Diagnósticos retrasados y administración de ondansetron en el tratamiento de los vómitos en urgencias pediátricas

Introducción : El ondasentrón es un agente farmacológico de uso frecuente para el tratamiento sintomático de los vómitos originados por gastroenteritis. Sin embargo, podría enmascarar patologías más graves que ameriten reconsultas y hospitalización. Objetivo: Indagar si la administración del ondansetrón como tratamiento sintomático de los vómitos en el departamento de emergencias pediátricas (DEP) retrasó el diagnóstico de patologías graves. Materiales y métodos: Estudio observacional, descriptivo de corte transverso retrospectivo. Fueron elegibles pacientes que consultaron en el DEP, recibieron tratamiento con ondansetron, y reconsultaron dentro de las 24 horas. Los datos fueron recolectados de la base de datos de consultas del DEP, el comando reconsultas y entrevista telefónica a los padres. Las variables fueron edad, sexo, procedencia, motivo de la segunda consulta, diagnósticos finales en la segunda consulta. Los datos fueron analizados en SPSS utilizando estadística descriptiva. Resultados En el periodo de estudio consultaron por vómitos y recibieron ondasentrón 2018 pacientes. Reconsultaron dentro de las 24 horas 212, cumpliendo con los criterios de inclusión 205 pacientes. Se constató un 24,8% nuevos diagnósticos durante la reconsulta, de los cuales 35% requirieron hospitalización. Los diagnósticos fueron fiebre sin foco 2,9%, neumonía 2,4%, infección de vías urinarias 1%, sospecha de chikunguya 1,5%, adenitis mesentérica 0,5%, abdomen agudo quirúrgico 0,5%. Conclusión: Se identificó diagnósticos diferentes a la primera consulta en pacientes que recibieron ondansetrón como tratamiento sintomático de los vómitos en urgencias pediátricas, requiriendo hospitalización el 35% de los mismos.

Introduction: Ondansetron is a pharmacological agent frequently used for the symptomatic treatment of vomiting caused by gastroenteritis. However, it could mask more serious pathologies that require repeat consultations and hospitalization. Objective: To investigate whether the administration of ondansetron as a symptomatic treatment of vomiting in the pediatric emergency department (PED) delayed the diagnosis of serious pathologies. Materials and methods: This was an observational, descriptive, retrospective and cross-sectional study. Patients who consulted at the PED, received treatment with ondansetron, and returned for consultation within 24 hours were eligible. Data were collected from the PED consultation database, the follow-up consultation request, and a telephone interview with parents. The variables were age, sex, origin, reason for the second consultation, and final diagnoses in the second consultation. The data were analyzed in SPSS using descriptive statistics. Results: During the study period, 2018 patients consulted for vomiting and received ondansetron. 212 were consulted again within 24 hours, with 205 patients meeting the inclusion criteria. There were 24.8% new diagnoses during the follow-up consultation, of which 35% required hospitalization. The diagnoses were fever without source 2.9%, pneumonia 2.4%, urinary tract infection 1%, suspected chikunguya 1.5%, mesenteric adenitis 0.5%, and surgical acute abdomen 0.5%. Conclusion: Diagnoses different from the first consultation were identified in patients who received ondansetron for symptomatic treatment of vomiting in pediatric emergencies, with 35% requiring hospitalization.

Comparison of palonosetron and ondansetron in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in renal transplantation recipients: a randomized clinical trial

Abstract Background: End-stage renal diseases patients have a high risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), which is multifactorial and need acute attention after renal transplantation for a successful outcome in term of an uneventful postoperative period. The study was done to compare the efficacy of palonosetron and ondansetron in preventing early and late-onset PONV in live donor renal transplantation recipients (LDRT). Methods: The prospective randomized double-blinded study was done on 112 consecutive patients planned for live donor renal transplantation. Patients of both sexes in the age group of 18-60 years were randomly divided into two groups: Group O (Ondansetron) and Group P (Palonosetron) with 56 patients in each group by computer-generated randomization. The study drug was administered intravenously (IV) slowly over 30 seconds, one hour before extubation. Postoperatively, the patients were accessed for PONV at 6, 24, and 72 hours using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) nausea score and PONV intensity scale. Results: The incidence of PONV in the study was found to be 30.35%. There was significant difference in incidence of PONV between Group P and Group O at 6 hours (12.5% vs. 32.1%, p = 0.013) and 72 hours (1.8% vs. 33.9%, p < 0.001), but insignificant difference at 24 hours (1.8% vs. 10.7%, p = 0.113). VAS-nausea score was significantly lower in Group P as compared to Group O at a time point of 24 hours (45.54 ± 12.64 vs. 51.96 ± 14.70, p = 0.015) and 72 hours (39.11 ± 10.32 vs. 45.7 ± 15.12, p = 0.015). Conclusion: Palonosetron is clinically superior to ondansetron in preventing early and delayed onset postoperative nausea and vomiting in live-related renal transplant recipients.

Exposición a ondansetrón en el primer trimestre de gestación y riesgo de malformaciones congénitas: revisión sistemática y metaanálisis / Exposure to ondansetron in the first trimester of pregnancy and risk of congenital malformations: systematic review and meta-analysis

Resumen OBJETIVO: Determinar si la exposición al ondansetrón en el primer trimestre del embarazo se asocia, en general, con mayor riesgo de malformaciones orofaciales, cardiopatías congénitas, defectos del septo interventricular, de labio o paladar hendidos. MÉTODOLOGÍA: Revisión sistemática y metanálisis de estudios aleatorizados, cohortes y casos y controles publicados en las bases de datos de PubMed, EMBASE y LILACS. RESULTADOS: Se incluyeron 15 estudios: 11 de cohorte y 4 de casos y controles, con 245,679 mujeres expuestas al ondansetrón en el primer trimestre del embarazo. No se encontró una asociación estadísticamente significativa con malformaciones congénitas en general (RM 1.1; IC95%: 0.99-1.22; I2: 72%), con cardiopatías congénitas (RM 1.05; IC95%: 0.95-1.19; I2: 78%) y con comunicación interventricular (RM 1.2; IC95%: 0.97-1.45; I2: 85%). Se encontró un pequeño aumento en el riesgo de defectos orofaciales en general (RM 1.17; IC95%: 1.04-1.32; I2:0%), no se encontró un riesgo mayor de defecto de labio (RM 1.01; IC95%: 0.84-1.21; I2%: 0%) ni de paladar hendido (RM 1.16; IC95%: 0.9-1.5; I2: 31%). CONCLUSIÓN: Los resultados muestran que el tratamiento con ondansetrón en el primer trimestre del embarazo no se asocia con un aumento de malformaciones congénitas en general, ni con un incremento de cardiopatías, labio o paladar hendido, pero sí con incremento leve del riesgo de malformaciones orofaciales.

Abstract OBJECTIVE: To determine whether ondansetron exposure in the first trimester is associated with an increased risk of any congenital malformations. As secondary outcomes, determine if it is associated with a higher overall risk of congenital heart disease, interventricular septal defects, orofacial malformations, cleft lip defect (with or without palate) or cleft palate. METHODOLOGY: A systematic review with meta-analysis was carried out. The search was carried out in the following databases: PUBMED, EMBASE and LILACS, randomized studies, cohorts and cases and controls were chosen. RESULTS: 15 studies were included, 11 cohort studies and four case-control studies, with 245,679 women exposed to ondansetron in the first trimester. No statistically significant association was found with overall congenital malformations (OR, 1.1; 95%, CI 0.99-1.22 I2: 72%), nor with congenital heart diseases (OR, 1.05; 95%, CI 0.95-1.19 I2: 78%) not with ventricular septal defects (OR, 1.2 95% CI 0.97 - 1.45 I2: 85%). A small increased risk was found for overall orofacial defects (OR, 1.17 95% CI 1.04 - 1.32 I2:0%), no increased risk was found for lip defect (with or without palate) (OR, 1.01 CI 95% 0.84 -1.21 I2%: 0%) or cleft palate (OR, 1.16 95% CI 0.9 - 1.5 I2: 31%). CONCLUSION: The results show that the use of ondansetron in the first trimester is not associated with an increase in overall congenital malformations, nor with an increase in heart disease, cleft lip and/or palate, but there is a slight increase in the risk of orofacial malformations.

CYP2D6 isoenzyme and ABCB1 gene polymorphisms associated with postoperative nausea and vomiting in women undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized trial

Abstract Introduction: Postoperative nausea and vomiting is still a common complication. Serotonin receptor antagonists are commonly used in clinical practice for antiemetic prophylaxis. Interin-dividual variations in drug response, including single nucleotide polymorphisms, are related to pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic changes in these drugs and may lead to a poor therapeutic response. This study aimed to evaluate the influence of CYP2D6 isoenzyme and ABCB1 gene polymorphisms on the frequency of postoperative nausea and vomiting with the use of ondansetron or palonosetron. Methods: A randomized, double-blind clinical trial including 82 women aged 60 years or over undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy was conducted. Patients were randomized to receive either ondansetron or palonosetron for postoperative nausea and vomiting prophylaxis. DNA was extracted from saliva. Genetic polymorphisms were analyzed by real-time polymerase chain reaction. The following polymorphisms were analyzed: rs3892097 C/T, rs1128503 A/G, rs16947A/G, rs1065852 A/G, rs1045642 A/G, rs2032582 C/A, and rs20325821 C/A. Results: Overall, vomiting, and severe nausea occurred in 22.5% and 57.5% of patients, respectively. In the palonosetron group, patients with the GG genotype (rs16947 A/G) experienced more severe nausea (p = 0.043). In the ondansetron group, patients with the M genotype (rs16947 A/G) presented mild nausea (p = 0.034), and those with the AA genotype (rs1065852 A/G) experienced more vomiting (p = 0.034). Conclusion: A low antiemetic response was observed with ondansetron in the presence of the AA genotype (rs16947 A/G) and the AA genotype (rs1065852 A/G), and a low therapeutic response was found with palonosetron in the presence of the GG genotype (rs16947 A/G) in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Register: ClinicalTrials.gov.

CYP2D6 isoenzyme and ABCB1 gene polymorphisms associated with postoperative nausea and vomiting in women undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized trial.

INTRODUCTION: Postoperative nausea and vomiting is still a common complication. Serotonin receptor antagonists are commonly used in clinical practice for antiemetic prophylaxis. Interindividual variations in drug response, including single nucleotide polymorphisms, are related to pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic changes in these drugs and may lead to a poor therapeutic response. This study aimed to evaluate the influence of CYP2D6 isoenzyme and ABCB1 gene polymorphisms on the frequency of postoperative nausea and vomiting with the use of ondansetron or palonosetron. METHODS: A randomized, double-blind clinical trial including 82 women aged 60 years or over undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy was conducted. Patients were randomized to receive either ondansetron or palonosetron for postoperative nausea and vomiting prophylaxis. DNA was extracted from saliva. Genetic polymorphisms were analyzed by real-time polymerase chain reaction. The following polymorphisms were analyzed: rs3892097 C/T, rs1128503 A/G, rs16947 A/G, rs1065852 A/G, rs1045642 A/G, rs2032582 C/A, and rs20325821 C/A. RESULTS: Overall, vomiting, and severe nausea occurred in 22.5% and 57.5% of patients, respectively. In the palonosetron group, patients with the GG genotype (rs16947 A/G) experienced more severe nausea (p = 0.043). In the ondansetron group, patients with the AA genotype (rs16947 A/G) presented mild nausea (p = 0.034), and those with the AA genotype (rs1065852 A/G) experienced more vomiting (p = 0.034). CONCLUSION: A low antiemetic response was observed with ondansetron in the presence of the AA genotype (rs16947 A/G) and the AA genotype (rs1065852 A/G), and a low therapeutic response was found with palonosetron in the presence of the GG genotype (rs16947 A/G) in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. REGISTER: ClinicalTrials.gov.

Efectividad de la profilaxis antiemética en el posoperatorio de pacientes operados por cirugía de mínimo acceso

Anestesia, náuseas y vómitos postoperatorios van unidas prácticamente desde que la anestesia general se introdujo en la práctica clínica quirúrgica, y todavía en la actualidad sigue presentando una incidencia inaceptablemente alta. Con el objetivo de evaluarla efectividad de la medicación preanestésica antiemética con ondansetrón en comparación con dexametasona, en la prevención de la aparición de náuseas y vómitos postoperatorios, se realizó un estudio prospectivo, cuasiexperimental, con grupo control no equivalente en pacientes operados por cirugía de mínimo acceso en el hospital provincial general "Carlos Manuel de Céspedes″ de Bayamo, entre septiembre 2017 hasta diciembre 2020, distribuidos aleatoriamente en dos grupos de 78 pacientes cada uno: el grupo I tratado con ondansetrón, y el grupo II tratado con dexametasona. Fueron utilizados el test del Xi-cuadrado (X2), y la prueba de diferencias de proporciones, con un valor de p = 0,05; los pacientes entre 40 a 49 años de edad, el sexo femenino, ASA II, sin antecedentes de náuseas y vómitos; y con estratificación de riesgo intermedio de nausea y vómitos, fueron más frecuente en el grupo al que se le administró dexametasona. En el grupo I, el mayor número de pacientes tuvo intensidad leve y un número reducido de pacientes requirieron rescate antiemético con dimenhidrinato. En el grupo II, el mayor número de pacientes reportó intensidad moderada seguida de fuerte, requiriendo rescate antiemético. Se concluyó que la administración de ondansetrón en monoterapia es más efectiva en la prevención de la aparición de náuseas y vómitos postoperatorios que la administración de dexametasona.

Postoperative anaesthesia, nausea and vomiting have been linked practically since general anaesthesia was introduced into clinical surgical practice, and still today it continues to have an unacceptably high incidence. With the objective of evaluating the effectiveness of preanesthetic antiemetic medication with ondansetron compared to dexamethasone, in the prevention of the appearance of postoperative nausea and vomiting, a prospective, quasi-experimental study was carried out with a control group not equivalent in patients operated by minimally accessible surgery in the general provincial hospital "Carlos Manuel de Céspedes" of Bayamo. between September 2017 to December 2020, randomly distributed into two groups of 78 patients each: group I treated with ondansetron, and group II treated with dexamethasone. The Xi-square test (X2) and the proportions differences test were used, with a value of p = 0.05; patients between 40 and 49 years of age, female, ASA II, with no history of nausea and vomiting; and with intermediate risk stratification of nausea and vomiting, were more frequent in the group administered dexamethasone. In group I, the largest number of patients had mild intensity and a small number of patients required antiemetic rescue with dimenhydrinate. In group II, the largest number of patients reported moderate intensity followed by strong intensity, requiring antiemetic rescue. It was concluded that ondansetron monotherapy is more effective in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting than dexamethasone administration.

Anestesia pós-operatória, náuseas e vômitos têm sido associados praticamente desde que a anestesia geral foi introduzida na prática clínica cirúrgica, e ainda hoje continua a ter uma incidência inaceitavelmente alta. Como objetivo de avaliar a eficácia da medicação antiemética pré-anestésica com ondansetrona comparada à dexametasona na prevenção do aparecimento de náuseas e vômitos pós-operatórios, foi realizado um estudo prospectivo, quase experimental, com um grupo controle não equivalente em pacientes operados por cirurgia minimamente acessível no hospital geral provincial "Carlos Manuel de Céspedes" de Bayamo entre setembro de 2017 a dezembro de 2020, distribuídos aleatoriamente em dois grupos de 78 pacientes cada: grupo I tratado com ondansetron e grupo II tratado com dexametasona. Foram utilizados o teste do xi-quadrado (X2) e o teste de diferenças de proporções, com valor de p = 0,05; pacientes entre 40 e 49 anos, sexo feminino, ASA II, sem história de náuseas e vômitos; e com estratificação de risco intermediário para náuseas e vômitos, foram mais frequentes no grupo que recebeu dexametasona. No grupo I, o maior número de pacientes apresentou intensidade leve e um pequeno número de pacientes necessitou de resgate antiemético com dimenidrinato. No grupo II, o maior número de pacientes relatou intensidade moderada seguida de intensidade forte, necessitando de resgate antiemético. Concluiu-se que a monoterapia com ondansetrona é mais efetiva na prevenção de náuseas e vômitos pós-operatórios do que a administração de dexametasona.

Prevalencia de medicamentos que prolongan el intervalo QT en salas de cardiología de un hospital de alta complejidad / Drug induced prolongation of Q-T interval in cardiology wards

Resumen: Antecedentes: La prevalencia del síndrome del QT largo (SQTL) producido por medicamentos es una de las reacciones adversas que en el último tiempo ha aumentado en prevalencia y mortalidad. No solamente ocurre con el uso de medicamentos para el tratamiento de cardiopatías, sino también en medicamentos con otra acción terapéutica. Objetivo: Evaluar la prevalencia del síndrome del SQTL inducido por medicamentos en salas de cardiología de un hospital de alta complejidad. Métodos: Estudio prospectivo, de tipo descriptivo y de corte transversal en 36 pacientes cardiópatas, que consistió en evaluar la frecuencia del uso de medicamentos que son capaces de producir un SQTL y la prevalencia de este efecto adverso. Los datos clínicos se recolectaron de la ficha clínica y de entrevistas con los pacientes. Se efectuó un seguimiento para detectar la aparición de prolongación del intervalo QT. Los resultados obtenidos fueron presentados por medio de estadística descriptiva (programa estadístico Statgraphics Centurion, versión XVI). No hubo estadística inferencial dada la ausencia de un grupo control. Resultados: 41,7%, de los 36 pacientes presentaron SQTL que en 86,7% de ellos fue asociado a un medicamento. Los medicamentos más frecuentemente asociados a este efecto adverso fueron Amiodarona (38,5%) y Ondansetrón (23,1%), y el factor de riesgo mayormente involucrado fue el sexo femenino (61,5%). Conclusión: Existió una alta prevalencia del uso de medicamentos que producen un SQTL, destacándose que existen medicamentos utilizados para otras patologías que también pueden producirlo.

Abstract: Background: The prevalence of the Long QT interval syndrome (LQTS) associated to drugs has increased en the last decades along with an increased mortality due to this condition. It occurs not only with drugs used to treat cardiac disease but also to other drugs. Aim: To evaluate the prevalence of drug induced LQTS in cardiology wards of a high complexity hospital. Method: This is a prospective, descriptive and cross sectional study in 36 patients with heart disease. The use of drugs known to affect the QT interval along with the frequency of LGTS were evaluated. Clincal data was obtained from clinical records and personal interviews. Patients were followed for the appearance of LQTS. Descriptive were used to present the results. No inferential statistics were used as no control group was involved (Statgraphics Centurion, version XVI). Results: 41.7% of the 36 patients developed LQTS and the association with drugs was present in 86.7% of them. The drugs most commonly identified were amiodarone (38.5%) and ondansetron (23.1%) of patients. Female geneder was the most common associated condition (61.5%). Conclusion: There was a frequent use of drugs known to produce LQTS, but other drugs may also be associated int this group of patients with heart disease admitted to intensive or intermediate care facilities.

Paro cardiorrespiratorio presuntamente secundario a la administración de ondansetrón en paciente con trastorno electrolítico

El Ondansetron pertenece a una clase de medicamentos llamados antagonistas de los receptores 5HT3 con uso antiemético indicados para el control de las náuseas inducidos por la quimioterapia, radioterapia y cirugía. A este fármaco, se asociado muy pocos efectos adversos serios. Actualmente el Ondansetron ha sido relacionado con casos de arritmias ventriculares y muerte súbita. El presente caso pertenece a un paciente de sexo masculino de 67 años de edad atendido en servicio de urgencias por un cuadro de hipokalemia crónica, tratado en base a fluidoterapia, ranitidina, almodipino y ondasetron en un tiempo de 20,min, posterior a la administración de este último presenta muerte súbita.

Ondansetron belongs to a class of medications called 5HT3 receptor antagonists with antiemetic use indicated for the control of nausea induced by chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and surgery. This medication has been associated with very few serious side effects. Currently, Ondansetron has been linked to cases of ventricular arrhythmias and sudden death. This case is of a 67-year-old male patient treated in the emergency department for a chronic hypokalemia, treated with fluid therapy, ranitidine, amlodipine, and ondansetron in a time of 20 minutes, after the administration of the latter, he presented with sudden death.

An overview of preparation and characterization of solid binary system and its application on transdermal film with variation of plasticizers

Chemotherapy induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) and post-operative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a problem, often occurs in patient. Inspite of high bioavailability, the demerits such as: hepatic first pass metabolism and invasive nature of oral and parenteral dosage forms can be avoided with anti-emetic therapy of transdermal device. The major objective of the present study is to modify the hydrochloride (HCl) form of Ondansetron (OND) to the base form followed by improvement of solubility and permeability of OND by employing solid dispersion (SD) loaded patches. Preformulation study, as observed, begins with an approach to enthuse solubility of OND by SD technique choosing different carriers. The choice of carriers was rationalized by phase solubility study. Several combinations of transdermal films were prepared with pure drug, carriers and SDs with plasticizer Ka values of OND-HPßCD binary system were found lower (54.43 to 187.57 M-1) than that of OND-PVP K-30 binary system (1156.77 to 12203.6 M-1). The drug content of SDs and patches were found satisfactory. Better permeation rate (236.48±3.66 µg/3.935 cm2) with promising flux enhancement (8.30 fold) was found with DBP loaded SD patch (P6*). Hence, enhancement of solubility and permeability of P6* ensures that it can successfully enhance the bioavailability

Comparison of palonosetron and ondansetron in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in renal transplantation recipients: a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: End-stage renal diseases patients have a high risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), which is multifactorial and need acute attention after renal transplantation for a successful outcome in term of an uneventful postoperative period. The study was done to compare the efficacy of palonosetron and ondansetron in preventing early and late-onset PONV in live donor renal transplantation recipients (LDRT). METHODS: The prospective randomized double-blinded study was done on 112 consecutive patients planned for live donor renal transplantation. Patients of both sexes in the age group of 18-60 years were randomly divided into two groups: Group O (Ondansetron) and Group P (Palonosetron) with 56 patients in each group by computer-generated randomization. The study drug was administered intravenously (IV) slowly over 30 seconds, one hour before extubation. Postoperatively, the patients were accessed for PONV at 6, 24, and 72 hours using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) nausea score and PONV intensity scale. RESULTS: The incidence of PONV in the study was found to be 30.35%. There was significant difference in incidence of PONV between Group P and Group O at 6 hours (12.5% vs. 32.1%, p = 0.013) and 72 hours (1.8% vs. 33.9%, p < 0.001), but insignificant difference at 24 hours (1.8% vs. 10.7%, p = 0.113). VAS-nausea score was significantly lower in Group P as compared to Group O at a time point of 24 hours (45.54 ± 12.64 vs. 51.96 ± 14.70, p = 0.015) and 72 hours (39.11 ± 10.32 vs. 45.7 ± 15.12, p = 0.015). CONCLUSION: Palonosetron is clinically superior to ondansetron in preventing early and delayed onset postoperative nausea and vomiting in live-related renal transplant recipients.

Synthesis and Development of Indole Based 5-HT3 Receptor Antagonists as Anti-Emetic Drugs in Oncology: An Update.

An important group of antiemetic drugs used in the treatment of nausea and vomiting after chemotherapy containing an indole moiety in their structures, working as 5- hydroxytryptamine type 3 serotonin receptor antagonist (5-HT3). This study focuses on compounds bearing an indole core that present a 5-HT3 receptor antagonist activity, which have been successfully used as antiemetic drugs for reducing chemotherapy adverse secondary effects during cancer treatment. Their synthesis, biological activities, and some outstanding characteristics are discussed, providing a general outlook towards the development of more efficient antiemetic drugs.

Effect of ondansetron on spinal anesthesia-induced hypotension in non-obstetric surgeries: a randomised, double-blind and placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Spinal anesthesia is an effective technique for many surgical procedures, but it is often associated with an increased risk of potentially deleterious hemodynamic disturbances. The benefits of prophylactic ondansetron for preventing spinal anesthesia-induced hypotension are still uncertain. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the effect of ondansetron and placebo before spinal block on the incidence of hypotension in patients having non-obstetric surgeries. METHODS: Randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, superiority trial with a 1:1 allocation ratio. A total of 144 patients scheduled for non-obstetric surgeries with an indication for spinal anesthesia were randomized. Patients received intravenous ondansetron (8mg) or placebo before standard spinal anesthesia. The primary outcome was the rate of hypotension in the first 30 minutes after spinal anesthesia. RESULTS: Hypotension occurred in 20 of 72 patients (27.8%) in the ondansetron group and in 36 of 72 patients (50%) in the placebo group (Odds Ratio-OR=0.38; 95% Confidence Interval-CI 0.19 to 0.77; p=0.007). Fewer patients in the ondansetron group required ephedrine compared to the placebo group (13.9% vs. 27.8%; OR=0.42; 95% CI 0.18 to 0.98; p=0.04). Exploratory analyses revealed that ondansetron may be more effective than placebo in patients aged 60 years or older (OR=0.12; 95% CI 0.03 to 0.48; p=0.03). No difference in heart rate variations was observed. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that ondansetron can be a viable and effective strategy to reduce both the incidence of spinal anesthesia-induced hypotension and vasopressors usage in non-obstetric surgeries.

¿Puede el fentanilo intratecal disminuir la aparición de náuseas y vómito en comparación con ondansetrón intravenoso durante cesárea electiva? Revisión sistemática de la literatura y metaanálisis / Can intrathecal fentanyl decrease the occurrence of nausea and vomiting compared with intravenous ondansetron during elective cesarean section? Literature Systematic review and meta-analysis

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.

Utilidad del ondansetrón vs dexametasona como profilaxis antiemética posoperatoria durante la cirugía mayor ginecológica / Usefulness of ondansetron versus dexamethasone as postoperative antiemetic prophylaxis during major gynecologic surgery

Introducción: Las náuseas y vómitos posoperatorios son una secuela no deseada durante la etapa de recuperación anestésica. Objetivo: Evaluar la utilidad de la dexametasona en comparación con el ondansetrón para la prevención de las náuseas y vómitos posoperatorios después de procedimientos quirúrgicos ginecológicos mayores, bajo anestesia general orotraqueal. Método: Se realizó un estudio observacional analítico, prospectivo, en 84 pacientes mayores de 19 años, en el Hospital Clínico Quirúrgico Miguel Enríquez desde octubre de 2018 hasta septiembre de 2019, divididas de forma secuencial, en orden de llegada a la unidad quirúrgica, en dos grupos. Al grupo 1 se le administró dexametasona (4 mg endovenosa); al grupo 2 (4 mg de ondansetrón), 30 min antes de finalizar la cirugía. Resultados: Predominó de forma significativa el riesgo medio de náuseas y vómitos posoperatorios en los pacientes con edades comprendidas entre 41 y 50 años. Predominó la condición de excelente y buena (pgt;0,05) en cuanto a la efectividad del tratamiento profiláctico. La cefalea prevaleció de forma significativa en el grupo 2. La mayor parte de las pacientes no presentó eventos adversos. Conclusiones: El ondansetrón y la dexametasona son útiles para la profilaxis de las náuseas y vómitos posoperatorios en pacientes intervenidas de cirugía mayor ginecológica, bajo anestesia general orotraqueal por lo que se considera un tratamiento seguro, con eventos adversos leves y de fácil control(AU)

Introduction: Postoperative nausea and vomiting are an unwanted sequel during the anesthetic recovery stage. Objective: To evaluate the usefulness of dexamethasone compared with ondansetron for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting after major gynecological surgical procedures, under general orotracheal anesthesia. Method: A prospective, analytical and observational study was carried out with 84 patients older than 19 years of age, at Miguel Enríquez Hospital Clinical-Surgical Hospital, from October 2018 to September 2019, divided sequentially, in order of arrival at the surgical unit, into two groups. The group 1 was administered dexamethasone (4 mg intravenously), and the group 2 was administered ondansetron (4 mg), 30 min before the end of the surgery. Results: The average risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting prevailed significantly among patients aged 41-50 years. Excellent and good conditions predominated (pgt;0.05) in terms of effectiveness of prophylactic treatment. Headache prevailed significantly in the group 2. Most of the patients did not present adverse events. Conclusions: Ondansetron and dexamethasone are useful for postoperative nausea and vomiting prophylaxis among patients who received major gynecological surgery, under general orotracheal anesthesia, a reason why it is considered a safe treatment, with mild adverse events and easy control(AU)

Comparison of palonosetron-dexamethasone and ondansetron-dexamethasone for prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in middle ear surgery: a randomized clinical trial / Comparação entre palonosetrona-dexametasona e ondansetrona-dexametasona na prevenção de náuseas e vômitos no pós-operatório de cirurgia do ouvido médio: estudo clínico randomizado

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.

[Comparison of palonosetron-dexamethasone and ondansetron-dexamethasone for prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in middle ear surgery: a randomized clinical trial]. / Comparação entre palonosetrona­dexametasona e ondansetrona­dexametasona na prevenção de náuseas e vômitos no pós­operatório de cirurgia do ouvido médio: estudo clínico randomizado.

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.

La administración de ondansetrón no mejora la evolución de los niños con gastroenteritis aguda sin deshidratación / Administration of ondansetron does not improve the course of children with acute gastroenteritis without dehydration

Sobre la base de una viñeta clínica de un niño con gastroenteritis aguda sin deshidratación, el autor de este artículo realiza una búsqueda bibliográfica para revisar la evidencia que avala el uso de ondansetrón para tratar sus vómitos, práctica bastante común en instituciones con acceso a este fármaco en sus centrales de emergencia. Luego de dicha búsqueda, el autor concluye que en niños con gastroenteritis aguda sin deshidratación, la administración de ondansetrón no reduce la necesidad de hidratación intravenosa ni la frecuencia ni la severidad de los vómitos. (AU)

Based on a clinical vignette of a child with acute gastroenteritis without dehydration, the author of this article performs a literature search to review the evidence supporting the use of ondansetron to treat his vomiting, a fairly common practice in institutions with access to this drug in their emergency rooms. After this search, the author concludes that in children with acute gastroenteritis without dehydration, the administration of ondansetron does not reduce the need for intravenous hydration or the frequency or severity of vomiting. (AU)

¿Puede el fentanilo intratecal disminuir la aparición de náuseas y vómito en comparación con ondansetrón intravenoso durante cesárea electiva? Revisión sistemática de la literatura y metaanálisis / Can intrathecal fentanyl decrease the occurrence of nausea and vomiting compared with intravenous ondansetron during elective cesarean section? Literature Systematic review and meta-analysis

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.

Palonosetron versus ondansetron for prevention of nausea and vomiting after total abdominal hysterectomy under spinal anesthesia with intrathecal morphine: a double-blind, randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Hysterectomy is a widely performed surgery and neuraxial anesthesia with intrathecal morphine provides superior quality of recovery. Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a frequent problem with intrathecal morphine use. Although palonosetron is effective for prevention of PONV after general anesthesia, its efficacy after neuraxial anesthesia has not been established. This study was conducted to compare the use of palonosetron with ondansetron for PONV prophylaxis in patients at a high risk of PONV during total abdominal hysterectomy (TAH) under spinal anesthesia with intrathecal morphine. METHODS: This prospective, randomized double-blind study conducted at São Rafael Hospital involved 140 American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I or II women who underwent TAH under spinal anesthesia with intrathecal morphine and who had at least 3 risk factors for PONV based on Apfel's simplified score. The patients were randomized into two groups: one received palonosetron whereas the other received ondansetron. All patients received spinal anesthesia with intrathecal morphine, as well as dexamethasone plus palonosetron or ondansetron for PONV prophylaxis. The overall incidence of PONV, incidence of early- and late-onset nausea and vomiting, severity of nausea, and use of rescue antiemetics were recorded. RESULTS: The overall incidence of PONV was 42.9% in the palonosetron group and 52.9% in the ondansetron group (p > 0.05). No significant differences existed in the incidence of early- and late-onset nausea or early-onset vomiting between the two groups. The incidence of late-onset vomiting was significantly lower in the palonosetron group. CONCLUSIONS: Palonosetron exhibited efficacy similar to that of ondansetron for reducing the overall incidence of PONV after TAH under spinal anesthesia with intrathecal morphine; however, palonosetron reduced the incidence of late-onset vomiting significantly better than ondansetron. TRIAL REGISTRATION: RBR-4gnm8n ( ensaiosclinicos.gov.br ), date of registration: August 18, 2014.

Effects of Dexamethasone and Ondansetron as an Adjuvant to Bupivacaine in Supraclavicular Brachial Plexus Blocks

Background Th supraclavicular brachial plexus block (SCBPB) exhibits a good anesthetic and analgesic effect to the upper extremity below the shoulder and reduces the need for opioid consumption. Among many medications, dexamethasone and ondansetron had been used as effective adjuvants to the local anesthetics in BPB. Aim: to compare the block characteristics with dexamethasone versus ondansetron as adjuvant to bupivacaine hydrochloride (BPV) in SCBPB. Materials and methods: 75 patients were allocated and divided into three equal groups. Combined ultrasound and nerve stimulation (CUSNS) - guided SCBPB had been done. Control group (C) received thirty ml of 0,5% bupivacaine with 2 ml of normal saline. Ondansetron group (O) received thirty l of 0.5% bupivacaine with 2 ml of 4 mg of ondasetron. In dexamethasone group (D), patient received thirty ml of 0.5% BPV plus 2 ml of 8 mg dexamethasone. Results: A prolonged effect of both sensory and motor block were observed in both group D and group O (more significant in D) than group C. Total dose of analgesic (tramadol in mgs in 24 hours) was obviously reduced in group D and group O than group C. Conclusion: Dexamethasone had better effects on sensory and motor block duration in comparison with ondansetron. The first time to analgesic request in dexamethasone group was longer than ondansetron group (AU)