• B Lefèvre, M Freysz, J Lèpine, J M Royer, D Perrin, and G Malka.
• Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, General Hospital, University of Dijon, France.
• Anesth Prog. 1992 Jan 1;39(1-2):13-8.

AbstractThis study compared the efficacy and side effects of equianalgesic doses of nalbuphine and fentanyl as intravenous (IV) analgesics for medically compromised patients undergoing oral surgery with local anesthesia. A total of 24 inpatients scheduled for oral surgery and with an ASA physical status of 3 or 4 were randomly assigned to two treatment groups and received IV analgesia with an injection of either 0.2 mg/kg nalbuphine or 2 micrograms/kg fentanyl. Three minutes later, local anesthesia was administered. Respiratory rate, heart rate, arterial blood pressure, and oxyhemoglobin saturation (SpO2) were recorded before and during surgery. After the operation, the patient, surgeon, and anesthesiologist were asked to complete questionnaires regarding drug effects. Analgesia and sedation appeared sufficient and comparable according to the surgeon, anesthesiologists, and patients in the two groups, and there were no significant differences in blood pressure or heart rate. Respiratory rate and SpO2 were lower in patients treated with fentanyl (P < 0.05), and eight patients of this group experienced episodes of oxygen desaturation (SpO2 < 90%) compared with only two patients who received nalbuphine (P < 0.05). Nalbuphine produced less respiratory depression and should be considered a suitable alternative to fentanyl for use in medically compromised patients undergoing oral surgery.

35 keywords...

hide…