Anesth Analg 2001;93:162-165
© 2001 International Anesthesia Research Society
OBSTETRIC ANESTHESIA
Nalbuphine Versus Propofol for Treatment of Intrathecal Morphine-Induced Pruritus After Cesarean Delivery
Somrat Charuluxananan, MD, MSc, FRCAT,
Oranuch Kyokong, MD, MSc, FRCAT,
Wanna Somboonviboon, MD, FRCAT,
Somrat Lertmaharit, M Med STAT,
Pornswan Ngamprasertwong, MD, and
Kandit Nimcharoendee, MD
Department of Anesthesiology, the Clinical Epidemiology Unit, and the Department of Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand
Address correspondence and reprint requests to Charuluxananan Somrat, MD, Department of Anesthesiology, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Rama IV Rd., Pathumwan, Bangkok 10330, Thailand.
In this prospective, randomized, double-blinded study, we compared the efficacy of nalbuphine and propofol for treating intrathecal morphine-induced pruritus after cesarean delivery. One-hundred-eighty-one parturients who developed moderate to severe pruritus after the administration of intrathecal morphine were randomly allocated into two groups. One group received 3 mg IV nalbuphine (n = 91), and the other received 20 mg IV propofol (n = 90). The improvement of pruritus and other adverse effects was determined at 10 min after study drug administration. The treatment success rate was higher in the Nalbuphine group than in the Propofol group (83% vs 61%; P < 0.001). Among the successfully treated patients, recurrence rates of moderate to severe pruritus within 4 h were not significantly different (nalbuphine 9% versus propofol 7%; P = 0.76). Other side effects, such as decreased analgesia, increased nausea, vomiting, increased sedation, pain on injection, and dizziness, were not significantly different between groups. Sedation and pain on injection, which were the two most common side effects, were minor and clinically inconsequential.
Implications: Nalbuphine was superior to propofol for the treatment of intrathecalmorphine-induced pruritus after cesarean delivery.
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
D. Tamdee, S. Charuluxananan, Y. Punjasawadwong, C. Tawichasri, J. Patumanond, and P. Sriprajittichai
A Randomized Controlled Trial of Pentazocine Versus Ondansetron for the Treatment of Intrathecal Morphine-Induced Pruritus in Patients Undergoing Cesarean Delivery
Anesth. Analg.,
November 1, 2009;
109(5):
1606 - 1611.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
C. A. Iatrou, C. K. Dragoumanis, T. D. Vogiatzaki, G. I. Vretzakis, C. E. Simopoulos, and V. K. Dimitriou
Prophylactic Intravenous Ondansetron and Dolasetron in Intrathecal Morphine-Induced Pruritus: A Randomized, Double-Blinded, Placebo-Controlled Study
Anesth. Analg.,
November 1, 2005;
101(5):
1516 - 1520.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. Charuluxananan, O. Kyokong, W. Somboonviboon, A. Narasethakamol, and P. Promlok
Nalbuphine Versus Ondansetron for Prevention of Intrathecal Morphine-Induced Pruritus After Cesarean Delivery
Anesth. Analg.,
June 1, 2003;
96(6):
1789 - 1793.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
B. Ben-David, P. J. DeMeo, C. Lucyk, and D. Solosko
Minidose Lidocaine-Fentanyl Spinal Anesthesia in Ambulatory Surgery: Prophylactic Nalbuphine Versus Nalbuphine Plus Droperidol
Anesth. Analg.,
December 1, 2002;
95(6):
1596 - 1600.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
|