Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Nausea”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 577 records · Page 32Linked to original sources
PubMed1993

Oral ondansetron in the prophylaxis of nausea and vomiting induced by cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and 5-fluorouracil (CMF) in women with breast cancer. Results of a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: The combination of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and 5-fluorouracil (CMF) is a widely used chemotherapy regimen in breast cancer patients. However, the control of nausea and vomiting induced by oral CMF is a rarely examined problem. Therefore we felt a randomized, placebo controlled study justified in order to improve currently available antiemetic therapy. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: In a randomised double-blind trial ondansetron given orally, 8 mg three times a day for 15 days, was compared with placebo in 82 breast cancer patients receiving chemotherapy with CMF (cyclophosphamide 100 mg/m2 orally days 1-14, methotrexate 40 mg/m2 i.v. days 1 and 8 and 5-fluorouracil 600 mg/m2 i.v. days 1 and 8). The patients recorded nausea and the number of vomits and retches daily on diary cards. Forty-two patients received ondansetron and 40 received placebo. RESULTS: Significantly more patients who received ondansetron experienced neither vomiting nor retching (emesis) compared to those receiving placebo over a 15 day treatment period (60% vs. 35%, p = 0.027). The difference, with 95% confidence limits, was estimated at 25 (4.45%). Furthermore, there was a trend in favour of ondansetron in the control of nausea. Ondansetron was well tolerated, with 25 patients (59%) reporting at least 1 adverse event compared to 18 patients (45%) receiving placebo (p = 0.191). CONCLUSION: The results indicate that ondansetron given orally for 15 days is safe and effective in the control of emesis induced by CMF. It is however too early to recommend ondansetron as standard antiemetic therapy for oral CMF, as the treatment of nausea and vomiting in this setting has not been studied thoroughly enough.

Administration, Oral↗
PubMed1995

Clinical efficacy of lorazepam in prophylaxis of anticipatory, acute, and delayed nausea and vomiting induced by high doses of cisplatin. A prospective randomized trial.

Nausea and vomiting are extremely common and most distressing side effects of high-dose cisplatin therapy. Cisplatin induces anticipatory and acute, as well as, delayed emesis. High doses of metoclopramide can effectively decrease the intensity of these symptoms in up to 70% of cases. Several agents, including dexamethasone and antihistamines have been demonstrated to either increase the efficacy of metoclopramide or decrease the side effects. Lorazepam, a benzodiazepine, has both antiemetic and anxiolytic properties. It can be useful as an adjunct to metoclopramide-based therapy. We conducted a randomized trial to evaluate the efficacy of lorazepam in managing anticipatory, acute, and delayed emesis induced by high doses of cisplatin. A total of 180 events involving cisplatin administration (100 mg/m2 as a 24-hour continuous infusion) were randomized to receive metoclopramide along with dexamethasone and clemastine with and without lorazepam. Categorical scales were utilized to document the incidence of nausea and vomiting and side effects related to antiemetic therapy. All episodes are evaluable. Lorazepam significantly reduced the incidence of anticipatory nausea and vomiting (P < .05) as well as acute emesis (P = .05) induced by cisplatin. Delayed emesis was also decreased; however, it was statistically significant on day 3 only (P < .05). Side effects were few except for mild sedation and amnesia, which were significantly more common in those receiving lorazepam (P < .001). We conclude that lorazepam increases the efficacy of metoclopramide against cisplatin-induced anticipatory, acute, and delayed nausea and vomiting. This four-drug regimen may offer one of the best combinations to be utilized in comparative trials against the newly introduced serotonin antagonists.

Adult↗
PubMed1997

Comparison of tropisetron, droperidol, and saline in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting after gynecologic surgery.

This study was performed to compare the efficacy of tropisetron, droperidol, and saline in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) and to compare the possible adverse effects of these drugs in gynecologic incontinence surgery. Using a randomized, double-blind study design, we studied 150 women undergoing gynecologic incontinence surgery with standardized general anesthesia. At the end of surgery, the patients received either tropisetron 5 mg, droperidol 1.25 mg, or 0.9% saline intravenously (i.v.). As a rescue antiemetic, the patients received metoclopramide 10 mg i.v.. The episodes of nausea, retching, and vomiting; the need for rescue treatment; and the type and severity of adverse events were recorded at four occasions during the 48-h observation period. Pain, anxiety, drowsiness, and general satisfaction were also evaluated on a linear numerical scale of 0-10. Complete response (no PONV within the 48-h observation period) occurred similarly in the study groups (tropisetron 25%, droperidol 22%, and placebo 18%). Tropisetron and droperidol had no effect on the incidence of nausea and retching. However, the incidence of vomiting was significantly less in the tropisetron group than in the placebo group (tropisetron 19%, droperidol 45%, and placebo 57%). The number of emetic episodes (retching and/or vomiting) per patient within 48 h was significantly decreased under tropisetron when compared with placebo (tropisetron 2.5 +/- 3.4, droperidol 4.2 +/- 6.1, placebo 5.9 +/- 7.1). With regard to adverse events, the patients in the droperidol group had significantly more anxiety than the placebo group (2-6 h postoperatively), more drowsiness than the tropisetron and placebo groups (0-2 h postoperatively), and more dissatisfaction than the tropisetron (0-6 h postoperatively) and placebo groups (2-6 h postoperatively). We conclude that tropisetron given 5 mg i.v. during anesthesia in gynecologic incontinence surgery effectively prevents vomiting but not nausea and retching, while 1.25 mg i.v. droperidol fails to prevent any of these emetic symptoms and results in adverse events.

Antiemetics↗
PubMed1997

Reversal of neuromuscular blockade with neostigmine has no effect on the incidence or severity of postoperative nausea and vomiting.

UNLABELLED: We performed this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study to determine whether reversal of neuromuscular block with neostigmine increases the incidence and severity of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). We studied 162 women undergoing abdominal hysterectomy and randomly allocated them into two groups. In Group A, neuromuscular block produced with mivacurium was antagonized with neostigmine 2.0 mg and glycopyrrolate 0.4 mg intravenously, whereas Group B received no drugs to facilitate antagonism of blockade. The incidence and severity of PONV was assessed up to 27 h after the operation. There was no difference in PONV between the groups (in Group A 35% had nausea and 33% vomited; in Group B 28% nauseated and 40% vomited) or in the amount of antiemetics given. We had a 75% chance to find a 30% difference in PONV. We conclude that the administration of neostigmine and glycopyrrolate at the end of anesthesia to reverse neuromuscular block does not increase the incidence or severity of PONV. IMPLICATIONS: Neostigmine may increase postoperative nausea and vomiting. In this study, omission of reversal of neuromuscular block with neostigmine failed to decrease the incidence or severity of postoperative nausea and vomiting.

Adult↗
PubMed1999

The use of nonpharmacologic techniques to prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting: a meta-analysis.

UNLABELLED: We assessed the efficacy of nonpharmacologic techniques to prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) by systematic review. These studies included acupuncture, electroacupuncture, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, acupoint stimulation, and acupressure. Of the 24 randomized trials retrieved by a search of articles indexed on the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases (1980-1997), 19 were eligible for meta-analysis. The primary outcomes were the incidence of nausea, vomiting, or both 0-6 h (early efficacy) or 0-48 h (late efficacy) after surgery. The pooled relative risk (RR) and numbers needed to treat (NNT) were calculated. In children, no benefit was found. Some results in adults were significant. Nonpharmacologic techniques were similar to antiemetics in preventing early vomiting (RR = 0.89 [95% confidence interval 0.47-1.67]; NNT = 63 [10-infinity]) and late vomiting (RR = 0.80 [0.35-1.81]; NNT = 25 [5-infinity]) in adults. Nonpharmacologic techniques were better than placebo at preventing early nausea (RR = 0.34 [0.20-0.58]; NNT = 4 [3-6]) and early vomiting in adults (RR = 0.47 [0.34-0.64]; NNT = 5 [4-8]). Nonpharmacologic techniques were similar to placebo in preventing late vomiting in adults (RR = 0.81 [0.46-1.42]; NNT = 14 [6-infinity]). Using nonpharmacologic techniques, 20%-25% of adults will not have early PONV compared with placebo. It may be an alternative to receiving no treatment or first-line antiemetics. IMPLICATIONS: This systematic review showed that nonpharmacologic techniques were equivalent to commonly used antiemetic drugs in preventing vomiting after surgery. Nonpharmacologic techniques were more effective than placebo in preventing nausea and vomiting within 6 h of surgery in adults, but there was no benefit in children.

Acupressure↗
PubMed2000

The use of dexamethasone for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in females undergoing thyroidectomy: a dose-ranging study.

We sought to determine the minimum effective dose of dexamethasone in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in women undergoing thyroidectomy. Two hundred twenty-five women (n = 45 in each of five groups) undergoing thyroidectomy under general anesthesia were enrolled in this randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study. Immediately after the induction of anesthesia, patients received IV dexamethasone at doses of 10 mg (D10), 5 mg (D5), 2.5 mg (D2.5), 1.25 mg (D1.25), or saline (S). We found that Groups D10 and D5 were significantly different from Group S in the total incidences of nausea and vomiting, more than four vomiting episodes, the proportions of patients requiring rescue antiemetics, and the incidences of complete responses. The differences between Groups D10 and D5 were not significant. Dexamethasone 2.5 mg reduced the total incidence of nausea and vomiting. Dexamethasone 1.25 mg was not effective. Dexamethasone 5 mg IV is the minimum effective dose in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in women undergoing thyroidectomy.

Adult↗
PubMed2001

Dexamethasone for preventing nausea and vomiting associated with epidural morphine: a dose-ranging study.

UNLABELLED: We conducted a dose-ranging study of dexamethasone for preventing nausea and vomiting within the first 24 h after the administration of epidural morphine. Two hundred twenty-five women (n = 45 in each of the five groups) undergoing simple abdominal total hysterectomy under epidural anesthesia were enrolled in this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. When the incision closure was completed, patients received IV dexamethasone, 10 mg, 5 mg, or 2.5 mg; IV droperidol 1.25 mg; or saline 2 mL. All patients received epidural morphine 3 mg for postoperative analgesia. We found that patients who received dexamethasone 5 mg or 10 mg or droperidol 1.25 mg were significantly different from those who received saline alone in the following variables: the total incidence of nausea and vomiting, the incidence of more than four vomiting episodes, the number of patients requiring rescue antiemetics, the total number of patients with no vomiting and/or no antiemetic medication (P < 0.05 to P < 0.01). The differences among dexamethasone 10 mg and 5 mg and droperidol 1.25 mg were not significant. Dexamethasone 2.5 mg was ineffective. In conclusion, because dexamethasone 5 mg was as effective as 10 mg as an antiemetic, we recommend the smaller dose for preventing nausea and vomiting associated with epidural morphine. IMPLICATIONS: We conducted a dose-ranging study of dexamethasone for preventing nausea and vomiting within the first 24 h after the administration of epidural morphine. We found that dexamethasone 5 mg was as effective as 10 mg. We recommend the smaller dose for this purpose.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

The efficacy and safety of transdermal scopolamine for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting: a quantitative systematic review.

UNLABELLED: The role of scopolamine administered via transdermal therapeutic systems in the prevention of postoperative vomiting, nausea, and nausea and vomiting is unclear. We performed a systematic search for full reports of randomized comparisons of transdermal scopolamine with inactive control. Dichotomous data were extracted. In the meta-analysis, relative risks and numbers-needed-to-treat/harm were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CI). In 23 trials, 979 patients received transdermal scopolamine, and 984 patients received placebo. Sensitivity analyses were performed using restricted data for truncated control event rates (40%-80%) and for large trials. With these data, the relative risks for postoperative vomiting (five reports), nausea (five reports), nausea and vomiting (eight reports), and rescue treatment (three reports) were 0.69 (95% CI, 0.58-0.82), 0.69 (95% CI, 0.54-0.87), 0.76 (95% CI, 0.66-0.88), and 0.68 (95% CI, 0.54-0.85), respectively. This means that of 100 patients who receive transdermal scopolamine, approximately 17 will not experience postoperative vomiting who would have done so had they all received a placebo. However, 18 of 100 patients will have visual disturbances, eight will report dry mouth, two will report dizziness, one will be classified as being agitated, and 1-13 patients who are prescribed transdermal scopolamine will not use it correctly. The timing of application does not alter efficacy. IMPLICATIONS: Of 100 patients who receive transdermal scopolamine, approximately 17 will not vomit in the postoperative period who would have done so had they all received a placebo. However, 18 of 100 patients will have visual disturbances, and eight will report dry mouth. Incorrect use further limits its efficacy.

Administration, Cutaneous↗
PubMed2003

Supplemental oxygen does not reduce the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting after ambulatory gynecologic laparoscopy.

UNLABELLED: Supplemental 80% oxygen administration halves the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in inpatients. Whether it prevents PONV after ambulatory surgery is unknown. We tested the efficacy of supplemental 80% oxygen in decreasing the incidence of PONV after ambulatory gynecologic laparoscopy. One hundred patients were given a standardized sevoflurane anesthetic. They were randomly assigned to two groups: routine oxygen administration with 30% oxygen, balance nitrogen (Group A); and supplemental oxygen with 80% oxygen, balance nitrogen (Group B). Oxygen was administered during surgery and up to 1 h after surgery. The incidence of nausea and vomiting and the need for rescue antiemetics did not differ between the groups in the postanesthesia care unit, in the Phase II unit, or during the 24-h follow-up. The overall incidence of nausea and vomiting during the first postoperative 24 h was 62% in Group A and 55% in Group B (P = 0.486). There were no differences in the recovery profiles and patient satisfaction between the groups. In this study, supplemental oxygen did not prevent PONV in patients undergoing ambulatory gynecologic laparoscopy. IMPLICATIONS: Supplemental 80% oxygen administration during surgery and until 1 h after surgery compared with 30% oxygen administration did not prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting after ambulatory gynecologic laparoscopy.

Adult↗
PubMed1993

Comparison of ondansetron versus placebo to prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting in women undergoing ambulatory gynecologic surgery.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative nausea and emesis, especially in ambulatory surgical patients, remains a troublesome problem. This study was performed to compare the incidence of nausea and emesis during the 24-h postoperative period in ondansetron-treated patients versus placebo-treated patients. METHODS: Using a randomized prospective double-blind study design, women between the ages of 18 and 70 yr undergoing gynecologic surgical procedures with general opioid anesthesia on an outpatient basis were enrolled. Ondansetron or placebo was administered prior to induction of anesthesia. Patients were stratified according to history of nausea and emesis during previous exposure to general anesthesia and randomized to dose received. RESULTS: Data from the 544 women showed that all doses of intravenous ondansetron tested (1, 4, and 8 mg) were significantly more effective (62%, 76%, and 77%, respectively) than placebo (46%) in reducing the incidence of emesis following surgery until 24 h after recovery room entry. All these doses were more effective than placebo in patients with no prior history of emesis following surgery and the 4- and 8-mg doses were more effective than placebo in patients with a prior history of emesis following surgery. All doses of ondansetron tested were generally well tolerated with adverse events, clinical laboratory tests, and recovery room vital signs similar to those of placebo. Serum aspartate transaminase (AST) was increased in five patients (1 mg, 2 patients; 4 mg, 1 patient; 8 mg, 2 patients). In the three patients in whom subsequent analysis were performed, the serum AST had decreased to preoperative levels. CONCLUSIONS: Ondansetron given intravenously to prevent postoperative nausea and emesis was highly effective in the 4- and 8-mg doses in women having ambulatory gynecologic surgery.

Adult↗
PubMed1994

Effects of ondansetron in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in children.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a commonly observed adverse effect of general anesthesia. Recently, ondansetron, a new serotonin3 (5-hydroxytryptamine3) receptor antagonist was shown to be effective in the prophylaxis and prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in children and adults as well as of PONV in adults. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the capacity of ondansetron to prevent PONV in pediatric patients. METHODS: Two hundred children (132 boys and 68 girls) 2-10 yr of age received general inhalational anesthesia for surgical procedures (the extremities; ear, nose, and throat; inguinal hernia and phimosis; and dentistry) of an expected duration of less than 90 min. This study was divided into two phases: prophylaxis and rescue treatment. For prophylaxis, patients were randomly assigned to two groups: one group received an intravenous injection of 0.1 mg/kg ondansetron, and the other group received a placebo before surgical incision under double-blind conditions. For rescue treatment, only placebo patients were included; as a rescue medication they received an intravenous injection of 0.1 mg/kg ondansetron or 0.02 mg/kg droperidol according to a prestudy randomization under double-blind conditions. Incidence and severity of PONV (PONV score 0 = no nausea and no retching; 1 = complaining of sickness and retching; 2 = vomiting one or two time in 30 min; 3 = vomiting more than two times in 30 min) was recorded over a 4-h period in the postanesthesia care unit. Within 72 h of the procedure, a follow-up nurse interviewed the parents for late-onset nausea in the children. RESULTS: With regard to prophylaxis, 10% of patients receiving ondansetron had PONV during the 4-h observation period versus 40% of those receiving placebo (P < 0.001). The incidence of vomiting alone (PONV score > or = 2) was 5% and 25%, respectively (P < 0.001). There were no significant differences between ondansetron and droperidol in the treatment of PONV. However, at the end of the 4-h period, ondansetron patients were less sedated than were patients who had received droperidol (P < 0.01). Interviews with parents could be performed for 143 of 200 children (76 ondansetron and 67 placebo). Twenty-four children (15 ondansetron and 9 placebo) showed late-onset PONV after the 4-h observation period but within 24 h of the procedure (19.7% vs. 13.4%; P not significant). CONCLUSIONS: Ondansetron is effective in the prevention of PONV in pediatric patients for the first 4 h after general anesthesia. Lower sedation scores with ondansetron compared with droperidol may be an advantage, especially in ambulatory surgery. However, the incidence of late-onset PONV (> 4-24 h) was not influenced by prophylactic treatment with one dose of ondansetron preoperatively.

Anesthesia, General↗
PubMed1996

Omission of nitrous oxide during anesthesia reduces the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting. A meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative nausea and vomiting are important causes of morbidity after general anesthesia. Nitrous oxide has been implicated as an emetogenic agent in many studies. However, several other trials have failed to sustain this claim. The authors tried to resolve this issue through a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting after anesthesia with or without nitrous oxide. METHODS: Of 37 published studies retrieved by a search of articles indexed on the MEDLINE database from 1966 to 1994, 24 studies (26 trials) with distinct nitrous-oxide and non-nitrous oxide groups were eligible for the meta-analysis. The pooled odds ratio and relative risk were calculated. Post boc subgroup analysis was also performed to qualify the result. RESULTS: The pooled odds ratio was 0.63 (0.53 to 0.75). Omission of nitrous oxide reduced the risk for postoperative nausea and vomiting by 28% (18% to 37%). In the subgroup analysis, the maximal effect of omission of nitrous oxide was seen in female patients. In patients undergoing abdominal surgery and general surgical procedures, the effect of omission of nitrous oxide, although in the same direction, was not significant. CONCLUSION: Omission of nitrous oxide reduced the odds of postoperative nausea and vomiting by 37%, a reduction in risk of 28%.

Adult↗
PubMed1997

Determination of plasma concentrations of propofol associated with 50% reduction in postoperative nausea.

BACKGROUND: Subhypnotic doses of propofol possess direct antiemetic properties. The authors sought to determine the plasma concentration of propofol needed to effectively manage postoperative nausea and vomiting. METHODS: Patients aged 18-70 yr who were classified as American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status 1 or 2 and had surgery during general anesthesia were approached for the study. Only patients who had nausea (verbal rating score > 5 on a 0- to 10-point scale), retching, or vomiting in the postanesthetic care unit participated. Propofol was administered to these patients to achieve target plasma concentrations of 100, 200, 400, and 800 ng/ml using a computer-assisted continuous infusion device. Target concentrations were increased every 15 min until patients described at least a 50% reduction in symptoms on the verbal rating score. An arterial blood sample was obtained at each step. The measured plasma propofol concentrations were used to analyze data. Blood pressure, heart and respiratory rates, arterial blood saturation, sedation score, and overall satisfaction with treatment were recorded. RESULTS: Of the 89 patients who consented to the study, 15 patients met entry criteria and were enrolled. Five of these patients also had retching or vomiting when they entered the study. Fourteen patients responded successfully to treatment. One patient did not achieve the required response at plasma concentrations of 830 ng/ml. Hence the success rate for the treatment of postoperative nausea and vomiting was 93%. Among patients who responded, the median plasma concentration associated with an antiemetic response was 343 ng/ml. There was no difference in sedation scores from baseline and no episodes of desaturation. Hemodynamic parameters were stable during the study. CONCLUSIONS: Propofol is generally efficacious in treating postoperative nausea and vomiting at plasma concentrations that do not produce increased sedation. Simulations indicate that to achieve antiemetic plasma propofol concentrations of 343 ng/ml, a bolus dose of 10 mg followed by an infusion of approximately 10 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1) are necessary.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2000

Subarachnoid meperidine (Pethidine) causes significant nausea and vomiting during labor. The Duke Women's Anesthesia Research Group.

BACKGROUND: The combined spinal-epidural (CSE) technique using bupivicaine-fentanyl has become an established method of pain control during parturition. One limitation is the relatively short duration of effective analgesia produced by bupivicaine-fentanyl. In contrast, subarachnoid meperidine has been shown to provide a long duration of anesthesia in nonobstetric patients. Therefore, the authors tested the hypothesis that subarachnoid meperidine produces a significant increase in the duration of analgesia compared with bupivicaine-fentanyl. METHODS: Based on a power analysis of preliminary data, the authors intended to recruit 90 patients for the study, randomized to three groups: 2.5 mg bupivicaine-25 microg fentanyl, 15 mg meperidine, or 25 mg meperidine. However, after enrolling 34 patients, the study was discontinued because of a significant increase in nausea or vomiting in the study patients. RESULTS: Nausea or vomiting was substantially increased in both meperidine groups compared with the bupivicaine-fentanyl group: 16 with nausea or vomiting in the meperidine groups (n = 21), compared with 1 in the bupivicaine-fentanyl group (n = 11), P = 0.0011. The mean duration of analgesia provided by 25 mg meperidine was 126 +/- 51 min, compared with 98 +/- 29 min for bupivicaine-fentanyl and 90 +/- 67 min for 15 mg meperidine. These data were not significant (P = 0.27). CONCLUSIONS: Although intrathecal meperidine could potentially prolong subarachnoid analgesia during labor, its use was associated with a significant incidence of nausea or vomiting. These data do not support the use of subarachnoid meperidine in doses of 15 or 25 mg for labor analgesia.

Adult↗
PubMed2001

Randomized controlled trial of total intravenous anesthesia with propofol versus inhalation anesthesia with isoflurane-nitrous oxide: postoperative nausea with vomiting and economic analysis.

BACKGROUND: To assess the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting after total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) with propofol versus inhalational anesthesia with isoflurane-nitrous oxide, the authors performed a randomized trial in 2,010 unselected surgical patients in a Dutch academic institution. An economic evaluation was also performed. METHODS: Elective inpatients (1,447) and outpatients (563) were randomly assigned to inhalational anesthesia with isoflurane-nitrous oxide or TIVA with propofol-air. Cumulative incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting was recorded for 72 h by blinded observers. Cost data of anesthetics, antiemetics, disposables, and equipment were collected. Cost differences caused by duration of postanesthesia care unit stay and hospitalization were analyzed. RESULTS: Total intravenous anesthesia reduced the absolute risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting up to 72 h by 15% among inpatients (from 61% to 46%, P < 0.001) and by 18% among outpatients (from 46% to 28%, P < 0.001). This effect was most pronounced in the early postoperative period. The cost of anesthesia was more than three times greater for propofol TIVA. Median duration of stay in the postanesthesia care unit was 135 min after isoflurane versus 115 min after TIVA for inpatients (P < 0.001) and 160 min after isoflurane versus 150 min after TIVA for outpatients (P = 0.039). Duration of hospitalization was equal in both arms. CONCLUSION: Propofol TIVA results in a clinically relevant reduction of postoperative nausea and vomiting compared with isoflurane-nitrous oxide anesthesia (number needed to treat = 6). Both anesthetic techniques were otherwise similar. Anesthesia costs were more than three times greater for propofol TIVA, without economic gains from shorter stay in the postanesthesia care unit

Adult↗
PubMed2002

Electroacupuncture prophylaxis of postoperative nausea and vomiting following pediatric tonsillectomy with or without adenoidectomy.

BACKGROUND: Electrical stimulation of acupuncture point P6 reduces the incidence of postoperative nausea or vomiting (PONV) in adult patients. However, acupressure, laser stimulation of P6, and acupuncture during anesthesia have not been effective for reducing PONV in the pediatric population. The authors studied the effect of electrical P6 acupuncture in awake pediatric patients who had undergone surgery associated with a high incidence of PONV. METHODS: Patients aged 4-18 yr undergoing tonsillectomy with or without adenoidectomy were randomly assigned to acupuncture, sham acupuncture, or control groups. Acupuncture needles at P6 and a neutral point were placed while patients were anesthetized, and low-frequency electrical stimulation was applied to these points for 20 min in the recovery room while the patients were awake (P6 Acu group). This treatment was compared with sham needles along the arm at acupuncture points not associated with antiemesis (sham group) and a no-needle control group. The arms were wrapped to prevent identification of treatment group, and anesthetic, analgesic, and surgical technique were standardized. Assessed outcomes were occurrence of nausea, occurrence and number of episodes of vomiting, time to vomiting, and use of antiemetic rescue medication. RESULTS: One hundred twenty patients were enrolled in the study, 40 per group. There were no differences in age, weight, sex, or opioid administration between groups. The PONV incidence was significantly lower with P6 acupuncture (25 of 40 or 63%; odds ratio, 0.135; number needed to treat, 3.3; P < 0.001) compared with controls (37 of 40 or 93%). Sham puncture had no effect on PONV (35 of 40 or 88%; P = not significant). Occurrence of nausea was significantly less in P6 Acu (24 of 40 or 60%; odds ratio, 0.121; P < 0.01), but not in the sham group (34 of 40 or 85%) compared with the control group (37 of 40 or 93%). Vomiting occurred in 25 of 40 or 63% in P6 Acu; 35 of 40 or 88% in the sham group, and 31 in 40 or 78% in the control group (P = not significant). Patients receiving sham puncture vomited significantly earlier (P < 0.02) and needed more rescue treatment (33 of 40 or 83%; odds ratio, 3.48; P < 0.02) compared with P6 Acu (23 of 40 or 58%) and the control group (24 of 40 or 60%). CONCLUSIONS: Perioperative P6 electroacupuncture in awake patients significantly reduced the occurrence of nausea compared with the sham and control groups, but it did not significantly reduce the incidence or number of episodes of emesis or the use of rescue antiemetics. Sham acupuncture may exacerbate the severity but not the incidence of emesis. The efficacy of P6 acupuncture for PONV prevention is similar to commonly used pharmacotherapies. Its appropriate role in prevention and treatment of PONV requires further study.

Acupuncture Points↗
PubMed2002

P6 acupoint injections are as effective as droperidol in controlling early postoperative nausea and vomiting in children.

BACKGROUND: P6 acupuncture in adults is reported to be an effective preventive treatment for postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). It is not clear, however, whether this technique is effective as a preventive treatment for PONV in children. METHODS: Children undergoing anesthesia and surgery were randomized to four groups: (a) intravenous saline + bilateral P6 acupoint injections (n = 50); (b) intravenous droperidol + bilateral P6 sham acupuncture (n = 49); (c) intravenous saline + bilateral sham point injections (n = 43); (d) intravenous saline +bilateral P6 sham acupuncture (n = 45). The perioperative anesthetic technique was standardized in all subjects. The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) was evaluated in postanesthesia care unit (PACU) and 24 h after surgery. RESULTS: Incidence of nausea in the PACU was significantly lower in the acupoint group as compared with the sham point group (32% vs. 56%, P = 0.029) and P6 sham group (32% vs. 64%, P = 0.002) but not as compared with the droperidol group (32% vs. 46%, P = ns). Similarly, subjects in the acupoint group had a significantly lower incidence of vomiting in the PACU as compared with the sham point group (12% vs. 33%, P = 0.026) and P6 sham group (12% vs. 31%, P = 0.029) but not as compared with the droperidol group (12% vs. 18%, P = ns). The combined incidence of early PONV was also lower in the acupoint group as compared with the sham point group (P = 0.045) and P6 sham group (P = 0.004) but not as compared with the droperidol group (42% vs. 51%, P = ns). Finally, significantly fewer subjects in the acupoint group required intravenous ondansetron as an initial rescue therapy (P = 0.024). At 24 h after surgery, however, the incidence of late PONV was similar among the four study groups (P = ns). CONCLUSION: In children, P6 acupoint injections are as effective as droperidol in controlling early postoperative nausea and vomiting.

Acupuncture↗
PubMed2005

Prolongation of QTc interval after postoperative nausea and vomiting treatment by droperidol or ondansetron.

BACKGROUND: At dosages above 0.1 mg/kg, droperidol induces a dose-dependent QTc interval prolongation. Although subject to controversy, low-dose droperidol has recently been suspected to induce cardiac arrhythmias. Hence, 5-hydroxytryptamine type 3 antagonists have become the first-line drug for management of postoperative nausea and vomiting. These drugs are also known to prolong the QTc interval at high dosages. This study describes QTc interval changes associated with postoperative nausea and vomiting treatment by droperidol or ondansetron at low doses. METHODS: Eighty-five patients with postoperative nausea and vomiting were included in this prospective, single-blind study. Patients received either 0.75 mg intravenous droperidol (n = 43) or 4 mg intravenous ondansetron (n = 42). Electrocardiographic recordings were obtained before administration of antiemetic drug and then 1, 2, 3, 5, 10, and 15 min after. Electrocardiographic monitoring was maintained for 3 h in eight patients in each group. RESULTS: The QTc interval was prolonged (> 450 ms in men, > 470 ms in women) in 21% of the patients before antiemetic drug administration. This was significantly correlated with lower body temperature and longer duration of anesthesia. Compared with predrug QTc measurement, both antiemetics were associated with a significant QTc interval prolongation (P < 0.0001). The mean maximal QTc interval prolongation was 17 +/- 9 ms after droperidol occurring at the second minute and 20 +/- 13 ms after ondansetron at the third minute (both P < 0.0001). Compared with predrug measurement, the QTc interval was significantly lower after the 90th minute in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Droperidol and ondansetron induced similar clinically relevant QTc interval prolongations. When used in treatment of postoperative nausea and vomiting, a situation where prolongation of the QTc interval seems to occur, the safety of 5-hydroxytryptamine type 3 antagonists may not be superior to that of low-dose droperidol.

Adult↗