Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39130927›Full record

ArticleCureus2024

Assessment of the Efficacy of Nalbuphine as an Adjuvant to Intrathecal Bupivacaine in Endoscopic Urological Surgeries for the Prolongation of Postoperative Analgesia.

Saiesh Raut Dessai, Sanjot Ninave, Neeta Verma, Amol Bele, Aishwarya Nayak

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Saiesh Raut DessaiDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, Datta Meghe Institute of Higher Education and Research, Wardha, IND.
Sanjot NinaveDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, Datta Meghe Institute of Higher Education and Research, Wardha, IND.
Neeta VermaDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, Datta Meghe Institute of Higher Education and Research, Wardha, IND.
Amol BeleDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, Datta Meghe Institute of Higher Education and Research, Wardha, IND.
Aishwarya NayakDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research, Wardha, IND.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background In anaesthesiology, intrathecal drugs play pivotal roles in spinal anaesthesia. Despite their ability to induce a high sensory block, bupivacaine alone may not be adequate for postoperative analgesia. It often requires a substantial dose of postoperative rescue analgesia to manage pain effectively. Thus, we studied the efficacy of nalbuphine 1.5 mg injected intrathecally as an adjuvant in endoscopic urological surgery. Materials and methods Sixty patients undergoing endoscopic urological surgery were equally divided into two study groups: group B (injection 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine 15 mg (3 ml) plus sterile NS 0.15 ml) and group N (injection 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine 15 mg (3 ml)+nalbuphine 1.5 mg (0.15 ml)). The first appearance of the sensory and motor blockages and duration required to attain complete sensory and motor threshold was noted. All vitals were recorded. After surgery, it was recorded when the patient first needed rescue analgesia (injection paracetamol 1 gm IV). Any adverse effects were recorded and addressed. The statistical analysis was conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, V. 22.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY), with p<0.05 indicating significance in both groups' operations. Results Intrathecal nalbuphine as an adjuvant caused an earlier onset of sensory and motor inhibition, delayed two-segment regression, and prolonged postoperative anaesthesia. The control group experienced sensory block at 3.33±0.61 minutes, while the nalbuphine group had a mean onset of 2.66±0.92 minutes (p=0.001). The patient who received nalbuphine had a mean regression time of 119.60±14.549 minutes, whereas the bupivacaine group had a mean regression time of 88.43±17.196 minutes. Group N had a considerably longer duration of postoperative analgesia, lasting 264.97 minutes, compared to group B's 198.50 minutes (p<0.001). Intrathecal nalbuphine did not influence vital indicators such as heart rate, respiration rate, and oxygen saturation. Conclusion To conclude, endoscopic urological surgery patients who received a subarachnoid block with 1.5 mg (0.15 ml) of nalbuphine hydrochloride with 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine 15 mg (3 ml) had longer postoperative pain relief than those who received 3 ml of intrathecal bupivacaine (15 mg). Urinary retention and pruritus were absent. Intrathecal nalbuphine with hyperbaric 0.5% bupivacaine is deemed safe with minimal side effects in endoscopic urology surgery.

Indexed as

0.5% bupivacaineendourologynalbuphinespinal anaesthesiaurology

Identifiers

PMID39130927
PMCPMC11315415

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.