Nalbuphine in Pediatric Emergence Agitation Following Cochlear Implantation: A Randomized Trial.

Background: To investigate the effects of nalbuphine on emergency agitation (EA), which affects up to 80% of the children following otolaryngology procedures, in children undergoing cochlear implantation. Methods: A prospective double-blinded randomized controlled clinical trial was conducted between November 2020 and October 2022. Eligible children, aged 6 months to 3 years old, were randomly assigned to either 0.1 mg/kg, 0.15 mg/kg, 0.2 mg/kg nalbuphine or 0.9% saline groups. EA was defined by the Pediatric Anesthesia Emergence Delirium (PAED) score ≥10. Extubation time, post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) length of stay, severe EA (PAED ≥ 15), peak PAED score, the Faces, Legs, Activity, Cry, and Consolability (FLACC) scale, Ramsay sedation score, and adverse events were also recorded. Results: A total of 104 children were enrolled, with 26 children in each group. Nalbuphine significantly reduced the EA occurrence from 73.1% in the saline group to 38.5%, 30.8%, and 26.9% in the 0.1 mg/kg, 0.15 mg/kg, and 0.2 mg/kg nalbuphine groups, respectively (P < 0.001), without affecting the extubation time and PACU length of stay. More children (34.6%) in the 0.9% saline group experienced severe EA. Higher dose nalbuphine (0.15 mg/kg, 0.2 mg/kg) showed lower peak PAED score, better analgesia and sedation effect compared with 0.1 mg/kg nalbuphine and saline groups. However, 0.2mg/kg nalbuphine caused undesired over-sedation in two (7.7%) children. No other adverse events were reported. Conclusion: Young children undergoing cochlear implantation surgery were at a high risk of EA and postoperative pain, while 0.2 mg/kg nalbuphine might be an ideal candidate for EA and pain prevention when used under close monitoring. Trial Registration: ChiCTR2000040407.

Electrochemical detection of nalbuphine drug using oval-like ZnO nanostructure-based sensor.

Monitoring pharmaceutical drugs in various mediums is crucial to mitigate adverse effects. This study presents a chemical sensor using an oval-like zinc oxide (ZnO) nanostructure for electrochemical detection of nalbuphine. The ZnO nanostructure, produced via an efficient sol-gel technique, was extensively characterized using field emission scanning electron microscopy (FESEM), transmission electron microscopy (TEM), X-ray diffraction (XRD), UV-visible spectrophotometry, and fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR). A slurry of the ZnO nanostructure in a binder was applied to a glassy carbon electrode (GCE). The sensor's responsiveness to nalbuphine was assessed using linear sweep voltammetry (LSV), achieving optimal performance by fine-tuning the pH. The sensor demonstrated a proportional response to nalbuphine concentrations up to 150.0 nM with a good regression coefficient (R2) and a detection limit of 6.20 nM (S/N ratio of 3). Selectivity was validated against various interfering substances, and efficacy was confirmed through real sample analysis, highlighting the sensor's successful application for nalbuphine detection.

Amphiphilic NLC-Gel formulation loaded with Sebacoyl dinalbuphine ester and Nalbuphine for localized postoperative pain management.

Opioids are powerful analgesics; however, their significant systemic adverse effects and the need for frequent administration restrict their use. Nalbuphine (NA) is a κ-agonist narcotic with limited adverse effects, but needs to be frequently administrated due to its short elimination half-life. Whereas sebacoyl dinalbuphine ester (SDE) is a NA prodrug, which can effectively prolong the analgesic effect, but lacks immediate pain relief. Therefore, in this study, a rapid and sustained local delivery formulation to introduce NA and SDE directly into surgical sites was developed. An amphiphilic nanostructured lipid carrier (NLC) poloxamer 407 (P407) gel (NLC-Gel) was developed to permit concurrent delivery of hydrophobic SDE from the NLC core and hydrophilic NA from P407, offering a dual rapid and prolonged analgesic effect. Benefiting from the thermal-sensitive characteristic of P407, the formulation can be injected in liquid phase and instantly transit into gel at wound site. NLC-Gel properties, including particle size, drug release, rheology, and stability, were assessed. In vivo evaluation using a rat spinal surgery model highlighted the effect of the formulation through pain behavior test and hematology analysis. NLC-Gels demonstrated an analgesic effect comparable with that of commercial intramuscular injected SDE formulation (IM SDE), with only 15 % of the drug dosage. The inclusion of supplemental NA in the exterior gel (PA12-Gel + NA) provided rapid drug onset owing to swift NA dispersion, addressing acute pain within hours along with prolonged analgesic effects. Our findings suggest that this amphiphilic formulation significantly enhanced postoperative pain management in terms of safety and efficacy.

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.

Ultrasound-guided pericapsular nerve block compared with IV opioids in hip injuries: A randomised controlled trial.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: The study aimed to compare the analgesic effect of USG-guided PENG (Peri capsular nerve group) block with Intravenous Nalbuphine hydrochloride (IVN) in patients with hip fracture coming to the emergency department (ED). The purpose was also to monitor the adverse effects and rescue analgesic requirements in both treatment modalities. METHODS: The study was an open-label randomised controlled trial (RCT) comparing PENG block versus IVN in treating patients with femoral head and neck fractures, as well as pubic rami fracture of the hip (HF). The participants in the PENG group received a USG-guided PENG block by injection of 25 ml of 0.25% bupivacaine, whereas the IVN group received 0.15 mg/kg of nalbuphine. An emergency physician with expertise in ultrasound-guided nerve blocks performed the PENG blocks. The primary outcome was to measure the improvement of the NRS (Numerical rating scale) score at 30 min in both static position (Patient-chosen position for the best comfort) and dynamic position (15-degree passive affected lower limb elevation). Secondary outcomes were to measure static and dynamic NRS pain scores at 2 h, 4 h, and 6 h after intervention in both groups. The requirement for rescue analgesia, adverse events and any block-related complications were also recorded. RESULTS: A total of 60 patients with HF were included in the final analysis. The static and dynamic NRS score was significantly lower in the PENG group compared to the IVN group at 30 min, 2 h, 4 h, and 6 h post-intervention. In the PENG group, the static NRS score was improved by 5.73 ± 1.17, while In the IVN group, the static NRS score was just improved by 2.13 ± 0.97 at 30 min. In the same duration, the Dynamic NRS score in the PENG group was improved by 6.13 ± 1.38, while In the IVN group, it improved just by 2.43 ± 1.28. Rescue analgesia was required in 50.0% of patients in the IVN group but none in the PENG group. Further, no block-related complications or adverse events were observed in the patients of the PENG group. CONCLUSION: The study provides evidence that the ultrasound-guided PENG block has a better analgesic effect and has fewer adverse events than IV opioids in patients with HF.

A randomized, double-blind study to compare the efficacy and safety of nalbuphine nasal spray and injectable solution in patients after orthopaedic interventions and traumatological procedures.

AIMS: Our previous 3-period crossover study in healthy volunteers comparing the pharmacokinetics of nalbuphine nasal spray Apain with parenteral nalbuphine solution demonstrated high bioavailability of the nasal spray and close similarity of pharmacokinetic profiles after intranasal and intramuscular administration, especially within 30 min postdose. The aim of the present study was a noninferiority assessment of nalbuphine nasal spray vs. intramuscular injection for pain relief in postoperative patients. METHODS: Ninety orthopaedic and traumatology patients were enrolled in this double-blind, randomized study of the effectiveness and tolerance of a single 10.5 mg dose of nalbuphine nasal spray vs. 10 mg intramuscular injection. The summed pain intensity difference (SPID0-6) calculated using visual analogue scale scores was the primary study endpoint. RESULTS: Of 90 subjects enrolled, the per-protocol efficacy population comprised 79 patients; 6 patients in the reference group and 5 patients in the test group were excluded due to remedication. The mean values of study endpoints with 95% confidence interval were as follows in reference and test groups, respectively: SPID0-6 = 228.08 (205.73-250.43) vs. 248.73 9 (225.83-271.63), time to pain relief onset = 0.28 h (0.25-0.31) vs. 0.27 h (0.25-0.29), duration of analgesia = 5.55 h (5.17-5.93) vs. 5.51 h (5.10-5.92), area under the curve = 119.30 (91.17-147.43) vs. 99.81 (74.52-107.10). No statistically significant differences were revealed. CONCLUSION: Nalbuphine nasal spray Apain has been proven to be a safe, noninvasive alternative to intramuscular nalbuphine to relieve severe postoperative pain. Designed for self-administration and dose-adjusting, the noncontrolled opioid analgesic nalbuphine spray can be used for patient-controlled analgesia in out-of-hospital, field and home settings.

Regional analgesia using ultrasound-guided intermediate cervical plexus block versus cervical erector spinae block for anterior cervical spine surgery: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Regional analgesia techniques are crucial for pain management after cervical spine surgeries. Anesthesiologists strive to select the most effective and least hazardous regional analgesia technique for the cervical region. Our hypothesis is that an intermediate cervical plexus (IC) block can provide adequate postoperative analgesia compared to a cervical erector spinae (ES) block in patients undergoing anterior cervical spine surgery. METHODS: In this double-blind prospective trial, 58 patients were randomly assigned into two equal groups prior to the administration of general anesthesia. Patients in the IC group (n = 29) underwent ultrasound-guided bilateral intermediate cervical plexus block with 15 ml of bupivacaine 0.25% administered to each side. The ES group (n = 29) underwent ultrasound-guided bilateral cervical erector spinae plane blocks with 15 ml of 0.25% bupivacaine administered to each side at the C6 level. The primary outcome was to record the time to the first call for rescue analgesia (nalbuphine), and the secondary outcomes were to measure the performance time, the onset of the sensory block, the intraoperative fentanyl consumption, postoperative pain intensity using VAS, the postoperative total nalbuphine consumption, and postoperative complications such as nausea, vomiting, hypotension, and bradycardia. RESULTS: The performance and onset of sensory block times were significantly shorter in the IC group compared to the ES group. The time to first call for nalbuphine was significantly shorter in the IC group (7.31 ± 1.34 h) compared to the ES group (11.10 ± 1.82 h). The mean postoperative VAS scores were comparable between the two groups at the measured time points, except at 8 h, where it was significantly higher in the IC group, and at 12 h, where it was significantly higher in the ES group. The total nalbuphine consumption was significantly higher in the IC group (33.1 ± 10.13 mg) compared to the ES group (22.76 ± 8.62 mg). CONCLUSIONS: For patients undergoing anterior cervical spine surgery, the intermediate cervical plexus block does not provide better postoperative regional analgesia compared to the cervical erector spinae block. Performance time and onset time were shorter in the IC group, whereas nalbuphine consumption was lower in the ES group. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov. (NCT05577559, and the date of registration: 13-10-2022).

Efficacy and safety of nalbuphine for epidural labor analgesia at high altitude: An observational study.

Xining is located at the eastern edge of the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau, with an average altitude of >7000 feet (>2000 m). Nalbuphine is a kappa-opioid receptor agonist that can provide analgesia with fewer side effects than other opioid analgesics. This study aimed to evaluate pain control, side effects, and neonatal outcomes from combining nalbuphine with sufentanil and ropivacaine in 600 women during epidural anesthesia while giving birth at a high altitude in Xining, China. A total of 600 parturients receiving epidural labor analgesia were randomly divided into 2 groups, each group 300 parturients. The nalbuphine group received nalbuphine, sufentanil, and ropivacain, the control group only received sufentanil and ropivacain. The analgesic effect was evaluated through the Visual Analogue Scale scores. Neonatal outcomes were mainly evaluated through the Apgar Scores. Compared to the control group, the nalbuphine group showed lower Visual Analogue Scale scores at all time points after analgesia (P < .05). In comparison with the control group, parturients in the nalbuphine group showed lower incidence rates of fever at delivery, 24-hour postpartum bleeding, and pruritus (P < .05). However, between the 2 groups, there were no statistically significant differences in the remaining maternal and infant outcomes and neonatal outcomes (P > .05). Moreover, no adverse effects on neonatal outcomes were observed. The findings from this study support findings from previous studies that nalbuphine provided safe epidural analgesia without significant side effects for the mother and infant, and showed both safety and efficacy when used during labor at high altitude.

Breast Milk Excretion of Dinalbuphine Sebacate Injection Administered After Cesarean Section.

Ensuring the safety of analgesics during lactation is crucial for women of childbearing potential. Available data regarding the transfer of nalbuphine for postoperative acute pain via breast milk are limited to the postmarketing experience. This lactation study aimed to assess nalbuphine and dinalbuphine sebacate concentrations in breast milk from lactating women with postoperative pain treated with dinalbuphine sebacate extended-release injection (150 mg dinalbuphine sebacate/2 mL Naldebain). Breast milk was collected throughout the 5-day posthospitalization interval from 20 mothers injected with one dose of extended-release dinalbuphine sebacate intramuscularly. Maternal safety was assessed during the study period. Nalbuphine was detectable in 71% of milk samples collected from all mothers, whereas dinalbuphine sebacate was undetectable or below the quantitation limit (0.1 ng/mL). The mean nalbuphine concentration in milk was approximately 10.55 ng/mL, with the peak concentration reaching up to 12.7 ng/mL. The mean relative infant dose was 0.39% (coefficient of variation, 65%). The mean pain intensity at rest was reduced to mild pain from Day 2 morning to discharge. Overall, the maternal safety profile was tolerable. The breast milk of women who receive one dose of dinalbuphine sebacate injection postpartum contains low nalbuphine concentration. In addition, dinalbuphine sebacate injection potentially reduces maternal pain intensity during the first postpartum week and offers low toxicity risk among breastfed infants.

Optimal Post-Operative Nalbuphine Dose Regimen: A Randomized Controlled Trial in Patients with Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy.

Background and Objectives: Optimal opioid analgesia is an excellent analgesia that does not present unexpected adverse effects. Nalbuphine, acting on the opioid receptor as a partial mu antagonist and kappa agonist, is considered a suitable option for patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery. Therefore, we aim to investigate the appropriate dosage of nalbuphine for post-operative pain management in patients with laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Materials and Methods: Patients were randomly categorized into low, medium, and high nalbuphine groups. In each group, a patient control device for post-operative pain control was programed with a low (0.05 mg/kg), medium (0.10 mg/kg), or high (0.20 mg/kg) nalbuphine dose as a loading dose and each bolus dose with a lockout interval of 7 min and without background infusion. Primary and secondary outcomes included the post-operative pain scale and nalbuphine consumption, and episodes of post-operative opioid-related adverse events and satisfactory scores. Results: The low-dosage group presented a higher initial self-reported pain score in comparison to the other two groups for the two hours post-op (p = 0.039) but presented lower nalbuphine consumption than the other two groups for four hours post-op (p = 0.047). There was no significant difference in the analysis of the satisfactory score and adverse events. Conclusions: An appropriate administration of nalbuphine could be 0.1 to 0.2 mg/kg at the initial four hours; this formula could be modified to a lower dosage (0.05 mg/kg) in the post-operative management of laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Effect of two different doses of nalbuphine for postoperative analgesia in children with cleft palate: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Cleft palate repair surgery may result in severe pain in the immediate postoperative period. The aim of this study is to compare the effects of different doses of nalbuphine for postoperative analgesia in children with cleft palate. METHODS: From November 2019 to June 2021, 90 children (45 males and 45 females, age 9-20 months old, ASA class I-II) were selected for palatoplasty. They were randomly divided into three groups: the control group (Group C), the N1 group (postoperative analgesia with 0.05 mg/kg/h nalbuphine) and the N2 group (postoperative analgesia with 0.075 mg/kg/h nalbuphine). Each group had 30 cases. Nalbuphine was not continuously infused in Group C but was continuously infused in Groups N1 and N2 at rates of 0.05 mg/kg/h and 0.075 mg/kg/h, respectively, for 24 h for postoperative analgesia. The FLACC analgesia score and Ramsay Sedation score were recorded at 10 min (T1), 30 min (T2), 2 h (T3), 12 h (T4) and 24 h (T5) after the operation. Adverse reactions such as nausea, vomiting and respiratory depression were observed and recorded. RESULTS: Compared with those in Group C, the FLACC scores in the N1 and N2 groups decreased significantly at T1-T5 (p < 0.05); the Ramsay Sedation score in the N1 group was significantly higher at T3 and T4 (p < 0.05), and that in the N2 group was significantly higher at T1-T5 (p < 0.05). Compared with that in the N1 group, the FLACC score in the N2 group was not significantly different, and the Ramsay Sedation score increased significantly at T5 (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Using 0.05 mg/kg/h Nalbuphine continuously for 24 h for postoperative analgesia in children with cleft palate has a better effect and fewer adverse reactions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered at ChiCTR1900027385 (11/11/2019).

Nalbuphine-6-glucuronide is a potent analgesic with superior safety profiles by altering binding affinity and selectivity for mu-/kappa-opioid receptors.

Although nalbuphine, a semi-synthetic analgesic compound, is less potent than morphine in terms of alleviating severe pain, our recent findings have revealed that nalbuphine-6-glucuronide (N6G), one of the glucuronide metabolites of nalbuphine, promotes a significantly more robust analgesic effect than its parent drug. Nevertheless, despite these promising observations, the precise mechanisms underlying the analgesic effects of nalbuphine glucuronides have yet to be determined. In this study, we aim to elucidate the mechanisms associated with the analgesic effects of nalbuphine glucuronides. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic studies were conducted to investigate the relationship between the central and peripheral compartments of nalbuphine and its derivatives. The analgesic responses of these compounds were evaluated based on multiple behavioral tests involving thermal and mechanical stimuli. Radioligand binding assays were also performed to determine the binding affinity and selectivity of these compounds for different opioid receptors. The results of these tests consistently confirmed that the heightened analgesic effects of N6G are mediated through its enhanced binding affinity for both mu- and kappa-opioid receptors, even comparable to those of morphine. Notably, N6G exhibited fewer side effects and did not induce sudden death, thereby highlighting its superior safety profile. Additionally, pharmacokinetic studies indicated that N6G could cross the blood-brain barrier when administered peripherally, offering pain relief. Overall, N6G provides great analgesic efficacy and enhanced safety. These findings highlight the potential value of nalbuphine glucuronides, particularly N6G, as promising candidates for the development of novel analgesic drugs.

Butorphanol-Azaperone-Medetomidine Is as Safe and Effective as Nalbuphine-Azaperone-Medetomidine for Immobilization of Juvenile American Black Bears (Ursus americanus).

Immobilization kits including butorphanol-azaperone-medetomidine (BAM) and nalbuphine-azaperone-medetomidine can provide effective, safe, and easy-to-use protocols in bears. Nalbuphine-azaperone-medetomidine is not commercially available but may be useful for wildlife agencies because it does not contain controlled substances. This study directly compared BAM to nalbuphine-azaperone-medetomidine immobilization in 10 juvenile healthy black bears (10 mo old; four females, six males) undergoing prerelease examinations after rehabilitation. Bears were immobilized via remote delivery of 1 mL of BAM (n=5) or nalbuphine-azaperone-medetomidine (n=5) intramuscularly in the shoulder during December (randomized, blinded trial). Bears were intubated, monitored with an electrocardiogram, pulse oximeter, capnograph, noninvasive blood pressure cuff, and rectal thermometer, and underwent physical examination, sample collection, morphometrics, and ear-tag placement. Induction, physiologic, and recovery parameters were recorded, including arterial blood gas analysis. The anesthetic agents were antagonized with atipamezole and naltrexone. There were no differences between protocols in induction or recovery times. There were no differences between protocols in heart rate, respiratory rate, temperature, oxygen saturation, end-tidal CO2, mean arterial pressure, or blood gas analysis or any differences between male and female bears in any parameters. Bears were hypertensive and normoxemic with low oxygen saturation via pulse oximeter, but all recovered smoothly and were released within 2 h of recovery. This study supports that nalbuphine-azaperone-medetomidine is clini-cally as safe and effective as BAM in American black bears.

Comparison of Ketamine-Xylazine, Butorphanol-Azaperone-Medetomidine, and Nalbuphine-Medetomidine-Azaperone for Raccoon (Procyon lotor) Immobilization.

Raccoons (Procyon lotor) are frequently handled using chemical immobilization in North America for management and research. In a controlled environment, we compared three drug combinations: ketamine-xylazine (KX), butorphanol-azaperone-medetomidine (BAM), and nalbuphine-medetomidine-azaperone (NalMed-A) for raccoon immobilization. In crossover comparisons, raccoons received a mean of the following: 8.66 mg/kg ketamine and 1.74 mg/kg xylazine (0.104 mL/kg KX); 0.464 mg/kg butorphanol, 0.155 mg/kg azaperone, and 0.185 mg/kg medetomidine (0.017 mL/kg BAM); and 0.800 mg/kg nalbuphine, 0.200 mg/kg azaperone, and 0.200 mg/kg medetomidine (0.020 mL/kg NalMed-A). Induction time was shortest with KX (mean±SE, 10.0±0.7 min) and longest with NalMed-A (13.0±1.3 min). A sampling procedure was completed on 89% (16/18), 72% (13/18), and 89% (16/18) of the raccoons administered KX, BAM, and NalMed-A, respectively. Reasons for incomplete sampling included inadequate immobilization (one KX and one NalMed-A), responsive behaviors (one each with KX, BAM, NalMed-A), or animal safety (four BAM). Mean recovery time for KX was 32.8±7.1 min without antagonizing and 28.6±5.2 min following delivery of an antagonist. Mean recovery time was 6.2±0.8 min for BAM and 5.1±0.5 min for NalMed-A after antagonizing. Only with KX were raccoons observed to recover without use of an antagonist. Supplemental oxygen was provided to 23% (3/13), 72% (13/18), and 71% (12/17) of raccoons immobilized with KX, BAM, and NalMed-A, respectively. Hypoxemia at <80% oxygen saturation occurred in 0% (0/17), 27% (4/15), and 6% (1/16) of the raccoons administered KX, BAM, and NalMed-A, respectively; all raccoons fully recovered from chemical immobilization. All combinations could be used for raccoon immobilization; however, the need for delivery of supplemental oxygen to a majority of raccoons immobilized with BAM and NalMed-A may limit broader use of these agents for certain field studies involving capture, sample, and release of free-ranging animals from a practical standpoint.

Epidural nalbuphine versus dexmedetomidine as adjuvants to bupivacaine in lower limb orthopedic surgeries for postoperative analgesia: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Administration of adjuvant drugs epidurally in combination with local anesthetics offers new dimensions in the management of postoperative pain. This study aimed to compare the addition of either nalbuphine or dexmedetomidine to epidural bupivacaine for postoperative analgesia in lower limb orthopedic surgeries under combined spinal-epidural anesthesia. METHODS: This prospective randomized double-blind study included 69 patients scheduled for lower limb orthopedic surgeries. Anesthesia was started with 15 mg hyperbaric bupivacaine 0.5% intrathecally, and then an epidural bolus dose of 12 ml (10 ml 0.25% bupivacaine with 2 ml normal saline in group C, 2 ml (10 mg) nalbuphine in group N or dexmedetomidine 2 ml (100 µg) in group D was administered when sensory regression to T10. Postoperatively, when visual analogue scale (VAS) was ≥ 3, an epidural top-up dose of 8 ml (6 ml 0.25% bupivacaine plus 2 ml normal saline in group C, 2 ml (2 mg) nalbuphine in group N or 20 µg dexmedetomidine (2 ml) in group D was given. The primary outcome was to evaluate the duration of postoperative analgesia and secondary outcomes were any side effects and patient satisfaction. RESULTS: The onset of epidural analgesia was 17.83 ± 2.53 versus 13.39 ± 1.27 versus 12.17 ± 1.27 min in groups C, N and D, respectively (p value < 0.001). The mean duration of analgesia was 241.3 ± 14.24 versus 318.38 ± 22.54 versus 365.87 ± 18.01 min in groups C, N and D, respectively (p value < 0.001). The mean sedation score was less in group C than group N and D (P < 0.001). The patient satisfaction score showed the lowest degree of satisfaction in group C (p value < 0.001). Top-up doses consumed and total analgesic requirements were lower in groups N and D than in group C. There was a statistically significant difference between the studied groups regarding VAS over time (p value < 0.001), intraoperative bradycardia (p value 0.029), and shivering (p value 0.029). CONCLUSION: The addition of either nalbuphine or dexmedetomidine to epidural bupivacaine was effective for postoperative analgesia in terms of onset, duration, and patient satisfaction with the superiority of dexmedetomidine over nalbuphine. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Approval from the research ethics committee of the Faculty of Medicine, Zagazig University was obtained with the reference number (ZU-IRB#:7045-15-8-2021) and it was registered under clinicaltrials.gov (NCT05041270) on registration date 13/09/2021.

Effectiveness and safety of prehospital analgesia including nalbuphine and paracetamol by paramedics: an observational study.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to examine the effectiveness and safety of prehospital analgesia with nalbuphine and/or paracetamol by paramedics. METHODS: In this retrospective trial, following the implementation of a standard-operating-procedure for pain requiring treatment as defined as a score ≥4 on the 0-10 Numeric Rating Scale for pain, all emergency operations in the district of Gütersloh between January 1, 2020, and June 30, 2022, with analgesic administration by paramedics in patients ≥18 years were included in the study. Analgesic agents employed by the paramedics included nalbuphine and/or paracetamol, butylscopolamine for abdominal colic, and esketamine in case of failure of the other analgesics. The primary endpoint was the patients' rating of their pain on the Numeric Rating Scale at the end of the operation. Additional covariates included sex, cause of pain, analgesics used, Numeric Rating Scale at beginning and analgesic-associated complications (reduced level of consciousness, hypotension, desaturation, a- or bradypnea). RESULTS: A total of 1931 emergency operations (female: N.=1039 [53.8%]) with pain requiring treatment (non-traumatic cause: N.=1106 [57.3%]; initial Numeric Rating Scale: 8.0±1.4). Analgesics applied were nalbuphine + paracetamol (50.6%), paracetamol (38.7%), butylscopolamine (13.4%), nalbuphine (7.7%), and esketamine (4.9%). Mean pain reduction was 4.3±2.3 (nalbuphine + paracetamol: 5.0±2.1; nalbuphine: 4.7±2.3) and paracetamol: 3.3±2.2, respectively. Factors influencing a change in the Numeric Rating Scale were trauma (regression-coefficient: -0.308, 95% CI: -0.496 - -0.119, P=0.0014 vs. non-trauma; nalbuphine [yes vs. no]: regression-coefficient 0.684, 95% CI 0.0774-1.291, P=0.03; nalbuphine + paracetamol: regression-coefficient 0.763, 95% CI 0.227-1.299, P=0.005). At the end of the operation, 49.7% had a Numeric Rating Scale <4, 34.3% had a Numeric Rating Scale 4-5, and 16.0% had a Numeric Rating Scale ≥6. Factors influencing a Numeric Rating Scale <4 at end of use were trauma vs. non-trauma: odds ratio 0.788, 95% CI 0.649-0.957, P=0.02. The Numeric Rating Scale at beginning reported: odds ratios 0.754, 95% CI 0.700-0.812, P<0.0001. Analgesic-associated complications were not observed. CONCLUSIONS: Prehospital analgesia by paramedics with nalbuphine as monotherapy or in combination with paracetamol allows for sufficient analgesia without the occurrence of complications.

Analgesic Efficacy of Nalbuphine as an Adjuvant to Ropivacaine in Erector Spinae Plane Block for Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: A Randomized, Double-Blinded, Clinical Trial.

Background: Erector spinae plane block (ESPB) is an easy and safe method for postoperative analgesia. However its effect lasts only for several hours. This trial was to investigate the effectiveness of different doses of nalbuphine as an adjuvant to ropivacaine in ESPB for patients undergoing percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). Methods: Patients scheduled for PCNL were randomized into three groups and received ultrasound-guided ESPB at T10 level for postoperative analgesia. Each subject received 28 mL of 100 mg ropivacaine solution mixed with 2 mL of normal saline (Group R), 2 mL of 10 mg nalbuphine (Group RNL), or 2 mL of 20 mg nalbuphine (Group RNH). Primary outcome was the time to first opioid demand. Secondary outcomes were morphine consumption, VAS scores within 24 h postoperatively, rescue analgesic requirements, and length of hospital stay. Results: The median [interquartile range, IQR] time to first opioid demand was significantly longer in group RNH (8.70 [6.90,14.85] h) than that of group R and group RNL (2.90 [2.00,6.30] h and 5.80 [2.95,7.00] h, respectively). VAS scores (either resting or active) within 24 h postoperatively were comparable between the three groups, with the most significant differences especially at 4, 6, 8 h. Morphine consumption at 24 h postoperatively was significant for R group vs RNH group (median difference, 9; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.57 to 16.43; p = 0.02). Conclusions: Adding 20mg nalbuphine to ropivacaine in ESPB could significantly improve the effect of analgesia and prolong the duration of nerve blocks for PCNL.

A MIXTURE OF NALBUPHINE, AZAPERONE, AND MEDETOMIDINE FOR IMMOBILIZING RINGTAILS (BASSARISCUS ASTUTUS).

We evaluated a combination of nalbuphine HCl (40 mg/mL), azaperone tartrate (10 mg/mL), and medetomidine HCl (10 mg/mL), a combination known as NAM or NalMed-A, in 23 ringtails (Bassariscus astutus) during 29 handling events for a radio-collaring study in southern Oregon, US, from August 2020 to March 2022. The combination was delivered to ringtails by hand injection at 0.075 mL NAM per estimated 1 kg body mass. The mean (± standard deviation, SD) dosage calculated post hoc was 3.366 (±0.724) mg/kg nalbuphine, 0.841 (±0.181) mg/kg medetomidine, and 0.841 (±0.181) mg/kg azaperone. All captured ringtails were effectively immobilized with a mean (SD) induction time of 13.24 (±3.57) min. The medetomidine and nalbuphine components were antagonized with a combination of atipamezole and naltrexone HCl with a mean (SD) recovery time of 2.48 (±1.94) min. This combination appeared to be safe and effective for immobilizing ringtails with a low volume dose, smooth antagonism, and rapid recovery. In addition, NAM does not contain any drugs that are US Drug Enforcement scheduled, which makes it useful for immobilization procedures by wildlife professionals in the US.