ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To develop and validate clinical risk prediction tools for neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS). STUDY DESIGN: We developed prediction models for NAS based on a set of 30 demographic and antenatal exposure covariates collected during pregnancy. Data (outpatient prescription, vital, and administrative records), were obtained from enrollees in the Tennessee Medicaid Program from 2009 to 2014. Models were created using logistic regression and backward selection based on improvement in the Akaike information criterion, and internally validated using bootstrap cross-validation. RESULTS: A total of 218 020 maternal and infant dyads met inclusion criteria, of whom 3208 infants were diagnosed with NAS. The general population model included age, hepatitis C virus infection, days of opioid used by type, number of cigarettes used daily, and the following medications used in the last 30 day of pregnancy: bupropion, antinausea medicines, benzodiazepines, antipsychotics, and gabapentin. Infant characteristics included birthweight, small for gestational age, and infant sex. A high-risk model used a smaller number of predictive variables. Both models discriminated well with an area under the curve of 0.89 and were well-calibrated for low-risk infants. CONCLUSIONS: We developed 2 predictive models for NAS based on demographics and antenatal exposure during the last 30 days of pregnancy that were able to risk stratify infants at risk of developing the syndrome.
Subject(s)
Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome/diagnosis , Risk Assessment/methods , Adult , Analgesics/administration & dosage , Analgesics/adverse effects , Antiemetics/administration & dosage , Antiemetics/adverse effects , Antipsychotic Agents/administration & dosage , Antipsychotic Agents/adverse effects , Benzodiazepines/administration & dosage , Benzodiazepines/adverse effects , Bupropion/administration & dosage , Bupropion/adverse effects , Female , Gabapentin/administration & dosage , Gabapentin/adverse effects , Hepatitis C/epidemiology , Humans , Infant, Low Birth Weight , Infant, Newborn , Infant, Small for Gestational Age , Male , Maternal Age , Maternal Exposure/adverse effects , Maternal-Fetal Exchange , Opiate Substitution Treatment , Opioid-Related Disorders/drug therapy , Pregnancy , Retrospective Studies , Sex Distribution , Smoking/epidemiology , Smoking Cessation Agents/administration & dosage , Smoking Cessation Agents/adverse effects , Young AdultABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting (PONV) is a multifactorial surgical complication with an unclear underlying cause. Anesthetic methods, patients' characteristics and the type of surgery are considered as factors affecting PONV. This study was designed to compare the effect of inhalational and intravenous anesthesia in abdominal surgery on the incidence and severity of PONV. METHODS: A single-blinded prospective randomized clinical trial on 105 patients aged 18-65 years was carried out. Patients were divided in two groups of Total Intravenous Anesthesia (TIVA) and Inhalational anesthesia. The incidence and severity of PONV were examined at 0, 2, 6, 12, and 24hours after the surgery. The use of a rescue antiemetic was also evaluated. RESULTS: Fifty point nine percent of the patients in the inhalation group and 17.3% of the patients in the intravenous group developed PONV (p <0.001). The incidence of vomiting was reported in 11.3% of the Inhalational group and 3.8% of the TIVA group (p=0.15), and 24.5% of patients in the Inhalation group and 9.6% of patients in the intravenous group needed an antiemetic medication (p=0.043). CONCLUSION: The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting and the need for administration of an antiemetic rescue drug, and the severity of nausea in patients were significantly lower in the TIVA group.
Subject(s)
Anesthetics, Inhalation/administration & dosage , Anesthetics, Intravenous/administration & dosage , Laparotomy/methods , Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting/epidemiology , Abdomen/surgery , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Anesthetics, Inhalation/adverse effects , Anesthetics, Intravenous/adverse effects , Antiemetics/administration & dosage , Female , Humans , Incidence , Male , Middle Aged , Severity of Illness Index , Single-Blind Method , Young AdultABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: The incidence of Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting (PONV) after video cholecystectomy is high. Progress in pharmacological PONV prophylaxis includes a new generation of 5-HT3 antagonists. This study aims to assess the effect of the 5-HT3 antagonist in postanesthetic antiemetic management of patients submitted to laparoscopic cholecystectomy with total intravenous anesthesia. METHODS: Sixty individuals who underwent video cholecystectomy were randomized into three groups of 20 individuals according to the treatment administered: 0.125 mg of palonosetron (Group 1); 4 mg of ondansetron associated with 4 mg of dexamethasone (Group 2); 4 mg of dexamethasone (Group 3). General intravenous anesthesia was performed with propofol, remifentanil and rocuronium. The group to which the participant belonged was concealed from the investigator who assessed drug effect. PONV was assessed using the Rhodes Scale at 12 and 24 hours after surgery. Rescue medication was 0.655 to 1.5 mg of droperidol. RESULTS: Group 1 presented a lower incidence of PONV and required less rescue medication in the first postoperative hour. There was no significant difference among the three groups regarding PONV incidence in the first 12 postoperative hours. Groups 1 and 2 were superior to Group 3 regarding the control of PONV from 12 to 24 hours, and after rescue medication from 12 to 24 hours. Group 1 showed significantly superior nausea control in the first 12 postoperative hours. CONCLUSIONS: The present study showed evidence that palonosetron is superior to the drugs compared regarding a protracted antiemetic effect and less requirement of rescue drugs, mainly related to its ability to completely inhibit the uncomfortable symptom of nausea.
Subject(s)
Anesthetics, Intravenous/administration & dosage , Antiemetics/administration & dosage , Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic/methods , Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting/prevention & control , Adult , Dexamethasone/administration & dosage , Double-Blind Method , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Ondansetron/administration & dosage , Palonosetron/administration & dosage , Propofol/administration & dosage , Remifentanil/administration & dosage , Rocuronium/administration & dosage , Young AdultABSTRACT
Abstract Background: Postoperative nausea and vomiting is the second most common complaint in the postoperative period after pain. The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting was 60-80% in middle ear surgeries in the absence of antiemetic prophylaxis. Because of this high incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting, we aimed to assess the effect of palonosetron-dexamethasone and ondansetron-dexamethasone combination for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients of middle ear surgery. Methods: Sixty-four patients, scheduled for middle ear surgery, were randomized into two groups to receive the palonosetron-dexamethasone and ondansetron-dexamethasone combination intravenously before induction of anesthesia. Anesthesia technique was standardized in all patients. Postoperatively, the incidences and severity of nausea and vomiting, the requirement of rescue antiemetic, side effects and patient satisfaction score were recorded. Results: Demographics were similar in the study groups. The incidence difference of nausea was statistically significant between groups O and P at a time interval of 2-6 hours only (p = 0.026). The incidence and severity of vomiting were not statistically significant between groups O and P during the whole study period. The overall incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (0-24 hours postoperatively) was 37.5% in group O and 9.4% in group P (p = 0.016). Absolute risk reduction with palonosetron-dexamethasone was 28%, the relative risk reduction was 75%, and the number-needed-to-treat was 4. The patient's satisfaction score was higher in group P than group O (p = 0.016). The frequency of rescue medication was more common in group O than in group P patients (p = 0.026). Conclusion: The combination of palonosetron-dexamethasone is superior to ondansetron-dexamethasone for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting after middle ear surgeries.
Resumo Justificativa: Náusea e vômito no pós-operatório é a segunda queixa pós-operatória mais frequente após a dor. Sem profilaxia antiemética, a incidência de náusea e vômito no pós-operatório foi de 60−80% após cirurgia do ouvido médio. Dada a alta incidência relatada de náusea e vômito no pós-operatório, nosso objetivo foi avaliar o efeito da combinação de palonosetrona-dexametasona e ondansetrona-dexametasona na prevenção de náusea e vômito no pós-operatório em pacientes submetidos a cirurgia do ouvido médio. Método: Sessenta e quatro pacientes programados para cirurgia de ouvido médio foram aleatoriamente divididos em dois grupos. Um recebeu a combinação de palonosetrona-dexametasona (grupo P) e o outro ondansetrona-dexametasona (grupo O) por via intravenosa antes da indução anestésica. A técnica anestésica foi padronizada em todos os pacientes. No pós-operatório, foram registradas incidência e gravidade das náuseas e vômitos, necessidade de antiemético de resgate, efeitos colaterais e índice de satisfação dos pacientes. Resultados: As características demográficas foram semelhantes nos grupos estudados. A diferença na incidência de náusea foi estatisticamente significante entre os grupos O e P apenas no intervalo de tempo entre 2 e 6 horas (p = 0,026). A incidência e gravidade de vômito não foram estatisticamente significantes entre os grupos O e P durante todo o período do estudo. A incidência geral de náusea e vômito no pós-operatório (0−24 horas de pós-operatório) foi de 37,5% no grupo O e de 9,4% no grupo P (p = 0,016). A combinação palonosetrona-dexametasona associou-se com redução do risco absoluto de 28%, redução do risco relativo de 75%, e o número necessário para tratar foi 4. O escore de satisfação do paciente foi maior no grupo P (p = 0,016). A frequência da medicação de resgate foi mais comum no grupo O (p = 0,026). Conclusão: A combinação de palonosetrona-dexametasona é superior à ondansetrona-dexametasona na prevenção da náusea e vômito no pós-operatório após cirurgia de ouvido médio.
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Adult , Young Adult , Dexamethasone/administration & dosage , Ondansetron/administration & dosage , Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting/prevention & control , Palonosetron/administration & dosage , Double-Blind Method , Incidence , Prospective Studies , Patient Satisfaction , Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting/epidemiology , Drug Therapy, Combination , Ear, Middle/surgery , Middle Aged , Antiemetics/administration & dosageABSTRACT
Abstract Introduction and objectives: The incidence of Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting (PONV) after video cholecystectomy is high. Progress in pharmacological PONV prophylaxis includes a new generation of 5-HT3 antagonists. This study aims to assess the effect of the 5-HT3 antagonist in postanesthetic antiemetic management of patients submitted to laparoscopic cholecystectomy with total intravenous anesthesia. Methods: Sixty individuals who underwent video cholecystectomy were randomized into three groups of 20 individuals according to the treatment administered: 0.125 mg of palonosetron (Group 1); 4 mg of ondansetron associated with 4 mg of dexamethasone (Group 2); 4 mg of dexamethasone (Group 3). General intravenous anesthesia was performed with propofol, remifentanil and rocuronium. The group to which the participant belonged was concealed from the investigator who assessed drug effect. PONV was assessed using the Rhodes Scale at 12 and 24 hours after surgery. Rescue medication was 0.655 to 1.5 mg of droperidol. Results: Group 1 presented a lower incidence of PONV and required less rescue medication in the first postoperative hour. There was no significant difference among the three groups regarding PONV incidence in the first 12 postoperative hours. Groups 1 and 2 were superior to Group 3 regarding the control of PONV from 12 to 24 hours, and after rescue medication from 12 to 24 hours. Group 1 showed significantly superior nausea control in the first 12 postoperative hours. Conclusions: The present study showed evidence that palonosetron is superior to the drugs compared regarding a protracted antiemetic effect and less requirement of rescue drugs, mainly related to its ability to completely inhibit the uncomfortable symptom of nausea.
Resumo Justificativa e objetivo: Náuseas e Vômitos no Pós-Operatório (NVPO) têm alta incidência após videocolecistectomia. Avanços na profilaxia farmacológica de NVPO incluem a nova geração de antagonista 5-HT3. O objetivo deste estudo foi avaliar o efeito do antagonista 5-HT3 no controle antiemético pós-anestésico em videocolecistectomia com anestesia venosa total. Método: Estudo realizado no HC-UFU (Hospital Terciário). Sessenta indivíduos submetidos a videocolecistectomia foram randomizados em três grupos de igual número, sendo administrados 0,125 mg de palonosetrona (Grupo 1); 4 mg de ondasetrona e 4 mg de dexametasona (Grupo 2); ou 4 mg de dexametasona (Grupo 3). A anestesia geral venosa foi realizada com propofol, remifentanil e rocurônio. O avaliador do efeito da droga desconhecia o grupo ao qual o indivíduo pertencia. NVPO foi avaliada aplicando a Escala de Rhodes após 12 e 24 horas do término da cirurgia. Para resgate terapêutico, foi estabelecido 0,655−1,5 mg de droperidol. Resultado: Observou-se no Grupo 1 menor incidência de NVPO e de resgate terapêutico na primeira hora de PO. Não foi observada diferença significativa entre os três grupos com relação a ocorrência de NVPO nas primeiras 12 horas de pós-operatório. Os grupos 1 e 2 foram superiores ao Grupo 3 no que se refere ao controle de NVPO de 12 a 24 horas e após o resgate de 12−24 horas. Observou-se que o controle de náuseas nas primeiras 12 horas de pós-operatório do Grupo 1 foi significantemente superior. Conclusão: O presente estudo mostrou evidências da superioridade da palonosetrona às demais drogas empregadas no que se refere ao efeito antiemético prolongado e menor necessidade de resgate, principalmente na capacidade de inibir completamente o desconfortável sintoma de náusea.
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Adult , Young Adult , Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic/methods , Anesthetics, Intravenous/administration & dosage , Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting/prevention & control , Antiemetics/administration & dosage , Dexamethasone/administration & dosage , Propofol/administration & dosage , Double-Blind Method , Ondansetron/administration & dosage , Rocuronium/administration & dosage , Remifentanil/administration & dosage , Palonosetron/administration & dosage , Middle AgedABSTRACT
Abstract Background and objectives: Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a common and undesirable complication observed after laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). We investigated the effects of auriculoacupuncture (AA) on the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in the immediate postoperative period of uncomplicated laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Methods: Sixty-eight patients were randomly divided into two groups, auriculoacupuncture (n = 35) and control (n = 33), and then they were evaluated prospectively. The needle was placed before anaesthesia induction and remained for 20 minutes. Nausea intensity was evaluated using an analogic visual scale and PONV events were registered immediately after anaesthesia care unit admission and in the second, fourth and sixth hours after the surgery. Results: The auriculoacupuncture group had a significantly smaller incidence of nausea and vomiting than the control group throughout the whole postoperative period (16/35 vs. 27/33, p= 0.03 and 4/35 vs. 15/33, p= 0.005, respectively); the AA group had fewer nausea events 2 h (p= 0.03) and 6 h (p= 0.001) after surgery and fewer vomiting events 2 h (p= 0.01) and 6 h (p= 0.02) after surgery. Conclusions: Auriculoacupuncture can partially prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting when compared to metoclopramide alone after uncomplicated laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Auriculoacupuncture can be recommended as an adjuvant therapy for postoperative nausea and vomiting prevention in selected patients.
Resumo Justificativa e objetivos: Náuseas e vômitos são complicações comuns e indesejáveis no pós-operatório de colecistectomia laparoscópica (CL). Nós investigamos os efeitos da auriculoacupuntura (AA) para a prevenção de náuseas e vômitos no período pós-operatório (NVPO) imediato da CL não complicada. Métodos: 68 pacientes foram aleatoriamente divididos em dois grupos, auriculoacupuntura (n = 35) e controle (n = 33), e foram avaliados prospectivamente. A agulha foi aplicada antes da indução anestésica e permaneceu no lugar por 20 minutos. A intensidade da náusea foi avaliada mediante escala visual analógica e episódios de NVPO foram registrados imediatamente após a admissão na unidade de recuperação anestésica e duas, quatro e seis horas após a cirurgia. Resultados: O grupo AA apresentou significativamente menos episódios de NVPO do que o grupo controle durante todo o período pós-operatório (16/35 vs. 27/33, p = 0,03 e 4/35 vs. 15/33, p = 0,005, respectivamente). O grupo auriculoacupuntura apresentou episódios de náuseas menos intensos às 2 horas (p = 0,03) e 6 horas (p = 0,001) após a cirurgia e menos episódios de vômitos 2 horas (p = 0,01) e 6 horas (p = 0,02) após a cirurgia. Conclusão: A auriculoacupuntura aliviou náuseas e vômitos no pós-operatório em número significante de pacientes, mas não foi capaz de prevenir náuseas e vômitos no pós-operatório em todos os pacientes. Ela pode ser recomendada como terapia adjuvante para prevenção de náuseas e vômitos no pós-operatório no pós-operatório de colecistectomia laparoscópica em pacientes selecionados.
Subject(s)
Humans , Female , Adult , Acupuncture Therapy/methods , Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic/adverse effects , Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting/prevention & control , Antiemetics/administration & dosage , Time Factors , Double-Blind Method , Incidence , Prospective Studies , Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic/methods , Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting/epidemiology , Metoclopramide/administration & dosageABSTRACT
Abstract Background: Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting (PONV) is a common complication of general anesthesia. Several kinds of antiemetics, including 5-Hydroxytryptamine3 (5-HT3) receptor antagonists, and Neurokinin-1 (NK-1) receptor antagonists have been used to treat PONV. Objectives: To compare the antiemetic effect of NK-1 receptor antagonists, including fosaprepitant. Data sources: Online databases (PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, The Cochrane Library databases) were used. Study eligibility criteria, participants, and interventions: Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) performed in patients over 18 years with ASA-PS of I‒III, aimed to assess the efficacy of antiemetics including NK-1 receptor antagonists and 5-HT3 receptor antagonists, and compared the incidence of PONV were included. Study appraisal and synthesis methods: All statistical assessments were conducted by a random effect approach, and odds ratios and 95% Confidence Intervals were calculated. Results: Aprepitant 40 mg and 80 mg significantly reduced the incidence of vomiting 0‒24 hours postoperatively (Odds Ratio [OR = 0.40]; 95% Confidence Interval [95% CI 0.30‒0.54]; p < 0.001, and OR = 0.32; 95% CI 0.19‒0.56; p < 0.001). Fosaprepitant could also reduce the incidence of vomiting significantly both 0‒24 and 0‒48 hours postoperatively (OR = 0.07; 95% CI 0.02‒0.24; p < 0.001 and OR = 0.07; 95% CI 0.02‒0.23; p < 0.001). Limitations: Risk factors for PONV are not considered, RCTs using multiple antiemetics are included, RCTs for fosaprepitant is small, and some bias may be present. Conclusions and implications of key findings: Aprepitant and fosaprepitant can be effective prophylactic antiemetics for postoperative vomiting. However, more studies are required for higher-quality meta-analyses. Systematic review registration number: CRD42019120188.
Resumo Histórico: Náusea e Vômito no Pós-Operatório (NVPO) é um evento adverso frequente da anestesia geral. Várias classes de antieméticos, incluindo antagonistas do receptor 5-Hidroxitriptamina3 (5-HT3) e antagonistas do receptor da Neurocinina-1 (NK-1), têm sido utilizados para tratar a NVPO. Objetivo: Comparar o efeito antiemético dos antagonistas do receptor NK-1, incluindo o fosaprepitanto. Fontes de dados: Foram utilizadas bases de dados on-line (PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, The Cochrane Library). Critérios de elegibilidade do estudo, participantes e intervenções: Foram incluídos Estudos Clínicos Randomizados (ECR) realizados em pacientes acima de 18 anos classificação ASA I a III, com o objetivo de avaliar a eficácia de antieméticos que incluíssem antagonistas do receptor NK-1 e antagonistas do receptor 5-HT3, e que comparassem a incidência de NVPO. Métodos de avaliação e síntese do estudo: Todas as avaliações estatísticas foram realizadas por abordagem de efeito aleatório e foram calculadas razões de chances e Intervalos de Confiança de 95%. Resultados: As doses de 40 mg e 80 mg de aprepitanto reduziram significantemente a incidência de vômito no período de 0 a 24 horas pós-operatórias (razão de chances [OR = 0,40]; Intervalo de Confiança de 95% [95% IC] 0,30-0,54; p < 0,001 e OR = 0,32; 95% IC 0,19-0,56; p < 0,001). O fosaprepitanto pode também reduzir significantemente a incidência de vômito tanto de 0-24 horas como no período de 0-48 horas pós-operatórias (OR = 0,07; 95% IC 0,02-0,24; p < 0,001 e OR = 0,07; 95% IC 0,02-0,23; p < 0,001). Limitações: Os fatores de risco para NVPO não foram analisados, ECRs usando múltiplos antieméticos foram incluídos, ECRs para fosaprepitanto tinham amostras pequenas, podendo haver algum viés. Conclusões e implicações dos principais achados: Aprepitanto e fosaprepitanto podem ser drogas antieméticas profiláticas efetivas para vômito no pós-operatório. No entanto, são necessários mais estudos para elaboração de meta-análises de melhor qualidade. Número de registro da revisão sistemática: CRD42019120188.
Subject(s)
Humans , Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting/prevention & control , Neurokinin-1 Receptor Antagonists/administration & dosage , Antiemetics/administration & dosage , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Morpholines/administration & dosage , Morpholines/pharmacology , Incidence , Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting/epidemiology , Serotonin 5-HT3 Receptor Antagonists/administration & dosage , Serotonin 5-HT3 Receptor Antagonists/pharmacology , Neurokinin-1 Receptor Antagonists/pharmacology , Anesthesia, General/adverse effects , Anesthesia, General/methods , Antiemetics/pharmacologyABSTRACT
Abstract Background: Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting (PONV) is a multifactorial surgical complication with an unclear underlying cause. Anesthetic methods, patients' characteristics and the type of surgery are considered as factors affecting PONV. This study was designed to compare the effect of inhalational and intravenous anesthesia in abdominal surgery on the incidence and severity of PONV. Methods: A single-blinded prospective randomized clinical trial on 105 patients aged 18 − 65 years was carried out. Patients were divided into two groups of Total Intravenous Anesthesia (TIVA) and inhalational anesthesia. The incidence and the severity of PONV were examined at 0, 2, 6, 12 and 24 hours after the surgery. The use of a rescue antiemetic was also evaluated. Results: 50.9% of the patients in the inhalation group and 17.3% of the patients in the intravenous group developed PONV (p < 0.001). The incidence of vomiting was reported in 11.3% of the inhalational group and 3.8% of the TIVA group (p = 0.15). 24.5% of patients in the inhalation group and 9.6% of patients in the intravenous group needed an antiemetic medication (p = 0.043). Conclusion: The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting and the need for administration of an antiemetic rescue drug and the severity of nausea in patients were significantly lower in the TIVA group.
Resumo Justificativa: Náusea e Vômito no Pós-Operatório (NVPO) é uma complicação multifatorial com etiologia não esclarecida. A técnica anestésica, as características dos pacientes e o tipo de cirurgia são considerados fatores que afetam a NVPO. O presente estudo foi desenhado para comparar o efeito da anestesia inalatória com anestesia intravenosa na incidência e gravidade de NVPO na cirurgia abdominal. Método: Foi realizado estudo clínico mono-cego prospectivo randomizado com 105 pacientes com idades de 18 − 65 anos. Os pacientes foram divididos em dois grupos, Anestesia Total Intravenosa (TIVA) e anestesia inalatória. A incidência e gravidade de NVPO foram avaliadas em cinco momentos: 0, 2, 6, 12 e 24 horas pós-cirurgia. O uso de antiemético de resgate também foi avaliado. Resultados: NVPO ocorreu em 50,9% dos pacientes no grupo inalatória e 17,3% dos pacientes no grupo TIVA (p< 0,001). A incidência de vômitos relatados foi 11,3% no grupo Inalatória e 3,8% no grupo TIVA (p = 0,15). Necessitaram de medicação antiemética 24,5% dos pacientes no grupo Inalatória e 9,6% dos pacientes no grupo TIVA (p = 0.043). Conclusão: A incidência de náusea e vômito no pós-operatório, a necessidade de administração de droga antiemética de resgate e a gravidade da náusea foram significantemente mais baixas no grupo TIVA.
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Young Adult , Anesthetics, Intravenous/administration & dosage , Anesthetics, Inhalation/administration & dosage , Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting/epidemiology , Laparotomy/methods , Severity of Illness Index , Single-Blind Method , Incidence , Anesthetics, Intravenous/adverse effects , Anesthetics, Inhalation/adverse effects , Abdomen/surgery , Middle Aged , Antiemetics/administration & dosageABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Postoperative nausea and vomiting is the second most common complaint in the postoperative period after pain. The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting was 60-80% in middle ear surgeries in the absence of antiemetic prophylaxis. Because of this high incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting, we aimed to assess the effect of palonosetron-dexamethasone and ondansetron-dexamethasone combination for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients of middle ear surgery. METHODS: Sixty-four patients, scheduled for middle ear surgery, were randomized into two groups to receive the palonosetron-dexamethasone and ondansetron-dexamethasone combination intravenously before induction of anesthesia. Anesthesia technique was standardized in all patients. Postoperatively, the incidences and severity of nausea and vomiting, the requirement of rescue antiemetic, side effects and patient satisfaction score were recorded. RESULTS: Demographics were similar in the study groups. The incidence difference of nausea was statistically significant between groups O and P at a time interval of 2-6hours only (p=0.026). The incidence and severity of vomiting were not statistically significant between groups O and P during the whole study period. The overall incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (0-24hours postoperatively) was 37.5% in group O and 9.4% in group P (p=0.016). Absolute risk reduction with palonosetron-dexamethasone was 28%, the relative risk reduction was 75%, and the number-needed-to-treat was 4. The patient's satisfaction score was higher in group P than group O (p=0.016). The frequency of rescue medication was more common in group O than in group P patients (p=0.026). CONCLUSION: The combination of palonosetron-dexamethasone is superior to ondansetron-dexamethasone for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting after middle ear surgeries.
Subject(s)
Dexamethasone/administration & dosage , Ondansetron/administration & dosage , Palonosetron/administration & dosage , Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting/prevention & control , Adult , Antiemetics/administration & dosage , Double-Blind Method , Drug Therapy, Combination , Ear, Middle/surgery , Female , Humans , Incidence , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Satisfaction , Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting/epidemiology , Prospective Studies , Young AdultABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a common and undesirable complication observed after laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). We investigated the effects of auriculoacupuncture (AA) on the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in the immediate postoperative period of uncomplicated laparoscopic cholecystectomy. METHODS: Sixty-eight patients were randomly divided into two groups, auriculoacupuncture (n = 35) and control (n = 33) and then they were evaluated prospectively. The needle was placed before anaesthesia induction and remained for 20 minutes. Nausea intensity was evaluated using an analogic visual scale and PONV events were registered immediately after anaesthesia care unit admission and in the second, fourth and sixth hours after the surgery. RESULTS: The auriculoacupuncture group had a significantly smaller incidence of nausea and vomiting than the control group throughout the whole postoperative period (16/35 vs. 27/33, p = 0.03 and 4/35 vs. 15/33, p = 0.005, respectively); the AA group had fewer nausea events 2hours (p = 0.03) and 6hours (p = 0.001) after surgery and fewer vomiting events 2hours (p = 0.01) and 6hours (p = 0.02) after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Auriculoacupuncture can partially prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting when compared to metoclopramide alone after uncomplicated laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Auriculoacupuncture can be recommended as an adjuvant therapy for postoperative nausea and vomiting prevention in selected patients.
Subject(s)
Acupuncture Therapy/methods , Antiemetics/administration & dosage , Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic/adverse effects , Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting/prevention & control , Adult , Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic/methods , Double-Blind Method , Female , Humans , Incidence , Metoclopramide/administration & dosage , Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting/epidemiology , Prospective Studies , Time FactorsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting (PONV) is a common complication of general anesthesia. Several kinds of antiemetics, including 5-Hydroxytryptamine3 (5-HT3) receptor antagonists and Neurokinin-1 (NK-1) receptor antagonists, have been used to treat PONV. OBJECTIVES: To compare the antiemetic effect of NK-1 receptor antagonists, including fosaprepitant. DATA SOURCES: Online databases (PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, The Cochrane Library databases) were used. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA, PARTICIPANTS, AND INTERVENTIONS: Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) performed in patients over 18 years with ASA-PS of I-III, aimed to assess the efficacy of antiemetics including NK-1 receptor antagonists and 5-HT3 receptor antagonists, and compared the incidence of PONV were included. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: All statistical assessments were conducted by a random effect approach and odds ratios and 95% Confidence Intervals were calculated. RESULTS: Aprepitant 40mg and 80mg significantly reduced the incidence of vomiting 0-24hours postoperatively (Odds Ratio [OR = 0.40]; 95% Confidence Interval [95% CI 0.30-0.54]; p < 0.001, and OR = 0.32; 95% CI 0.19-0.56; p < 0.001). Fosaprepitant could also reduce the incidence of vomiting significantly both 0-24h and 0-48hours postoperatively (OR = 0.07; 95% CI 0.02-0.24; p < 0.001 and OR = 0.07; 95% CI 0.02-0.23; p < 0.001). LIMITATIONS: Risk factors for PONV are not considered, RCTs using multiple antiemetics are included, RCTs for fosaprepitant is small, and some bias may be present. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS: Aprepitant and fosaprepitant can be effective prophylactic antiemetics for postoperative vomiting. However, more studies are required for higher-quality meta-analyses. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019120188.
Subject(s)
Antiemetics/administration & dosage , Neurokinin-1 Receptor Antagonists/administration & dosage , Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting/prevention & control , Anesthesia, General/adverse effects , Anesthesia, General/methods , Antiemetics/pharmacology , Humans , Incidence , Morpholines/administration & dosage , Morpholines/pharmacology , Neurokinin-1 Receptor Antagonists/pharmacology , Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting/epidemiology , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Serotonin 5-HT3 Receptor Antagonists/administration & dosage , Serotonin 5-HT3 Receptor Antagonists/pharmacologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Although reports suggest that pain and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) may be more frequent in women, the evidence is inconsistent. The objective of this study was to investigate whether women are more sensitive to pain and PONV after laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). METHODS: A total of 370 women and 275 men were included in a retrospective cohort study. All underwent LC under standardized general anesthesia. The variables analyzed included clinical and anthropometric parameters. End points were the incidence of nausea, vomiting, pain, and the requirement for additional pain relievers and antiemetics to control these. RESULTS: The women were younger and had lower body weight than the men (p < 0.001). Body mass index was within the normal range for 50% of women and 30% of men (p < 0.001). Pain was more common in women at 1, 6, 12 and 24 h after surgery (p < 0.02). Narcotics in addition to the doses used to lessen pain intensity (p = 0.01) were required in 60 women and 19 men (p < 0.001). PONV was more frequent in women at 1 and 6 h after surgery (p < 0.01). Rescue antiemetics were required in 35 women and 11 men (p = 0.008). Hospital stay was shorter for men (p < 0.001). Four patients in each group developed postoperative complications (p = 0.14). There was no mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Early postoperative pain, nausea and vomiting after LC were more common in women, who more frequently required analgesic and antiemetic rescue medication.
Subject(s)
Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic/adverse effects , Gallbladder/surgery , Pain, Postoperative/epidemiology , Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting/epidemiology , Administration, Intravenous , Adult , Analgesia/methods , Antiemetics/administration & dosage , Female , Humans , Incidence , Male , Mexico/epidemiology , Middle Aged , Pain, Postoperative/drug therapy , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Prospective Studies , Retrospective Studies , Sex FactorsABSTRACT
Elective caesarean section is one of the surgeries with the highest intraoperative incidence of nausea, retching and vomiting (IONV), due, among other causes, to the use of anesthetics during the procedure. Some clinical trials have associated the use of low-dose intrathecal (IT) fentanyl with a lower incidence of nausea, retching and vomiting compared to other anesthetics used during caesarean sections. In this context, the objective of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the decrease in the appearance of nausea and vomiting during elective caesarean section with the application of IT fentanyl when compared with the use of intravenous ondansetron (EV). A systematic search was conducted in the main databases (PubMed, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov, Cochrane Library and Google Scholar) for Randomized Clinical Trials (RCTs) that evaluated the use of IT fentanyl compared to ondansetron EV to decrease the occurrence and incidence of IONV during elective caesarean section. The meta-analysis showed a reduction in the incidence of nausea (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.29-0.93, P = 0.03), gagging (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0, 18-0.88, P = 0.02) and vomiting (RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.11-0.64, P = 0.003) in the group of patients treated with IT fentanyl compared to the group treated with EV ondansetron. From the results, it is suggested that the administration of 12.5 to 20 µg of IT fentanyl may decrease the incidence of IONV in patients undergoing elective caesarean section, although the importance of more high-quality RCTs is highlighted.
La cesárea electiva es una de las cirugías con mayor incidencia intraoperatoria de náuseas, arcadas y vómito (NAV), debido entre otras causas, al uso de anestésicos durante el procedimiento. Algunos ensayos clínicos han asociado el uso de fentanilo intratecal (IT) a dosis bajas con una menor incidencia de náuseas, arcadas y vómito en comparación con otros anestésicos usados durante las cesáreas. En este contexto el objetivo de este metaanálisis fue evaluar la disminución en la aparición de náuseas y vómito durante cesárea electiva con la aplicación de fentanilo IT al compararlo con el uso de ondansetrón intravenoso (EV). Se realizó una búsqueda sistemática en las principales bases de datos (PubMed, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov, Cochrane Library y Google Scholar) para ensayos clínicos aleatorizados (ECA) que evaluaron el uso del fentanilo IT en comparación con ondansetrón EV para disminuir la aparición e incidencia de IONV durante cesárea electiva. En el metaanálisis se evidenció una reducción en la incidencia de náusea (RR 0,52, 95% IC 0,29-0,93, P = 0,03), arcada (RR 0,39, 95% IC 0,18-0,88, P = 0,02) y vómito (RR 0,26, 95% IC 0,11-0,64, P = 0,003) en el grupo de pacientes tratados con fentanilo IT comparado con el grupo tratado con ondansetrón EV. A partir de los resultados, se sugiere que la administración de 12,5 a 20 µg de fentanilo IT puede disminuir la incidencia de NAV intraoperatorias en pacientes sometidas a cesárea electiva, aunque se resalta la importancia de más ECA de alta calidad.
Subject(s)
Humans , Female , Pregnancy , Vomiting/prevention & control , Cesarean Section/methods , Fentanyl/administration & dosage , Nausea/prevention & control , Ondansetron/administration & dosage , Elective Surgical Procedures , Injections, Intravenous , Intraoperative Period , Anesthesia, Spinal , Antiemetics/administration & dosageABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Perioperative IV dextrose infusions have been investigated for their potential to reduce the risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting. In this meta-analysis, we investigated the use of an intraoperative or postoperative infusion of dextrose for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting. METHODS: Our group searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane library, and Google Scholar for relevant randomized controlled trials examining the use of perioperative IV dextrose for prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting. The primary outcome was the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (both in the postanesthesia care unit and within the first 24 h of surgery). Secondary outcomes included postoperative antiemetic administration and serum glucose level. RESULTS: Our search yielded a total of 10 randomized controlled trials (n = 987 patients) comparing the use of a perioperative dextrose infusion (n = 465) to control (n = 522). Perioperative dextrose infusion was not associated with a significant reduction in postoperative nausea and vomiting in the postanesthesia care unit (risk ratio = 0.91, 95% CI, 0.73-1.15; P = .44) or within the first 24 h (risk ratio = 0.76, 95% CI, 0.55-1.04; P = .09) of surgery. Although the use of dextrose was associated with a significant reduction in antiemetic administration within the first 24 h (risk ratio = 0.55, 95% CI, 0.45-0.69; P < .001), it also increased postoperative plasma glucose levels compared to controls. CONCLUSIONS: The use of perioperative dextrose did not result in a statistically significant association with postoperative nausea and vomiting. When utilized, plasma glucose monitoring is recommended to assess for postoperative hyperglycemia. Further prospective trials are necessary to examine the potential impact of timing of administration of a dextrose infusion on incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting and rescue antiemetic requirements.
Subject(s)
Antiemetics/administration & dosage , Glucose/administration & dosage , Perioperative Care/methods , Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting/prevention & control , Antiemetics/adverse effects , Blood Glucose/drug effects , Blood Glucose/metabolism , Drug Administration Schedule , Female , Glucose/adverse effects , Humans , Hyperglycemia/blood , Hyperglycemia/chemically induced , Incidence , Infusions, Intravenous , Male , Perioperative Care/adverse effects , Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting/epidemiology , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Time Factors , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
Abstract Objective: To compare the effectiveness of a single intramuscular dose of bromopride, metoclopramide, or ondansetron for treating vomiting. Methods: Randomized controlled trial including children 1-12 years of age presenting with acute vomiting at the pediatric emergency department. Outcomes: Number of children that stopped vomiting at one, six, and 24 h following treatment; episodes of diarrhea; acceptance of oral liquids; intravenous rehydration; return to hospital and side effects. Results: There were 175 children who completed the study. Within the first hour after treatment, all drugs were equally effective, with ondansetron preventing vomiting in 100%, bromopride in 96.6%, and metoclopramide in 94.8% of children (p = 0.288). Within six hours, ondansetron was successful in preventing vomiting in 98.3% of children, compared to bromopride and metoclopramide, which were successful in 91.5% and 84.4% of patients, respectively (p = 0.023). Within 24 h, ondansetron was superior to both other agents, as it remained efficacious in reducing vomiting in 96.6% of children, as opposed to 67.8% and 67.2% with bromopride and metoclopramide, respectively (p = 0.001). The ondansetron group showed better acceptance of oral liquids (p = 0.05) when compared to the bromopride and metoclopramide. The ondansetron group did not show any side effects in 75.9% of cases, compared to 54.2% and 53.5% in the bromopride and metoclopramide groups, respectively. Somnolence was the most common side effect. Conclusions: A single dose of ondansetron is superior to bromopride and metoclopramide in preventing vomiting six hours and 24 h following treatment. Oral fluid intake after receiving medication was statistically better with Ondansetronwhile also having less side effects compared to the other two agents.
Resumo Objetivo: Para comparar a eficacia de uma unica dose intramuscular de bromoprida, metoclopramida ou ondansetrona no tratamento de vomito. Métodos: Ensaio controlado randomizado incluindo crianc¸as de 1 a 12 anos de idade que apresentam vomito agudo no departamento de emergencia pediatrica. Desfechos: Numero de crianças que pararam de vomitar 1, 6 e 24 horas apos o tratamento; episodios de diarreia; aceitac¸ao de liquidos orais; reidratac¸ao intravenosa, retorno ao hospital e efeitos colaterais. Resultados: 175 crianças concluiram o estudo. Na primeira hora apos o tratamento, todos os medicamentos foram igualmente eficazes, sendo que a ondansetrona preveniu vomito em 100%, a bromoprida em 96,6% e metoclopramida em 94,8% das crianças (p = 0,288). Em 6 horas, a ondansetrona mostrou sucesso na prevençao do vomito em 98,3% das crianças, em comparac¸ao a bromoprida e a metoclopramida, que mostraram sucesso em 91,5% e 84,4% dos pacientes, respectivamente (p = 0,023). Em 24 horas, a ondansetrona foi superior aos dois outros agentes, pois ela continuou eficaz na reduçao do vomito em 96,6% das crianças, diferente de 67,8% e 67,2% com bromoprida e metoclopramida, respectivamente (p = 0,001). O grupo de ondansetrona mostrou melhor aceitaçao de liquidos orais (p = 0,05) em comparaçao a bromoprida e metoclopramida. O grupo de ondansetrona nao mostrou efeitos colaterais em 75,9% dos casos, em comparaçao a 54,2% e 53,5% dos grupos de bromoprida e metoclopramida. O efeito colateral mais comum foi sonolencia. Conclusões: Uma unica dose de ondansetrona e superior a bromoprida e metoclopramida no tratamento de vomito 6 horas e 24 horas apos o tratamento. A ingestao de fluidos orais apos receber medicaçao foi estatisticamente melhor com ondansetrona, ao mesmo tempo em que tambem apresentando menos efeitos colaterais em comparaçao aos outros dois agentes.
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Infant , Child, Preschool , Child , Vomiting/drug therapy , Ondansetron/administration & dosage , Metoclopramide/administration & dosage , Metoclopramide/analogs & derivatives , Antiemetics/administration & dosage , Acute Disease , Treatment Outcome , Emergency Service, HospitalABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of a single intramuscular dose of bromopride, metoclopramide, or ondansetron for treating vomiting. METHODS: Randomized controlled trial including children 1-12 years of age presenting with acute vomiting at the pediatric emergency department. OUTCOMES: Number of children that stopped vomiting at one, six, and 24h following treatment; episodes of diarrhea; acceptance of oral liquids; intravenous rehydration; return to hospital and side effects. RESULTS: There were 175 children who completed the study. Within the first hour after treatment, all drugs were equally effective, with ondansetron preventing vomiting in 100%, bromopride in 96.6%, and metoclopramide in 94.8% of children (p=0.288). Within six hours, ondansetron was successful in preventing vomiting in 98.3% of children, compared to bromopride and metoclopramide, which were successful in 91.5% and 84.4% of patients, respectively (p=0.023). Within 24h, ondansetron was superior to both other agents, as it remained efficacious in reducing vomiting in 96.6% of children, as opposed to 67.8% and 67.2% with bromopride and metoclopramide, respectively (p=0.001). The ondansetron group showed better acceptance of oral liquids (p=0.05) when compared to the bromopride and metoclopramide. The ondansetron group did not show any side effects in 75.9% of cases, compared to 54.2% and 53.5% in the bromopride and metoclopramide groups, respectively. Somnolence was the most common side effect. CONCLUSIONS: A single dose of ondansetron is superior to bromopride and metoclopramide in preventing vomiting six hours and 24h following treatment. Oral fluid intake after receiving medication was statistically better with Ondansetronwhile also having less side effects compared to the other two agents.
Subject(s)
Antiemetics/administration & dosage , Metoclopramide/analogs & derivatives , Metoclopramide/administration & dosage , Ondansetron/administration & dosage , Vomiting/drug therapy , Acute Disease , Child , Child, Preschool , Emergency Service, Hospital , Female , Humans , Infant , Male , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Nausea and vomiting are common side effects in cancer patients treated with chemotherapy. Proper control of these symptoms might improve quality of life in these patients. Addition of cannabinoids to standard antiemetic treatment has been proposed in order to improve control of these symptoms. METHODS: To answer this question we used Epistemonikos, the largest database of systematic reviews in health, which is maintained by screening multiple information sources, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, among others. We extracted data from the systematic reviews, reanalyzed data of primary studies, conducted a meta-analysis and generated a summary of findings table using the GRADE approach. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: We identified 16 systematic reviews that include 61 primary studies. Out of these, four were randomized trials that answered our question. At present, given that the certainty of the evidence is very low, it is unclear whether the addition of cannabinoids to standard antiemetic regimes benefits patients with chemotherapy induced nausea and vomiting. Cannabinoids probably increase adverse effects substantively.
INTRODUCCIÓN: El tratamiento de las náuseas y vómitos inducidos por quimioterapia podría mejorar la calidad de vida de los pacientes oncológicos; para lograrlo se ha propuesto la adición de cannabinoides a los esquemas de antieméticos habituales. MÉTODOS: Para responder esta pregunta utilizamos Epistemonikos, la mayor base de datos de revisiones sistemáticas en salud, la cual es mantenida mediante búsquedas en múltiples fuentes de información, incluyendo MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, entre otras. Extrajimos los datos desde las revisiones identificadas, reanalizamos los datos de los estudios primarios, realizamos un metanálisis y preparamos tablas de resumen de los resultados utilizando el método GRADE. RESULTADOS Y CONCLUSIONES: Identificamos 16 revisiones sistemáticas que en conjunto incluyen 61 estudios primarios, de los cuales cuatro son ensayos aleatorizados que responden a la pregunta de interés. Concluimos que no hay claridad respecto a si los cannabinoides otorgan un beneficio al añadirlos a esquemas antieméticos habituales para el control de náuseas y vómitos inducidos por quimioterapia, porque la certeza de la evidencia es muy baja. Probablemente aumentan los efectos adversos de manera sustantiva.
Subject(s)
Cannabinoids/therapeutic use , Nausea/drug therapy , Vomiting/drug therapy , Antiemetics/administration & dosage , Antiemetics/therapeutic use , Antineoplastic Agents/administration & dosage , Antineoplastic Agents/adverse effects , Cannabinoids/administration & dosage , Cannabinoids/adverse effects , Databases, Factual , Humans , Nausea/chemically induced , Neoplasms/drug therapy , Quality of Life , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Vomiting/chemically inducedABSTRACT
Resumen Las náuseas y vómitos postoperatorios (NVPO) son un problema frecuente en los pacientes quirúrgicos. Cuando no son prevenidos adecuadamente pueden provocar mayor morbilidad, estadía prolongada en la unidad de recuperación postoperatoria y hospitalización no planificada. El objetivo del equipo quirúrgico debe ser la profilaxis de las NVPO más que su tratamiento, con el fin de disminuir significativamente su incidencia y complicaciones asociadas. Los principales factores de riesgo para NVPO son: sexo femenino, historia de NVPO en cirugías previas y/o cinetosis, no fumar, uso de opioides sistémicos en el postoperatorio, someterse a ciertos tipos de cirugía (como colecistectomía, cirugía laparoscópica y cirugía ginecológica), utilizar anestésicos volátiles y/u óxido nitroso intraoperatorios, y duración de la cirugía. Sugerimos objetivar el riesgo de NVPO utilizando las escalas de riesgo de NVPO de Apfel o Koivuranta. Los principales fármacos antieméticos usados como profilaxis y tratamiento en el período perioperatorio son dexametasona, ondansetrón y droperidol. Existen estrategias generales que se pueden utilizar para reducir el riesgo quirúrgico basal de NVPO como evitar la anestesia general, privilegiando la anestesia regional, utilizar propofol para la inducción y mantención de la anestesia, evitar el uso de óxido nitroso y/o anestésicos inhalatorios, minimizar el uso postoperatorio de opioides sistémicos y recibir una hidratación intravenosa abundante durante la cirugía. La etiología de las NVPO es multifactorial, por lo que la prevención y tratamiento deben incluir diferentes clases de antieméticos, que actúen sobre los diferentes receptores de náuseas y/o vómitos hasta el momento conocidos, junto con las estrategias generales antes mencionadas.
Abstract Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) are a common problem in surgical patients. When not properly prevented, they can lead to increased morbidity, prolonged stay in the postoperative recovery unit and unplanned hospitalization. The objective of the surgical team should be the prophylaxis of PONV rather than its treatment, in order to significantly reduce its incidence and associated complications. The main risk factors for PONV are: female sex, history of PONV in prior surgeries and/or motion sickness, non-smoking, use of systemic opioids postoperatively, undergo certain types of surgery (such as cholecystectomy, laparoscopic surgery and gynecological surgery), use volatile anesthetics and/or intraoperative nitrous oxide, and duration of surgery. We suggest to objectify the risk of PONV using the Apfel or Koivuranta PONV risk scales. The main anti-emetic drugs used as prophylaxis and treatment in the perioperative period are dexamethasone, ondansetron and droperidol. There are general strategies that can be used to reduce the baseline surgical risk of PONV such as avoiding general anesthesia, favoring regional anesthesia, using propofol for induction and maintenance of general anesthesia, avoiding the use of nitrous oxide and/or inhalational anesthetics, minimizing the postoperative use of systemic opioids and to receive an abundant intravenous hydration during surgery. The etiology of PONV is multifactorial, so prevention and treatment should include different classes of antiemetics, acting on the different receptors of nausea and/or vomiting so far known, together with the general strategies mentioned above.
Subject(s)
Humans , Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting/prevention & control , Antiemetics/therapeutic use , Midazolam/therapeutic use , Butyrophenones/therapeutic use , Propofol/therapeutic use , Risk Factors , Adrenal Cortex Hormones/therapeutic use , Risk Assessment , Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting/therapy , Dihydroxytryptamines/antagonists & inhibitors , Antiemetics/administration & dosageABSTRACT
Este documento abarca temas de diagnóstico y tratamiento de la enfermedad diarreica aguda en niños menores de 5 años.
Subject(s)
Humans , Infant, Newborn , Infant , Child, Preschool , Primary Health Care , Dysentery/diagnosis , Dysentery/therapy , Vitamin D/analogs & derivatives , Food, Fortified , Zinc Compounds/administration & dosage , Probiotics/administration & dosage , Prebiotics/administration & dosage , Fluid Therapy/methods , Anti-Bacterial Agents/administration & dosage , Antidiarrheals/administration & dosage , Antiemetics/administration & dosageABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The aim of our study is to compare the effects of sugammadex and neostigmine, used for neuromuscular blockage antagonism, on postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). METHODS: Our study was completed with 98 ASA I-II risk patients undergoing endotracheal intubation under general anesthesia. At the end of the surgery patients were randomly divided into two groups given 2mgkg-1 sugammadex (Group S) or 50µgkg-1 neostigmine plus 0.2mgkg-1 atropine (Group N). Monitoring and recording times were set as 1 hour postoperative and from 1-6, 6-12, and 12-24hours. The anti-emetic amounts administered were recorded. RESULTS: In the first hour postoperative 13 patients in Group N (27%) and 4 in Group S (8%) were observed to have nausea and/or vomiting and the difference was statistically significant (p=0.0016). During the 24 hours of monitoring there was no significant difference in the incidence and severity of PONV (p>0.05), however the number of patients given ondansetron for PONV treatment in Group N was statistically significantly higher than the number in Group S (16 in Group N, 6 in Group S, p<0.011). CONCLUSIONS: At the end of our study comparing neostigmine with sugammadex for neuromuscular blockage antagonism, we found use of sugammadex had lower incidence of PONV in the postoperative 1st hour and less anti-emetic use in 24 hours of monitoring.