A Comparative Study of the Effect of Dexmedetomidine and Nalbuphine as an Adjuvant to Levobupivacaine in Ultrasound-Guided Supraclavicular Brachial Plexus Block: A Prospective Randomized Double-Blind Study

Background: The supraclavicular brachial plexus block (SCBPB) demonstrates wide surgical use for upper limbs through its application of levobupivacaine as the chosen local anesthetic because it offers lower cardiotoxic effects. Patients benefit from adjuvant medications dexmedetomidine and nalbuphin...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Jyoti Mala, Sudha Singh, Pankaj Kumar, Arvind Kumar
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications 2025-05-01
Series:Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences
Subjects:
Online Access:https://journals.lww.com/10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_698_25
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1850231830743089152
author Jyoti Mala
Sudha Singh
Pankaj Kumar
Arvind Kumar
author_facet Jyoti Mala
Sudha Singh
Pankaj Kumar
Arvind Kumar
author_sort Jyoti Mala
collection DOAJ
description Background: The supraclavicular brachial plexus block (SCBPB) demonstrates wide surgical use for upper limbs through its application of levobupivacaine as the chosen local anesthetic because it offers lower cardiotoxic effects. Patients benefit from adjuvant medications dexmedetomidine and nalbuphine since these compounds increase blockade sustainability and enhance characteristics of the block. Materials and Methods: The research investigated 60 patients with upper limb surgery that received ultrasound-guided SCBPB. The study design was prospective randomized double-blind. The research participants were divided into two groups of 30 each: Group D used 30 ml of 0.5% levobupivacaine with dexmedetomidine set at 50 μg, and Group N applied 30 ml of 0.5% levobupivacaine with nalbuphine at 10 mg. The authors analyzed and compared the block onset time along with the duration of sensory and motor block activity and analgesic period as well as hemodynamic changes and adverse effects between both groups. Results: The participants in Group D experienced faster sensory block onset times that were statistically lower than those observed in Group N with 7.5 ± 1.2 minutes versus 9.2 ± 1.4 minutes (P < 0.05). The time for motor block to take effect exhibited the same pattern as sensory block establishment. The subjects in Group D demonstrated longer blocks compared to subjects in Group N regarding sensory preservative time and motor preservative time [(sensory: 720 ± 30 min, motor: 680 ± 25 min) versus (sensory: 580 ± 35 min, motor: 540 ± 30 min)] (P < 0.05). The subjects in Group D received an extended duration of analgesic effects (850 ± 40 minutes) than those in Group N (660 ± 45 minutes) (P < 0.05). The subjects in both groups maintained stable hemodynamic conditions yet experienced mild bradycardia in Group D and mild sedation in Group N. The study revealed no severe adverse occurrences between any groups. Conclusion: Dexmedetomidine along with nalbuphine made levobupivacaine more effective in SCBPB, yet dexmedetomidine created longer-lasting effects on sensory and motor block while providing prolonged analgesic benefits.
format Article
id doaj-art-6d5e22bcd1a44a7a822e2b9edd4e5655
institution OA Journals
issn 0976-4879
0975-7406
language English
publishDate 2025-05-01
publisher Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications
record_format Article
series Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences
spelling doaj-art-6d5e22bcd1a44a7a822e2b9edd4e56552025-08-20T02:03:24ZengWolters Kluwer Medknow PublicationsJournal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences0976-48790975-74062025-05-0117Suppl 1S890S89310.4103/jpbs.jpbs_698_25A Comparative Study of the Effect of Dexmedetomidine and Nalbuphine as an Adjuvant to Levobupivacaine in Ultrasound-Guided Supraclavicular Brachial Plexus Block: A Prospective Randomized Double-Blind StudyJyoti MalaSudha SinghPankaj KumarArvind KumarBackground: The supraclavicular brachial plexus block (SCBPB) demonstrates wide surgical use for upper limbs through its application of levobupivacaine as the chosen local anesthetic because it offers lower cardiotoxic effects. Patients benefit from adjuvant medications dexmedetomidine and nalbuphine since these compounds increase blockade sustainability and enhance characteristics of the block. Materials and Methods: The research investigated 60 patients with upper limb surgery that received ultrasound-guided SCBPB. The study design was prospective randomized double-blind. The research participants were divided into two groups of 30 each: Group D used 30 ml of 0.5% levobupivacaine with dexmedetomidine set at 50 μg, and Group N applied 30 ml of 0.5% levobupivacaine with nalbuphine at 10 mg. The authors analyzed and compared the block onset time along with the duration of sensory and motor block activity and analgesic period as well as hemodynamic changes and adverse effects between both groups. Results: The participants in Group D experienced faster sensory block onset times that were statistically lower than those observed in Group N with 7.5 ± 1.2 minutes versus 9.2 ± 1.4 minutes (P < 0.05). The time for motor block to take effect exhibited the same pattern as sensory block establishment. The subjects in Group D demonstrated longer blocks compared to subjects in Group N regarding sensory preservative time and motor preservative time [(sensory: 720 ± 30 min, motor: 680 ± 25 min) versus (sensory: 580 ± 35 min, motor: 540 ± 30 min)] (P < 0.05). The subjects in Group D received an extended duration of analgesic effects (850 ± 40 minutes) than those in Group N (660 ± 45 minutes) (P < 0.05). The subjects in both groups maintained stable hemodynamic conditions yet experienced mild bradycardia in Group D and mild sedation in Group N. The study revealed no severe adverse occurrences between any groups. Conclusion: Dexmedetomidine along with nalbuphine made levobupivacaine more effective in SCBPB, yet dexmedetomidine created longer-lasting effects on sensory and motor block while providing prolonged analgesic benefits.https://journals.lww.com/10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_698_25dexmedetomidinelevobupivacainenalbuphineregional anesthesiasupraclavicular brachial plexus blockultrasound-guided nerve block
spellingShingle Jyoti Mala
Sudha Singh
Pankaj Kumar
Arvind Kumar
A Comparative Study of the Effect of Dexmedetomidine and Nalbuphine as an Adjuvant to Levobupivacaine in Ultrasound-Guided Supraclavicular Brachial Plexus Block: A Prospective Randomized Double-Blind Study
Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences
dexmedetomidine
levobupivacaine
nalbuphine
regional anesthesia
supraclavicular brachial plexus block
ultrasound-guided nerve block
title A Comparative Study of the Effect of Dexmedetomidine and Nalbuphine as an Adjuvant to Levobupivacaine in Ultrasound-Guided Supraclavicular Brachial Plexus Block: A Prospective Randomized Double-Blind Study
title_full A Comparative Study of the Effect of Dexmedetomidine and Nalbuphine as an Adjuvant to Levobupivacaine in Ultrasound-Guided Supraclavicular Brachial Plexus Block: A Prospective Randomized Double-Blind Study
title_fullStr A Comparative Study of the Effect of Dexmedetomidine and Nalbuphine as an Adjuvant to Levobupivacaine in Ultrasound-Guided Supraclavicular Brachial Plexus Block: A Prospective Randomized Double-Blind Study
title_full_unstemmed A Comparative Study of the Effect of Dexmedetomidine and Nalbuphine as an Adjuvant to Levobupivacaine in Ultrasound-Guided Supraclavicular Brachial Plexus Block: A Prospective Randomized Double-Blind Study
title_short A Comparative Study of the Effect of Dexmedetomidine and Nalbuphine as an Adjuvant to Levobupivacaine in Ultrasound-Guided Supraclavicular Brachial Plexus Block: A Prospective Randomized Double-Blind Study
title_sort comparative study of the effect of dexmedetomidine and nalbuphine as an adjuvant to levobupivacaine in ultrasound guided supraclavicular brachial plexus block a prospective randomized double blind study
topic dexmedetomidine
levobupivacaine
nalbuphine
regional anesthesia
supraclavicular brachial plexus block
ultrasound-guided nerve block
url https://journals.lww.com/10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_698_25
work_keys_str_mv AT jyotimala acomparativestudyoftheeffectofdexmedetomidineandnalbuphineasanadjuvanttolevobupivacaineinultrasoundguidedsupraclavicularbrachialplexusblockaprospectiverandomizeddoubleblindstudy
AT sudhasingh acomparativestudyoftheeffectofdexmedetomidineandnalbuphineasanadjuvanttolevobupivacaineinultrasoundguidedsupraclavicularbrachialplexusblockaprospectiverandomizeddoubleblindstudy
AT pankajkumar acomparativestudyoftheeffectofdexmedetomidineandnalbuphineasanadjuvanttolevobupivacaineinultrasoundguidedsupraclavicularbrachialplexusblockaprospectiverandomizeddoubleblindstudy
AT arvindkumar acomparativestudyoftheeffectofdexmedetomidineandnalbuphineasanadjuvanttolevobupivacaineinultrasoundguidedsupraclavicularbrachialplexusblockaprospectiverandomizeddoubleblindstudy
AT jyotimala comparativestudyoftheeffectofdexmedetomidineandnalbuphineasanadjuvanttolevobupivacaineinultrasoundguidedsupraclavicularbrachialplexusblockaprospectiverandomizeddoubleblindstudy
AT sudhasingh comparativestudyoftheeffectofdexmedetomidineandnalbuphineasanadjuvanttolevobupivacaineinultrasoundguidedsupraclavicularbrachialplexusblockaprospectiverandomizeddoubleblindstudy
AT pankajkumar comparativestudyoftheeffectofdexmedetomidineandnalbuphineasanadjuvanttolevobupivacaineinultrasoundguidedsupraclavicularbrachialplexusblockaprospectiverandomizeddoubleblindstudy
AT arvindkumar comparativestudyoftheeffectofdexmedetomidineandnalbuphineasanadjuvanttolevobupivacaineinultrasoundguidedsupraclavicularbrachialplexusblockaprospectiverandomizeddoubleblindstudy