ArticleJournal of pain research2020
Nalbuphine versus Midazolam as an Adjuvant to Intrathecal Bupivacaine for Postoperative Analgesia in Patients Undergoing Cesarean Section.
Article in Journal of pain research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03918187 (Nalbuphine Versus Midazolam as an Adjuvant to Intrathecal Bupivacaine for Postoperative Analgesia in Patients Undergoing Cesarean Section), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Nalbuphine Versus Midazolam as an Adjuvant to Intrathecal Bupivacaine for Postoperative Analgesia in Patients Undergoing Cesarean Section
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- A meta-analysis showing the quantitative evidence base of perineural nalbuphine for wound pain from upper-limb orthopaedic trauma surgery.International wound journal · 2023Pooled it
- Article
- Effect of nalbuphine plus ropivacaine on vaginal labor in epidural analgesia.BMC anesthesiology · 2023Article
- Patient-controlled intravenous administration of dexmedetomidine with nalbuphine versus sufentanil for post cesarean delivery analgesia: A retrospective observational study.The Kaohsiung journal of medical sciences · 2023Observational
- The potential value of exosomes as adjuvants for novel biologic local anesthetics.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Review
- Effect of adding midazolam to intrathecal bupivacaine in children undergoing lower abdominal surgeries: A randomised controlled trial.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2022Article
- Immediate Postoperative Analgesia of Nalbuphine-Ketamine Combination Compared with Ketamine Alone in Xylazine-Sedated Goats Undergoing Left Flank Laparotomy.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeAdding adjuvants to intrathecal hyperbaric bupivacaine provides long analgesic duration with less adverse effects. The aim of this study was to compare intrathecal nalbuphine versus midazolam in patients undergoing cesarean section. CLINICAL TRIAL ID: NCT03918187. PATIENTS AND
methodsThis was a prospective randomized controlled study conducted on 90 females undergoing cesarean section under spinal anesthesia who were randomly allocated to three equal groups of 30 patients each: group C received hyperbaric bupivacaine 12.5 mg plus 0.5 mL saline, group N received hyperbaric bupivacaine 12.5 mg plus 1 mg nalbuphine, group M received hyperbaric bupivacaine 12.5 mg plus 2.5 mg midazolam. The onset and duration of sensory and motor block, effective analgesic time, analgesic requirements, adverse effects, sedation, and Apgar scores were recorded.
resultsThere was significant rapid onset of sensory and motor block (1.95±.44 and 3.50±0.43 min) with slower regression of sensory block and time to bromage I (211.6±13.2 and 219.8±20.2 min) in group N compared to groups M, C (p < 0.001), with statistically significant rapid onset and long duration of both blocks in group M compared to C (p<0.001). The effective analgesic time was significantly prolonged in group N (263.7±16.3) compared to groups M and C (224.2 ± 18.6, 185.5±17.45), respectively, (p<0.001) and prolonged in group M compared to C (p<0.001), with increase in analgesic requirement in group C compared to groups N and M (p<0.001) and no significant difference between groups N and M. There was higher sedation score in groups N, M (1.78±0.63, 2.75±0.54), respectively, compared to group C (0.61±0.12) (p<0.001) with lower Apgar score in group M (6.9±0.73) at one minute than in groups N, C (7.1±0.91, 7.7±0.84) (p<0.001). There was no significant difference between groups regarding the adverse effects.
conclusionAdding 1 mg nalbuphine to 12.5 mg hyperbaric bupivacaine provided more effective postoperative analgesia than adding 2.5 mg midazolam, with less non-significant adverse effects in midazolam group in patients undergoing elective cesarean section.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.