ArticleAmerican journal of translational research2024
Comparison of nalbuphine and dezocine for postoperative analgesia in elderly patients undergoing laparoscopic radical gastric cancer surgery.
Article in American journal of translational research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveGastric cancer is a prevalent and significant malignancy that occurs throughout the world, with a particularly pronounced impact on the elderly population. This study aims to compare the efficacy of nalbuphine and dezocine in managing pain following laparoscopic radical gastrectomy.
methodElderly patients undergoing laparoscopic radical gastrectomy were divided into a nalbuphine (n=50) group and a dezocine (n=50) group according to their anesthesia agent. Anesthesia methods included preoperative intravenous administration of either 0.15 mg/kg nalbuphine or 0.1 mg/kg dezocine, followed by continuous propofol infusion during surgery. Pain and sedation levels were assessed using the VAS and Ramsay Sedation Scale. Secondary indicators included postoperative pain indicators, hemodynamic parameters, recovery time, and adverse anesthetic reactions.
resultsThere were no significant differences in baseline data between the two groups, including gender, age, body weight, ASA classification, gastric cancer stage, and surgery duration (all P > 0.05). The nalbuphine group showed superior postoperative pain management compared to the dezocine group, with lower VAS, RSS, inflammatory levels (SP and IL-6) and stress response indicators (all P < 0.05). The nalbuphine group also had shorter awakening time, higher awakening quality, shorter surgery time, and earlier extubation time. Furthermore, the incidence of adverse events was lower in the nalbuphine group.
conclusionNalbuphine provides better postoperative pain relief and was associated with fewer adverse events in elderly patients undergoing laparoscopic radical gastrectomy. These findings suggest that nalbuphine is a safer and more effective analgesic option in this clinical context.
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.