Trial reportBMC anesthesiology2025
Comparative efficacy and safety of nalbuphine and hydromorphone in painless colonoscopy techniques: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in BMC anesthesiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of Ciprofol-Nalbuphine and Propofol-Nalbuphine Sedation During Painless Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2026Trial
- Comparative study between nalbuphine and dexmedetomidine for conscious sedation in patients undergoing colonoscopy: randomized comparative trial.BMC anesthesiology · 2025Trial
- Preemptive nalbuphine combined with subcostal transversus abdominis plane block for multimodal analgesia in laparoscopic liver resection: a randomized controlled trial of multimodal analgesia for laparoscopic hepatectomy.Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2026Article
- Dose-Response Analysis of Nalbuphine for Alleviating Catheter-Related Bladder Discomfort After Ureteroscopic Lithotripsy in Men: A Retrospective Study.Drug design, development and therapy · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundColonoscopy is essential for diagnosing colon lesions but is often associated with discomfort. Painless colonoscopy techniques are being increasingly used to improve the patient experience."However, in the case of painless colonoscopy, anesthesia is performed outside the operating room, which requires more significant peri-examination of hemodynamic changes and adverse postoperative reactions. This requires a more careful selection of narcotic analgesics, and there needs to be optimal analgesic drug guidance in clinical practice. This study compared the efficacy and safety of nalbuphine and hydromorphone in improving patient comfort and maintaining hemodynamic stability during elective colonoscopy.
methodsThis prospective, randomized, double-blinded controlled trial included 72 adult patients (aged 18-65) who underwent sedation colonoscopy. The 72 patients were randomly divided into two groups using a computer-generated random sequence. Body mass index 18.5-28.0 kg/m2; American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade I to II. Then, the nalbuphine group was given 0.13 mg/kg nalbuphine, the hydromorphone group was given 0.016 mg/kg hydromorphone, and during the operation, 10-20 mg/time propofol could be appropriately injected according to the patient's examination and cooperation. All patients were continuously monitored for oxygen saturation, heart rate, and noninvasive mean arterial blood pressure. The colonoscopy time and anesthesia time were recorded. Adverse reactions such as hypotension, decreased oxygen saturation, nausea, and vomiting were recorded. Anesthesiologist satisfaction, gastroenterologist (operator), and patient satisfaction were recorded.
resultsBoth nalbuphine and hydromorphone effectively maintained hemodynamic stability, with no significant differences in vital signs observed between the groups (P > 0.05). However, nalbuphine significantly reduced the incidence of postoperative nausea, vomiting, dizziness, and headache compared to hydromorphone (P < 0.05). The reduced side effects of nalbuphine were marked, suggesting a better postoperative comfort profile.
conclusionsWhile nalbuphine and hydromorphone effectively maintain intraoperative vital signs, nalbuphine offers superior postoperative comfort. This makes nalbuphine a preferable analgesic choice in outpatient colonoscopy settings. Further research is warranted to determine the optimal dosages for both drugs and to explore their mechanisms of action in procedural pain management. REGISTER NUMBER: ChiCTR2300077446,November 9, 2023.
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.