Effectiveness and safety of prehospital analgesia with nalbuphine and paracetamol versus morphine by paramedics - an observational study.

BACKGROUND: Despite the development of various analgesic concepts, prehospital oligoanalgesia remains very common. The present work examines prehospital analgesia by paramedics using morphine vs. nalbuphine + paracetamol. METHODS: Patients with out-of-hospital-analgesia performed by paramedics from the emergency medical services of the districts of Fulda (morphine) and Gütersloh (nalbuphine + paracetamol) were evaluated with regards to pain intensity at the beginning and the end of prehospital treatment using the Numeric-Rating-Scale for pain (NRS), sex, age, and complications. The primary endpoint was achievement of adequate analgesia, defined as NRS < 4 at hospital handover, depending on the analgesics administered (nalbuphine + paracetamol vs. morphine). Pain intensity before and after receiving analgesia using the NRS, sex, age and complications were also monitored. RESULTS: A total of 1,808 patients who received out-of-hospital-analgesia were evaluated (nalbuphine + paracetamol: 1,635 (90.4%), NRS-initial: 8.0 ± 1.4, NRS-at-handover: 3.7 ± 2.0; morphine: 173(9.6%), NRS-initial: 8.5 ± 1.1, NRS-at-handover: 5.1 ± 2.0). Factors influencing the difference in NRS were: initial pain intensity on the NRS (regression coefficient (RK): 0.7276, 95%CI: 0.6602-0.7950, p < 0.001), therapy with morphine vs. nalbuphine + paracetamol (RK: -1.2594, 95%CI: -1.5770 - -0.9418, p < 0.001) and traumatic vs. non-traumatic causes of pain (RK: -0.2952, 95%CI: -0.4879 - -0.1024, p = 0.002). Therapy with morphine (n = 34 (19.6%)) compared to nalbuphine + paracetamol (n = 796 (48.7%)) (odds ratio (OR): 0.274, 95%CI: 0.185-0.405, p < 0.001) and the initial NRS score (OR:0.827, 95%CI: 0.771-0.887, p < 0.001) reduced the odds of having an NRS < 4 at hospital handover. Complications occurred with morphine in n = 10 (5.8%) and with nalbuphine + paracetamol in n = 35 (2.1%) cases. Risk factors for complications were analgesia with morphine (OR: 2.690, 95%CI: 1.287-5.621, p = 0.008), female sex (OR: 2.024, 95%CI: 1.040-3.937, p = 0.0379), as well as age (OR: 1.018, 95%CI: 1.003-1.034, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to morphine, prehospital analgesia with nalbuphine + paracetamol yields favourable effects in terms of analgesic effectiveness and a lower rate of complications and should therefore be considered in future recommendations for prehospital analgesia.

Co-Administration of nalbuphine to improve morphine tolerance in mice with bone cancer pain.

BACKGROUND: Kappa-opioid receptor (KOR) agonists are known for having opposite and/or different effects compared with Mu-opioid receptor (MOR) agonists. This study is aimed at clarifying the analgesic effect and tolerance of nalbuphine combined with morphine, and quantifying the mRNA and protein expression of spinal MOR and KOR in a mouse bone cancer pain (BCP) model treated with nalbuphine and morphine. METHOD: BCP model was prepared in C3H/HeNCrlVr Mice by implanting the sarcoma cells into the intramedullary space of the femur. The paw withdrawal thermal latency (PWL) measured by thermal radiometer was used to assess thermal hyperalgesia. PWL testing was performed after implantation and drug administration according to the protocol. Hematoxylin-eosin staining in the spinal cord and x-ray in the femoral intramedullary canal was detected. Real-time PCR and western blot analysis played a role in detecting spinal MOR and KOR expression changes. RESULTS: In tumor-implanted mice, the spinal MOR and KOR protein and mRNA expression was down-regulated when compared to that in sham-implanted mice (p < 0.05). Morphine therapy can lead to a decrease in spinal µ receptor expression. Similarly, the nalbuphine therapy can lead to a decrease in the expression of κ receptor protein and mRNA at the spinal cord level (p < 0.05). Morphine, nalbuphine, or nalbuphine co-administration with morphine all can extend the paw withdrawal thermal latency (PWL) to radiant thermal stimulation in tumor-implanted mice (p < 0.05). Compared with the morphine treatment group, nalbuphine co-administration with morphine delayed the reduction of PWL value again (p < 0.05). DISCUSSION: BCP itself may induce down-regulation of the spinal MOR and KOR expression. A low dose of nalbuphine co-administration with morphine led to the delayed emergence of morphine tolerance. The part of the mechanism may be due to the regulation of spinal opioid receptors expression.

Patient-controlled intravenous administration of dexmedetomidine with nalbuphine versus sufentanil for post cesarean delivery analgesia: A retrospective observational study.

This retrospective observational study aims to investigate the patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) of dexmedetomidine (DEX) with nalbuphine (NAL) versus sufentanil (SUF) for post-cesarean delivery management. A total of 300 women were evaluated who underwent cesarean section surgery with combined spinal-epidural anesthesia. After surgery, all patients were connected to a patient-controlled analgesia pump. The PCIA protocol was programmed with 0.11 µg/kg/h DEX in combination with 0.03 µg/kg/h SUF in Group I (n = 150) or 0.11 µg/kg/h DEX in combination with 0.03 mg/kg/h NAL in Group II (n = 150). There was no significant difference in incision pain and sedation level between the two groups within 48 h after the surgery assessed by visual analog scale (VAS) and Ramsay sedation scale, respectively. However, at 2, 6, 12, and 24 h after surgery, visceral pain at rest and at mobilization was alleviated in the Group II as compared with the Group I with lower VAS scores. Moreover, fewer adverse reactions were found in the Group II when compared with Group I, including postpartum respiratory depression, nausea/vomiting, urinary retention, and cardiovascular events. Overall, there was an increased patient satisfaction in the Group II as compared with the Group I. Based on the results of this study, it seems that adding NAL to PCIA with DEX, as compared to SUF with DEX, have an effect on reducing the intensity of visceral pain after cesarean section with less adverse reactions and higher patient satisfaction.

Effect of Multimodal Preemptive Analgesia of Flurbiprofen Axetil, Nalbuphine, and Retrobulbar Block on Postoperative Pain and Enhanced Recovery in Patients Undergoing Oculoplastic Day Surgery: A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blinded Study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of either flurbiprofen axetil or nalbuphine combined with retrobulbar block (RB) before surgery on postoperative pain control and enhanced recovery in day-care patients undergoing orbital implantation. METHODS: A total of 45 patients undergoing orbital implantation with general anesthesia were randomly divided into three groups: flurbiprofen axetil (1 mg/kg) combined with RB (group F), nalbuphine (0.1 mg/kg) combined with RB (group N), and placebo as normal saline with RB (group C). The primary outcome was the average pain score (numeric rating scale: 0-10) within the first 24 hours. Other outcomes including the peak pain score, paracetamol requirement, quality of recovery (QoR)-15, and adverse effects (AEs) were assessed. RESULTS: The average and peak pain scores within 24 hours after surgery in group F were significantly lower than in other groups ( p < 0.0167). Compared with group C, the NRS scores were significantly decreased at 2 and 4 hours in group F, and 2 hours in group N after surgery ( p < 0.0167), but without significant differences at other measured time points. The time to first paracetamol oral intake displayed a significant difference among the three groups ( p < 0.0167). CONCLUSION: Preemptive use of flurbiprofen axetil 1 mg/kg combined with RB is an optimal choice for multimodal analgesia for day-care patients undergoing orbital implantation in terms of efficient acute pain control, without impeding patient-enhanced recovery.

Nalbuphine Suppresses Leukemia Stem Cells and Acts Synergistically with Chemotherapy Drugs via Inhibiting Ras/Raf/Mek/Erk Pathway.

AIMS: Retrospective clinical studies have shown that opioids could potentially affect the risk of cancer recurrence and metastasis. Better understanding of the effects of opioids on cancer will help to select the optimal anesthetic regimens to achieve better outcomes in cancer patients. BACKGROUND: Increasing evidence has shown the direct effects of opioids on bulk cancer cells and cancer stem cells. Opioid such as nalbuphine is approved to control cancer-associated pain but little is known on their possible cancer effects. OBJECTIVE: To assess the biological effects of nalbuphine on acute myeloid leukemia (AML) differentiated and stem/progenitor CD34+ cells. METHODS: AML CD34+ cells were isolated with colony formation, growth and apoptosis assays performed. Biochemical and immunoblotting analyses were conducted in AML cells exposed to nalbuphine. RESULTS: Nalbuphine at clinically relevant concentrations was active against a panel of AML cell lines with varying IC50. Importantly, nalbuphine augmented the efficacy of cytarabine and daunorubicin in decreasing AML cell viability/ growth. Besides bulk AML cells, we noted that nalbuphine was effective and selective in decreasing viability and colony formation of AML CD34+ cells while sparing normal hematopoietic CD34+ cells. The action of nalbuphine on AML cells is not associated with opioid receptors but via inhibiting Ras/Raf/MEK/ERK signaling pathway. Overexpression of constitutively active Ras partially but significantly reversed the inhibitory effects of nalbuphine on AML cells. CONCLUSION: Our findings reveal the selective anti-AML activity of nalbuphine and its ability in inhibiting Ras signaling. Our work suggests that nalbuphine may be beneficial for leukemia patients.

Nalbuphine as analgesic in preschool children undergoing ophthalmic surgery and the occurrence of emergence delirium.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Perioperative pain in children is often inadequately treated, and emergence agitation is common. The purpose of this analysis was to determine whether nalbuphine is suitable for perioperative eye pain and to analyse if it influences the occurrence of emergence delirium/agitation (EDA) in children undergoing ophthalmic surgery in general anaesthesia. METHODS: Retrospective cohort analysis of 50 children in preschool age undergoing general anaesthesia for ophthalmic surgery receiving nalbuphine as a postoperative analgesic in a German university hospital from June 2020 to February 2021.Scores and values for pain and EDA were routinely recorded after awakening and during the stay in the recovery room. Data were evaluated retrospectively from the medical records. RESULTS: A total of 50 children (17 girls and 33 boys) underwent general anaesthesia for ophthalmic surgery. The median age of the children included was 20.5 months (range, 1-68 months), the median body weight was 12.25 kg (range, 2.9-29 kg). All patients received ibuprofen (10 mg/kg1) during induction of anaesthesia and nalbuphine (0.1 mg/kg) at the end of surgery. All patients had an Paediatric-Anaesthesia-Emergence-Delirium-I-score (PAED-ED-I Score) of less than 6 and acceptable Face-Legs-Activity-Cry-Consolability-scores (FLACC less than 3) on waking and on leaving the recovery room. CONCLUSION: Nalbuphine shows a sufficient analgesic effect for pain therapy following ophthalmic surgery in preschool children. Nalbuphine seems to reduce the incidence of EDA in children undergoing ophthalmic surgery.

Comparison of Preemptive Effect of Intravenous Ketorolac Versus Nalbuphine on Postoperative Shivering and Pain in Patients Undergoing Surgery Under Spinal Anesthesia: A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind Study.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative pain and postanesthesia shivering are the two common problems in patients undergoing surgery under spinal anesthesia (SA). The present study aimed to compare the preemptive prescription of the single dose of intravenous (IV) ketorolac versus nalbuphine on postoperative shivering and pain in patients undergoing surgery under SA. METHODS: Present study was a prospective, randomized double-blind study, conducted on patients of either gender, with American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status class I or II, aged 21-60 years, posted for elective lower abdominal surgeries under SA. Patients were randomized by computer-generated random numbers into two groups of 50 patients each: group N (received 0.2 mg/kg nalbuphine IV) and group K (received 0.5 mg/kg ketorolac IV). RESULTS: The incidence of postoperative shivering was 22 % and 36 % in groups N and K respectively and the difference was statistically significant. The first request for analgesia (minutes) was later in group N (295.17 ± 54.62) than in group K (223.80 ± 15.34) and the difference was statistically significant. Increased total analgesic consumption was noted more in group K (131.34 ± 43.27) than in group N (79.23 ± 21.34), and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.0001). The incidence of side effects was comparable among both groups. CONCLUSION: Preemptive nalbuphine had less incidence of postoperative shivering, delayed first request for analgesia, and less total analgesic consumption than ketorolac in patients undergoing surgery under SA.

Managing Chronic Cough Associated with Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis - Will Nalbuphine Fill an Unmet Need?

In this issue of NEJM Evidence, Maher et al.1 report the results of a randomized, controlled, 22-day treatment crossover trial comparing the antitussive effect of extended-release nalbuphine, an opioid agonist-antagonist, with placebo in a cohort of patients with definite or probable idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). In this small, short-term trial of 38 evaluable patients, the active drug was associated with a 75.1% reduction in daytime objective cough frequency (the primary outcome) compared with a 22.6% reduction in placebo-treated patients, yielding a substantial and statistically significant 52.5 percentage point placebo-adjusted change from baseline.

Nalbuphine 20 mg combined with sufentanil 2 µg/kg exerts a better postoperative analgesia effect in patients undergoing a second cesarean section: a randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Pain management following cesarean section remains a challenge, with many puerpera suffering from severe acute postoperative pain. And for a second cesarean section the degree of uterine contraction pain is more severe and frequent than that of a primipara. This study investigated the effect of different doses of nalbuphine combined with sufentanil for postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing a second cesarean section. METHODS: We prospectively recruited 168 women with a scarred uterus undergoing elective second cesarean section and they were randomly divided into 4 groups by random number extraction. A single intravenous injection of different doses of nalbuphine was given before the intravenous drip of oxytocin, and visual analogue scale (VAS) scores of uterine contraction pain were recorded 10 minutes before intravenous infusion of oxytocin (T1) and 10 minutes (T2), 30 minutes (T3), and 60 minutes (T4) after intravenous infusion of oxytocin. At 4, 8, 12, 24, and 48 hours after patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA), pain intensity was reassessed using the VAS score. RESULTS: One hundred and sixty patients underwent elective second cesarean section in between December 2020 and May 2021 completed the study. The VAS scores of uterine contractions at T1 and T4 were 3 (1.0), while the VAS scores at T2 and T3 were 7 (1.0), 6 (1.0), 5 (1.0), 5 (1.0) and 8 (1.0), 5 (2.0), 3 (1.0), 3 (0.75). The VAS scores at 12 hours after surgery of nalbuphine10mg and sufentanil (NS1), nalbuphine 10 mg and sufentanil 20 mg (NS2) and nalbuphine 30 mg and sufentanil 20 mg (NS3) were lower than sufentanil (S) group (P<0.001). Compared with the S group, total amount of sufentanil and PCIA compression numbers in the NS1, NS2, and NS3 groups at 4-8 and 8-12 hours after surgery decreased (P<0.001), with a more significant decrease in the NS2 and NS3 groups than in the NS1 group (P<0.001). The NS3 group had a significantly higher incidence of dizziness and sleepiness (P=0.02, P=0.001). Compared with the NS2 and NS3 groups, the incidence of respiratory depression in the S group was significantly higher (P=0.001). CONCLUSIONS: A single intravenous injection of nalbuphine 20 mg 10 minutes before the infusion of oxytocin combined with sufentanil 2 µg/kg could be safely used for postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing a second cesarean section and could effectively inhibit uterine contractions induced by oxytocin and reduce adverse reactions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR2100042382.

Efficacy of opioids and non-opioid analgesics in the treatment of post procedure pain of burned patients: a narrative review

Abstract Introduction Burns are a common trauma that cause acute severe pain in up to 80% of patients. The objective of this narrative review is to evaluate the efficacy of opioids, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, paracetamol, gabapentinoids, ketamine, and lidocaine in the treatment of acute pain in burn victims. Methodology The databases explored were PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials, and OpenGrey. The included randomized, controlled clinical trials assessed the analgesic efficacy of these drugs on hospitalized patients, had no age limit, patients were in the acute phase of the burn injury and were compared to placebo or other analgesic drugs. Studies describing deep sedation, chronic opioid use, chronic pain, and patients taken to reconstructive surgeries were excluded. The Jadad scale was used to evaluate quality. Results Six randomized controlled clinical trials (397 patients) that evaluated the analgesic efficacy of fentanyl (n = 2), nalbuphine (n = 1), ketamine (n = 1), gabapentin (n = 1), and lidocaine (n = 1) to treat post-procedural pain were included. Fentanyl, nalbuphine, and ketamine were effective, while lidocaine was associated with a slight increase in reported pain and gabapentin showed no significant differences. Two studies were of high quality, one was of medium high quality, and three were of low quality. No studies on the efficacy of NSAIDs or paracetamol were found. Conclusion Evidence of efficacy is very limited. Fentanyl, nalbuphine, and ketamine seem to be effective for controlling acute pain in burn patients, whereas gabapentin and lidocaine did not show any efficacy.

Nalbuphine alleviates inflammation by down-regulating NF-κB in an acute inflammatory visceral pain rat model.

INTRODUCTION: Nalbuphine can relieve patients' inflammation response after surgery compared to other opioid drugs. However, its molecular mechanism has not been clear. Activation of NF-κB signaling pathway under oxidative stress and inflammation can maintain pain escalation. METHODS: We firstly investigated the effect of nalbuphine on writhing test and mechanical allodynia using a rat model of inflammatory visceral pain (acetic acid (AA) administrated). Cytokines (including tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α, Interleukin (IL)-1ß, IL-2, and IL-6 in plasma were tested with ELISA technology. Expression levels of TNF-α, IκBα and p-NF-κB p65 at the spinal cord (L3-5) were measured by western blot or RT-qPCR. RESULTS: We found that the paw withdrawal threshold (PWT) values of rats were reduced in the model group, while the numbers of writhing, levels of IL-1ß, IL-2, IL-6, and TNF-α in plasma, and p-NF-κB protein and its gene expressions in the lumbar spinal cord were up-regulated. Subcutaneously injection of nalbuphine (10 µg/kg) or PDTC (NF-κB inhibitor) attenuated acetic acid-induced inflammatory pain, and this was associated with reversal of up-regulated IL-1ß, IL-2, IL-6, and TNF-α in both plasma and spinal cord. Furthermore, acetic acid increased p-NF-κB and TNF-α protein levels in the white matter of the spinal cord, which was attenuated by nalbuphine. These results suggested that nalbuphine can significantly ameliorate inflammatory pain via modulating the expression of NF-κB p65 as well as inflammation factors level in the spinal cord. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, nalbuphine inhibits inflammation through down-regulating NF-κB pathway at the spinal cord in a rat model of inflammatory visceral pain.

Effect of Preventive Analgesia with Nalbuphine and Dexmedetomidine in Endoscopic Sinus Surgery.

Background: The study was to assess the efficacy and safety of nalbuphine combined with dexmedetomidine for preventive analgesia in endoscopic sinus surgery. Methods: 110 patients with deviation of the nasal septum were randomized into the nalbuphine group (group N), dexmedetomidine combined with nalbuphine group (group DN), and saline group (group C). Fifteen minutes before the induction of anesthesia, patients in group N were injected nalbuphine 0.2 mg/kg intravenously; patients in group DN received intravenous infusion of dexmedetomidine 0.5 µg/kg and injection of nalbuphine 0.2 mg/kg; patients in group C received 0.9% saline. Mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR), numerical rating scale (NRS) scores, quality of recovery-40 (QoR-40) scores, the need for remedial analgesia, the consumption of remifentanil and propofol, and the incidence of adverse reactions were recorded. Results: MAP, HR, and NRS scores of the DN group were significantly lower and the QoR-40 scores were higher than those of groups N and C (P < 0.001). The need for remedial analgesia, the consumption of remifentanil and propofol, and the incidence of nausea in the DN group were the lowest among the three groups (P < 0.001). Conclusion: Preventive analgesia with nalbuphine and dexmedetomidine in endoscopic sinus surgery can not only maintain hemodynamic stability but also reduce intraoperative anesthetic dosage, postoperative pain, and improve the quality of postoperative recovery without affecting the revival and extubation time.

A Dose-Response Relationship Study of Prophylactic Nalbuphine to Reduce Pain During the Awakening Period in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Total Hysterectomy: A Randomized, Controlled, Double-Blind Clinical Study.

Purpose: Prophylactic intravenous nalbuphine was administered to observe its median effective dose (ED50) in reducing pain after undergoing laparoscopic total hysterectomy. To investigate the effect of different doses of nalbuphine on postoperative analgesia and adverse reactions in patients. Patients and Methods: The 120 patients undergoing laparoscopic total hysterectomy were divided into 6 groups: group C (control) and group P (5 different doses of nalbuphine) with 20 patients per group. The doses of nalbuphine in group P were in an equally proportional series (groups P1, P2, P3, P4, and P5 received doses of 0.280, 0.200, 0.140, 0.100, and 0.070 mg/kg, respectively), diluted to 20 mL with saline and administered 5 min before the induction of anesthesia. A similar volume (20 mL) of saline was administered to group C 5 min before the induction of anesthesia. The numeric rating scale (NRS) of patients during awakening and after surgery, the number of postoperative salvage analgesia, and the occurrence of postoperative adverse effects were recorded. Results: The ED50 (95% confidence interval (CI)) of nalbuphine in preventing pain during the awakening period in patients calculated using the point-slope method was 0.125 (0.108, 0.145) mg/kg. NRS scores differed among the 6 groups at 30 min and 1 h after extubation (P < 0.001; P < 0.001). Pairwise comparisons between groups revealed that, at 30 min after extubation, compared with group P1, the NRS scores of groups P4, P5, and C were higher (P = 0.001, P < 0.001, P < 0.001); compared with group P2, groups P5 and C had higher NRS scores (P = 0.011, P = 0.001). At 1 h after extubation, the NRS scores of groups P1 and P2 were lower than that of group P4 (P = 0.046, P = 0.036). Compared with the control, only the group P1 had a lower cough score (P = 0.009) and there were no differences in the other groups. There were no differences in sedation score at 10 min after extubation, the incidence of adverse events at 24 h postoperatively, or the number of remedial analgesics at 24 h postoperatively (P > 0.05). Conclusion: The ED50 (95% CI) of nalbuphine as a prophylactic in reducing pain during recovery was 0.125 (0.108, 0.145) mg/kg. Compared with the control, nalbuphine at doses of 0.140, 0.200, and 0.280 mg/kg prevented pain during the awakening period. Among these doses, 0.280 mg/kg was determined to be the best, the occurrence of cough was less during extubation and the postoperative analgesic effect was good. However, it is necessary to pay attention to the occurrence of adverse reactions.

Pain management of nalbuphine and sufentanil in patients admitted intensive care unit of different ages.

BACKGROUND: Pain relief for patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) can improve treatment outcomes and reduce the burden on doctors and nurses. This study aims to report the clinical analgesic and sedative effects of nalbuphine and sufentanil on ICU patients. METHODS: This study retrospectively analyzed the medical records of 87 critically ill patients who received nalbuphine or sufentanil infusion in the ICU, including demographic data, diagnosis, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II, Critical Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT), Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS), systolic and diastolic blood pressure, heart rate and blood oxygen saturation (SpO2). The primary outcomes of this study were CPOT and RASS scores. The secondary outcomes were hemodynamic changes, including systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, heart rate, and SpO2. The adverse events recorded during pain management, such as hypoxemia, respiration depression and bradycardia, were also collected and analyzed. RESULTS: None of the patients in both groups experienced episode of hypoxemia, respiration depression and bradycardia. However, age-stratified analyses showed that nalbuphine has a better analgesic effect than sufentanil for patients aged ≤ 60 (P < 0.05). In contrast, sufentanil showed a better analgesic effect than nalbuphine for patients aged > 60 ( P < 0.05). Furthermore, nalbuphine has a significantly better sedative effect than sufentanil for patients aged ≤ 60 (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: ICU patients of different age groups may be suitable for different analgesics. For patients under the age of 60, nalbuphine has better analgesia and sedation than sufentanil, and does not cause respiratory depression and drastic hemodynamic changes.

Effects of Nalbuphine Combined with Anterior Serratus Plane Block in Elderly Patients Undergoing Thoracoscopic Surgery.

Postoperative pain in elderly patients with lung cancer after thoracoscopic surgery is still an important factor affecting the prognosis of patients. In this study, 200 elderly patients with lung cancer who were positive and planned to undergo video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery were randomly divided into four groups: control group, SAPB (serratus anterior plane block) group, Nalbuphine group and Nalbuphine + SAPB group. The effects of drugs and nerve block on the perioperative indexes of elderly patients were observed. The results showed that ① The VAS and SAS scores of postoperative analgesia in the Nalbuphine + SAPB group were lower than those in the single group and the control group. ② The postoperative spontaneous respiratory recovery time, extubation time, resuscitation room stay time, extubation cough, restlessness and respiratory depression in the Nalbuphine + SAPB group were lower than those in the single group and the control group. ③ The heart rate (HR), systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), mean arterial pressure (MAP) and blood oxygen saturation (SpO2) of patients in Nalbuphine + SAPB group before induction, T2 after intubation, T3 before skin incision, T4 after skin incision, T5 after chest closure and T6 after extubation were lower than those in single group and control group. Therefore, this study concluded that Nabufine combined with SAPB can make the vital signs of intraoperative patients more stable, which is worthy of clinical promotion.

Efficacy of Nalbuphine as a Local Anesthetic Adjuvant for Brachial Plexus Block: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Nalbuphine has been increasingly used as a local anesthetic adjuvant to extend the duration of analgesia in brachial plexus block (BPB). OBJECTIVES: To systematically and firstly evaluate the available evidence on the efficacy of nalbuphine as an adjuvant to local anesthetics in BPB. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Medline, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, EBSCO, PubMed, and additional databases were searched. Randomized controlled trials comparing combination of perineural nalbuphine with local anesthetics to local anesthetics alone in BPB for upper extremity surgical procedures were eligible for inclusion. RESULTS: Nineteen randomized controlled trials involving 1,355 patients met the inclusion criteria. Perineural use of nalbuphine prolonged the duration of analgesia in BPB (mean difference [MD], 162.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], 119.0 to 205.9; P < 0.00001; very low quality of evidence). The duration of sensory block was also extended (MD, 141.6; 95% CI, 100.3 to 182.9; P < 0.00001; very low quality of evidence). Furthermore, nalbuphine shortened the onset time of sensory block (MD, -2.6; 95% CI, -3.6 to -1.5; P < 0.00001; very low quality of evidence). There were no significant differences in side effect-related outcomes, including nausea (risk radio [RR], 1.56; 95% CI, 0.82 to 2.59; P = 0.17; moderate quality of evidence) and vomiting (RR, 1.41; 95%  CI, 0.66 to 3.02; P = 0.38; moderate quality of evidence). LIMITATIONS: The study was limited by substantial heterogeneity, a relatively small sample size and difference-in-differences in how outcomes of interest were described and assessed. CONCLUSIONS: Perineural use of nalbuphine in BPB is an effective strategy for analgesia in adult patients undergoing upper extremity surgery.

Efficacy of opioids and non-opioid analgesics in the treatment of post procedure pain of burned patients: a narrative review.

INTRODUCTION: Burns are a common trauma that cause acute severe pain in up to 80% of patients. The objective of this narrative review is to evaluate the efficacy of opioids, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, paracetamol, gabapentinoids, ketamine, and lidocaine in the treatment of acute pain in burn victims. METHODOLOGY: The databases explored were PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials, and OpenGrey. The included randomized, controlled clinical trials assessed the analgesic efficacy of these drugs on hospitalized patients, had no age limit, patients were in the acute phase of the burn injury and were compared to placebo or other analgesic drugs. Studies describing deep sedation, chronic opioid use, chronic pain, and patients taken to reconstructive surgeries were excluded. The Jadad scale was used to evaluate quality. RESULTS: Six randomized controlled clinical trials (397 patients) that evaluated the analgesic efficacy of fentanyl (n = 2), nalbuphine (n = 1), ketamine (n = 1), gabapentin (n = 1), and lidocaine (n = 1) to treat post-procedural pain were included. Fentanyl, nalbuphine, and ketamine were effective, while lidocaine was associated with a slight increase in reported pain and gabapentin showed no significant differences. Two studies were of high quality, one was of medium high quality, and three were of low quality. No studies on the efficacy of NSAIDs or paracetamol were found. CONCLUSION: Evidence of efficacy is very limited. Fentanyl, nalbuphine, and ketamine seem to be effective for controlling acute pain in burn patients, whereas gabapentin and lidocaine did not show any efficacy.

Nalbuphine: a candidate for treatment of women overwhelmed with sudden, intense labor pain?

AIM: On very rare occasions, women are overwhelmed with sudden, intense labor pain in the context of ultra-rapid late second stage of labor, especially when the head is crowning. The consequences may comprise serious pelvic floor damage for the mother and hypoxia for the fetus. Drugs like nalbuphine for immediate maternal analgesia and sedation would be helpful. This mixed opioid agonist-antagonist, that was used in obstetric anesthesia in the 1980s, acts quickly while side effects for the mother are minor. To better estimate possible complications for the fetus of a use shortly before birth, it is important to find out how quickly i.v. administered nalbuphine reaches fetal circulation. Therefore, we characterized the transplacental transfer of nalbuphine using an ex vivo model. METHODS: Placentas were obtained from cesarean sections after mothers gave their informed consent. Upon cannulation of one cotyledon, nalbuphine was added to the maternal circuit (calculated final concentration 100 ng/mL) and the ex vivo placenta perfusions were performed. To determine nalbuphine transfer from maternal to fetal circuit in the successful perfusions (n = 5), samples were collected at different time points. RESULTS: At perfusion start, the measured initial nalbuphine concentrations in the maternal and fetal circuits are 93.1 and <0.1 ng/mL, respectively. After 5 min of placenta perfusion, 2.5 ng/mL nalbuphine (i.e. 3% of the initial nalbuphine concentration in the maternal circuit) is reached in the fetal circuit; after 15 and 30 min, 9.7 and 15.8 ng/mL (approximately 10 and 16% of initial maternal, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Only a small amount of nalbuphine is likely to reach the fetus during the first minutes after (i.v.) maternal administration. Nalbuphine might be a valuable candidate for clinical use in the i.v. analgesia and sedation of women overwhelmed with sudden labor pain in the context of ultra-rapid second stage of labor.