Dexamethasone with either granisetron or ondansetron for postoperative nausea and vomiting in laparoscopic surgery.

In a prospective randomized double-blind study, we compared the effectiveness of dexamethasone 8 mg with either granisetron 1 mg or ondansetron 4 mg in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery. Hundred ASA I and II patients scheduled for laparoscopic surgery were enrolled in the study and 84 patients completed it. Following induction of anesthesia, group I (n=42) received granisetron 1 mg and dexamethasone 8 mg, group II (n=42) received ondansetron 4 mg and dexamethasone 8 mg. Nausea and vomiting episodes, pain scores as well as side effects were recorded during the first hour and subsequently during the first 6 and 24 hours postoperatively. Satisfaction scores were obtained at discharge. There was no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups during the 1st 24 hours following surgery in regards to pain scores, satisfaction and side effects manifestations. At 0-1 hour interval, 100% of patients in group I and 97.6% in group II had no vomiting. Total response (no moderate or severe nausea and no rescue antiemetics) was 83.3% in group I and 80.95% in group II, and metoclopramide was used in 7.1% of patients in both groups. At 1-6 hours interval, 97.6% of patients in group I and 100% in group II had no vomiting. Total response was 92.8% in group I and 90.9% in group II, and metoclopramide was used in 4.76% of patients in group I and 2.38% in group II. At 6-24 hours no vomiting occurred in 97.6% of patients in group I and 100% in group II. Total response was 95.2% in both groups, and metoclopramide was used in 2.38% of patients in both groups. In conclusion, the combination of dexamethasone 8 mg with either granisetron 1 mg or ondansetron 4 mg following induction of anesthesia in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery showed no statistically significant difference in antiemetic efficacy with minimal side effects and excellent patient satisfaction.

Excellent intubating conditions with remifentanil-propofol and either low-dose rocuronium or succinylcholine.

PURPOSE: The shortest time to tracheal intubation, the best intubating conditions, and the shortest duration of muscle paralysis are achieved with succinylcholine. During a lidocaine-remifentanil-propofol induction of anesthesia, we compared intubating conditions 90 s after administering low-dose rocuronium (0.3 mg . kg(-1)) with intubating conditions 60 s after administering succinylcholine 1.5 mg . kg(-1). METHODS: The randomized double-blind study included 184 healthy adult patients scheduled for elective surgery. Anesthesia was induced in all patients with lidocaine 1.5 mg . kg(-1), remifentanil 2 microg . kg(-1), and propofol 2 mg . kg(-1) administered over 30 s. In one group, rocuronium 0.3 mg . kg(-1) was administered before the induction sequence, and in the other group, succinylcholine 1.5 mg . kg(-1) was administered after the induction sequence. Laryngoscopy was attempted 90 s after rocuronium administration and 60 s after succinylcholine administration. Intubating conditions were assessed as excellent, good, or poor on the basis of ease of laryngoscopy, position of the vocal cords, and reaction to insertion of the tracheal tube and cuff inflation. RESULTS: There were 92 patients per group. In the rocuronium group, intubating conditions were excellent in 83 patients (90%), good in 8 (9%), and poor in 1 (1%), not significantly different from the intubating conditions in the succinylcholine group, which were excellent in 88 patients (96%), good in 3 (3%), and poor in 1 (1%) (P = 0.3). CONCLUSION: During a lidocaine-remifentanil-propofol induction of anesthesia, rocuronium 0.3 mg . kg(-1) administered before the induction sequence provides intubating conditions comparable to those achieved with succinylcholine 1.5 mg . kg(-1) administered after the induction sequence.

The effect of low-dose remifentanil on responses to the endotracheal tube during emergence from general anesthesia.

BACKGROUND: Emergence from general anesthesia can be associated with coughing, agitation, and hemodynamic disturbances. Remifentanil may attenuate these responses. METHODS: In a prospective, double-blind, randomized trial, we enrolled 60 adult patients undergoing nasal surgery using remifentanil-based anesthesia. During the emergence phase, the remifentanil group had remifentanil reduced to one tenth of the maintenance rate, whereas the control group had remifentanil discontinued. RESULTS: Times to awakening and tracheal extubation were similar between the two groups. During emergence, the remifentanil group (infusion rate 0.014 +/- 0.011 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1)) had a significantly lower incidence (40% vs 80%, P = 0.002) and less severe coughing compared with the control group, as well as a lower incidence of nonpurposeful movement (3.3% vs 30%, P = 0.006) and slower heart rates. CONCLUSIONS: Low-dose remifentanil during emergence did not prolong wake-up but reduced the incidence and severity of coughing from the endotracheal tube.