Effects of Intrathecal Nalbuphine as an Adjuvant for Postoperative Analgesia: A Randomized, Double Blind, Control Study

Authors

  •   B. Shraddha Department of Anaesthesiology, K.V.G Medical College and Hospital, Sullia, Karnataka
  •   N. G. Anish Sharma Department of Anaesthesiology, K.V.G Medical College and Hospital, Sullia, Karnataka
  •   V. Niharika Department of Anaesthesiology, K.V.G Medical College and Hospital, Sullia, Karnataka
  •   M. Kavya Department of Anaesthesiology, K.V.G Medical College and Hospital, Sullia, Karnataka
  •   P. Shankaranarayana Department of Anaesthesiology, K.V.G Medical College and Hospital, Sullia, Karnataka

Keywords:

Intrathecal administration, nalbuphine, sensory and motor blockade

Abstract

Context: Opioids as adjuvants have been frequently used to prolong the neuraxial blockade for postoperative analgesia and are known to cause adverse effects. Nalbuphine, as an opioid with minimal adverse effects was tried for its effectiveness. Aims: Research was done to evaluate the effects of intrathecal Nalbuphine on the speed of onset of sensory and motor blockade, duration of analgesia and its side effects. Materials and Methods: Randomized clinical trial with a sample size of 60 adults in two groups of 30 each scheduled for lower abdominal and orthopaedic surgeries were included. Group 1 received 3 ml of hyperbaric bupivacaine 0.5% + 0.8 ml nalbuphine (0.8 mg) intrathecally, whereas group 2 received 3 ml of hyperbaric bupivacaine 0.5% + 0.8 ml of normal saline intrathecally. The onset of sensory and motor blockade, regression time of sensory blockade, duration of motor blockade, and analgesia, visual analogue scale (VAS) pain score and side effects were compared between the groups. Statistical Analysis Used: All the data was analyzed statistically and the significance was measured as probability of occurrence by the Student’s t‑test and Mann–Whitney U test. The values were expressed as mean ± the standard deviation and a P value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: The onset of sensory blockade was slower with increased duration of analgesia. Regression time of sensory blockade and duration of effective analgesia was prolonged in the study group with no significant side effects. Conclusions: Improvement in the duration of sensory and motor blockade with minimal side effects was observed, thus proving that it is an effective intrathecal adjuvant for postoperative analgesia.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Downloads

Published

2016-10-01

How to Cite

Shraddha, B., Anish Sharma, N. G., Niharika, V., Kavya, M., & Shankaranarayana, P. (2016). Effects of Intrathecal Nalbuphine as an Adjuvant for Postoperative Analgesia: A Randomized, Double Blind, Control Study. Karnataka Anaesthesia Journal, 2(4), 112–115. Retrieved from http://karnatakaanesthesiajournal.in/index.php/kaj/article/view/139212

Issue

Volume 2, Issue 4, October-December 2016

Section

Original Articles

References

Gunion MW, Marchionne AM, Anderson CT. Use of mixed agonist– antagonist Nalbuphine in opioid based analgesia. Acute Pain 2004;6;29‑39.

Fournier R, Van Gessel E, Macksay M, Gamulin Z. Onset and offset of intrathecal morphine versus Nalbuphine for postoperative pain relief after total hip replacement. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2000;44:940‑5.

Culebra X, Giovanni G, Jiri Z, Christian K. Advantages of intrathecal Nalbuphine compared with intrathecal Morphine after Caesarean delivery: An evaluation of post‑operative analgesia and adverse effects.Anesth Analg 2000;91:601‑5.

Jyothi B, Gowda S, Shaikh SI. Comparison of analgesic effect of different doses of intrathecal Nalbuphine with bupivacaine and bupivacaine alone for lower abdominal and orthopaedic surgeries.

Indian J Pain 2014;28:18‑23.

Breen TW, Shapiro T, Glass B, Foster‑Payne D, and Oriol NE. Epidural Anesthesia for Labor in an Ambulatory Patient. Anesth Analg 1993;77:919‑24.

Ramsay MAE, Savege TM, Simpson BRJ, Goodwin R. Controlled Sedation with Alphaxalone‑Alphadolone. BMJ 1974;2:656‑59.

Crichton N. Information point: Visual analogue scale (VAS) J Clin Nurs 2001;10:697‑706.

Tawfik MO. Mode of action of intraspinal opioids. Pain Rev 1994;1:275‑94.

Terajima K, Onodera H, Kobayashi M, Yamanaka H, Ohno T, Konuma S, et al. Efficacy of intrathecal morphine for analgesia following elective cesarean section: Comparison with previous delivery. J Nippon Med Sch 2003;70:327‑33.

Chaney MA. Side effects of intrathecal and epidural opioids. Can J Anesth 1995;42:891‑903.

Zarr GD, Werling LL, Brown SR, Cox BM. Opioid ligand binding sites in the spinal cord of the guinea‑pig. Neuropharmacology 1986;25:47‑80.

De Souza EB, Schmidt WK, Kuhar MJ. Nalbuphine: An autoradiographic opioid receptor binding profile in the central nervous system of an agonist/antagonist analgesic. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 1988;244:391‑402.

Ready LB, Loper KA, Nessly M, Wild L. Postoperative epidural morphine is safe on surgical wards. Anesthesiology 1991;75:452‑6.

Henderson SK, Cohen H. Nalbuphine augmentation of analgesia and reversal of side effects following epidural hydromorphone.Anesthesiology 1986;65:216‑8.

Penning JP, Samson B, Baxter AD. Reversal of epidural morphine‑induced respiratory depression and pruritus with nalbuphine.Can J Anaesth 1988;35:599‑604.

Yoon JY, Jee YS, Hong JY. A Comparison of Analgesic Effects and side effects of intrathecal morphine, nalbuphine and morphine‑nalbuphine mixture for pain relief during a caesarean section. Korean J Anaesthesiol 2002;42:627‑33.

Mukherjee A, Pal A, Dawar N. Intrathecal Nalbuphine as an adjuvant to subarachnoid block: What is the most effective dose? Anesth Essays Res 2011;5:171‑5.

Tiwari AK, Tomar GS, Agrawal J. Intrathecal Bupivacaine in Comparison With a Combination of Nalbuphine and Bupivacaine for Subarachnoid Block: A Randomized Prospective Double‑Blind Clinical Study. Am J Ther 2013;20:592‑5.

Rawal N, Nuutinen L, Raj PP, Lovering SL, Gobuty AH, Hargardine J, et al. Behavioral and histopathologic effects following intrathecal administration of butorphanol, sufentanil, and nalbuphine in sheep. Anesthesiology 1991;75:1025‑34.

Most read articles by the same author(s)