1. A pilot study of nalbuphine versus tramadol administered through continuous intravenous infusion for postoperative pain control in children.
- Author
-
Moyao-García D, Hernández-Palacios JC, Ramírez-Mora JC, and Nava-Ocampo AA
- Subjects
- Child, Child, Preschool, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Infant, Infusions, Intravenous, Male, Pain Measurement, Pain, Postoperative physiopathology, Pilot Projects, Treatment Outcome, Analgesics, Opioid administration & dosage, Nalbuphine administration & dosage, Pain, Postoperative drug therapy, Tramadol administration & dosage
- Abstract
Nalbuphine and tramadol are potent analgesic drugs. Our aim was to preliminarily assess and compare the efficacy and safety of nalbuphine and tramadol for postoperative analgesia in children. In a double-blind design, 24 ASA 1-3 children aged 1 to 10 years undergoing a scheduled surgical procedure were randomly allocated to receive either an intravenous bolus dose of nalbuphine 100 microg/kg immediately before the end of surgery followed by an infusion of 0.2 microg/kg/min for 72 hrs., or an intravenous bolus dose of tramadol 1000 microg/kg followed by an infusion of 2.0 microg/kg/min for 72 hrs. Postoperative pain control and drug-related adverse events were recorded. Three children who received nalbuphine required an extra bolus dose within the 12 hrs. of post-surgery versus one child in the tramadol group. A similar number of patients in both groups required an increment in the infusion rate within the 72 post-surgery hours. Sedation was observed in 2 children in the nalbuphine group and in 1 child in the tramadol group. Four children presented vomiting with tramadol and two with nalbuphine. Cardiovascular parameters remained within the normal ranges in both groups. In conclusion, the bolus/infusion regimen of tramadol evaluated in this study appears to have better postoperative analgesic efficacy than the bolus/infusion regimen of nalbuphine. These preliminary results require further confirmation by studies with a sample size enough to clearly identify differences in their efficacy as well as in the rate of adverse events secondary to the administration of each of them.
- Published
- 2009