究旨在比较麻鞘内纳布啡和丁丙诺啡在重布比卡因(0.5%)的辅助下用于下肢骨科手术脊髓麻醉的效果,以改善脊髓麻醉的质量(起效、持续时间和副作用),延长术后镇痛时间。在2017-2018年进行的这项单中心、双盲、基于医院的前瞻性比较研究中,招募了60名患者。随机平均(n = 30)分为两组:纳布啡组给予0.5 mL (0.8 mg)纳布啡加3ml(0.5%)重型高压布比卡因;丁丙诺啡组给予0.5 mL (60 mg)丁丙诺啡加3ml重型高压布比卡因。定期记录两组术中阻滞(运动和感觉)的发生和持续时间,以及首次给药的时间。术后12小时记录心率、血压、视觉模拟量表评分及不良反应。纳布啡组和丁丙诺啡组的人口学参数、感觉阻滞和运动阻滞的发生时间以及运动阻滞的持续时间具有可比性。丁丙诺啡组感觉阻滞持续时间明显长于纳布啡组。丁丙诺啡组与纳布啡组相比,首次给药时间延迟。两组患者均在90分钟达到最大感觉阻滞高度。丁丙诺啡组和纳布啡组的平均心率和血压有显著差异。与丁丙诺啡组相比,纳布啡组患者视觉模拟量表评分> 4分。两组均无明显副作用。鞘内丁丙诺啡是0.5%布比卡因在下肢骨科手术脊髓麻醉中更好的辅助剂,因为它提供了更长的感觉阻滞和延迟给药的第一次抢救镇痛,副作用可以忽略不计。该研究于2017年11月23日获得Krishna医学科学研究所机构伦理委员会批准(批准文号:KIMSDU/IEC/03/2017)。
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
Medical Gas Research
Medical Gas Research MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
13.80%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: Medical Gas Research is an open access journal which publishes basic, translational, and clinical research focusing on the neurobiology as well as multidisciplinary aspects of medical gas research and their applications to related disorders. The journal covers all areas of medical gas research, but also has several special sections. Authors can submit directly to these sections, whose peer-review process is overseen by our distinguished Section Editors: Inert gases - Edited by Xuejun Sun and Mark Coburn, Gasotransmitters - Edited by Atsunori Nakao and John Calvert, Oxygen and diving medicine - Edited by Daniel Rossignol and Ke Jian Liu, Anesthetic gases - Edited by Richard Applegate and Zhongcong Xie, Medical gas in other fields of biology - Edited by John Zhang. Medical gas is a large family including oxygen, hydrogen, carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, nitrogen, xenon, hydrogen sulfide, nitrous oxide, carbon disulfide, argon, helium and other noble gases. These medical gases are used in multiple fields of clinical practice and basic science research including anesthesiology, hyperbaric oxygen medicine, diving medicine, internal medicine, emergency medicine, surgery, and many basic sciences disciplines such as physiology, pharmacology, biochemistry, microbiology and neurosciences. Due to the unique nature of medical gas practice, Medical Gas Research will serve as an information platform for educational and technological advances in the field of medical gas.
×
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