Trial reportBMC anesthesiology2025
Comparative study between nalbuphine and dexmedetomidine for conscious sedation in patients undergoing colonoscopy: randomized comparative 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. It is linked to trial NCT05689242 (Comparative Study Between Intravenous Nalbuphine Versus Intravenous Dexmedetomidine for Conscious Sedation in Patients Undergoing Colonoscopy), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Comparative Study Between Intravenous Nalbuphine Versus Intravenous Dexmedetomidine for Conscious Sedation in Patients Undergoing Colonoscopy
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSedation is increasingly preferred for patients undergoing colonoscopy to improve tolerance and procedural success. This study aimed to compare the sedative and analgesic profiles, as well as hemodynamic responses, of dexmedetomidine and nalbuphine during elective colonoscopies.
methodsA total of 66 patients scheduled for colonoscopy were randomly divided into two equal groups: one received an intravenous bolus of dexmedetomidine (1 µg/kg) followed by a continuous infusion (0.5 µg/kg/h), and the other received nalbuphine (0.2 mg/kg IV). The primary endpoint was the assessment of sedation depth, while secondary endpoints included pain perception, cardiovascular stability, recovery measures, satisfaction scores, and the occurrence of adverse effects.
resultsRamsay Sedation Scores (RSS) significantly differed between groups at 15, 20 min, and at the end of the procedure, with nalbuphine producing higher scores after 10 min. Recovery and discharge times were significantly longer in the nalbuphine group (P < 0.05). Both regimens were well tolerated, with no serious complications reported. Patient and endoscopist satisfaction were higher in the nalbuphine group (P < 0.05).
conclusionBoth dexmedetomidine and nalbuphine provided effective sedation during colonoscopy. Dexmedetomidine favored quicker recovery but was associated with greater bradycardia and hypotension. Nalbuphine, while inducing deeper sedation and superior post-procedural analgesia, was associated with longer recovery times but provided better hemodynamic stability.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT05689242), date 19/1/2023.
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.