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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

12 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2026

Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting in Early Breast Cancer Patients Receiving Adjuvant Chemotherapy With Fluorouracil, Epirubicin, Cyclophosphamide Followed by Docetaxel Versus an Anthracycline-Free Regimen With Docetaxel, Cyclophosphamide-Results From a Randomized Clinical Trial.

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) remains an important side effect despite new antiemetic drugs. This study tried to understand the occurrence of CINV in patients receiving two different chemotherapy regimens. As part of the randomized controlled clinical trial SUCCESS C (NCT00847444), 1582 of the 3463 patients completed CINV diaries. Patients were randomized to receive either chemotherapy with FEC (5-fluorouracil, epirubicin, cyclophosphamide followed by docetaxel) or TC (docetaxel, cyclophosphamide). CINV was evaluated hourly using a specially designed questionnaire. Endpoints of the study were complete response (no emesis) and total control (no nausea and no emesis) and were assessed with Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression analyses over three chemotherapy cycles. Eight hundred fourteen patients received FEC and 768 received TC; patients and tumor characteristics were similar in both groups. Patients receiving FEC had significantly more nausea and vomiting, with the main difference in the first 12 h. In the first cycle, the 0-12-h nausea/emesis-free rates were 70%/41% for FEC and 91/76% for TC. By 24 h after chemotherapy, the rates were 65%/33% (FEC) and 85%/60% (TC). The differences were similar in cycles 2 and 3. The detailed analysis of CINV in the study is unique and paves the way for modern CINV analysis of new therapeutics such as antibody-drug conjugates.

Adult↗

PubMed2025

Efficacy of esketamine in reducing nausea and vomiting after anesthesia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) are significant perioperative challenges. This study evaluated the efficacy of perioperative esketamine in preventing PONV. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We systematically searched Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library from inception to August 2025 for randomized controlled trials investigating the effect of perioperative esketamine on PONV. The primary outcome was PONV incidence. Secondary outcomes included time to first flatus, postoperative pain degree, anxiety scores, agitation, anesthesia recovery time, and post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) stay duration. Data were analyzed using RevMan 5.4 and STATA 15.0 software. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses were performed to assess result stability and explore potential sources of heterogeneity. RESULTS: Thirty-eight randomized trials (3,425 patients) were included. Esketamine reduced the risk of nausea (RR=0.69, 95% CI: 0.53-0.90) and vomiting (RR=0.75, 95% CI: 0.57-0.98), shortened time to first flatus (SMD=-0.81, 95% CI: -1.48 to -0.15), and decreased rescue analgesic needs within 2 days (SMD=0.32, 95% CI: 0.2-0.5). However, it prolonged anesthesia recovery time (SMD=0.97, 95% CI: 0.28-1.67) and PACU stay (SMD=0.76, 95% CI: 0.27-1.26). CONCLUSIONS: Perioperative esketamine may reduce PONV and aid gastrointestinal recovery, but its potential to delay anesthesia recovery and PACU discharge requires consideration. Further studies are needed to clarify its risk-benefit profile. DATE OF FIRST SUBMISSION TO PROSPERO: 10 March 2024. DATE OF THE START OF STUDY SCREENING AGAINST ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: 21 March 2024.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Impact of oliceridine versus sufentanil on postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing thyroid surgery: a prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a common complication following thyroid surgery, often exacerbated by opioid use. Oliceridine, a novel G protein-biased μ-opioid receptor agonist, may reduce opioid-related adverse events. This study aimed to compare the impact of oliceridine versus sufentanil on the incidence and severity of PONV in patients undergoing thyroid surgery. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this prospective, double-blind, randomised controlled trial conducted between May 2025 and February 2026, 232 patients scheduled for thyroid surgery were randomly assigned to receive either oliceridine or sufentanil for intraoperative analgesia. The primary outcome was the incidence of PONV during the first 48 h postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included PONV severity, need for rescue anti-emetics, postoperative pain scores, recovery quality, and other adverse events. RESULTS: The incidence of PONV within 48 h postoperatively was significantly lower in the oliceridine group [13/107 (12%)] compared with the sufentanil group [31/110 (28%)] (OR = 0.35, 95% CI: 0.17-0.72, p = 0.006). Postoperative pain scores, rescue analgesia requirements, and Quality of Recovery-15 scores were comparable between the two groups (p > 0.05). Besides, exploratory unadjusted analyses revealed fewer rescue anti-emetics: O group 8/107 (8%) vs S group 25/110 (23%) (OR = 0.27, 95% CI: 0.12-0.64, p = 0.002); and less abdominal distension: O group 4/107 (4%) vs S group 19/110 (17%) (OR = 0.19, 95% CI: 0.06-0.57, p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: For young ASA I-II patients undergoing thyroid surgery, oliceridine yields adequate postoperative analgesia and lower PONV rates versus sufentanil. Additional trials involving high-intensity surgical procedures are needed to confirm consistent equivalence.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Comparison of opioid-free versus opioid-based total intravenous anaesthesia in elderly patients undergoing short-duration surgery: a randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Older adults who undergo short-duration surgery are vulnerable to opioid-related complications. It is uncertain whether an opioid-free total intravenous anaesthesia (OFA) can reduce these events. We aimed to determine whether OFA reduces the incidence of major postoperative adverse events compared with standard opioid-based total intravenous anaesthesia (OBA). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This single-center randomized clinical trial was conducted in China. From May to August 2025, 400 patients aged ≥60 years undergoing elective, short-duration surgery (anticipated duration of less than 90 min) were randomized 1:1 to receive either OFA (n = 200) or OBA (n = 200). The primary outcome was a composite of postoperative hypoxemia, delirium, or nausea and vomiting (PONV) within 48 h. RESULTS: A total of 400 randomized patients (mean [SD] age, 69.5 [7.0] years; 125 [31.3%] women). The primary composite outcome occurred in 50 patients (25.0%) in the OFA group and 87 patients (43.5%) in the OBA group (adjusted odds ratio, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.25 to 0.62; p < .001). Among the OFA group had a lower incidence of hypoxemia (15.0% vs 32.0%) and PONV (8.0% vs 16.0%). Intraoperative hemodynamic stability was greater in the OFA group. However, the OFA group had a higher incidence of intraoperative bradycardia (10.0% vs 3.0%; p = .005) and longer extubation times (mean, 9.5 vs 7.2 min; p < .001). CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that OFA is a viable alternative to opioid-based anesthesia for improving postoperative outcomes by reducing the incidence of hypoxemia and PONV in this population, while warranting careful management of its associated side effects. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR2500102550.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Esketamine vs. sufentanil for quality of recovery after outpatient gynecological surgery: a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Perioperative administration of esketamine has been reported to improve early quality of recovery (QoR). However, data on its effects in outpatient surgery are limited. This study aimed to assess the impact of esketamine on QoR in patients undergoing outpatient gynecological procedures. METHODS: In this investigator-initiated, double-blind, randomized clinical trial, patients aged 18-65 years scheduled for outpatient gynecological surgery under sedation were allocated to receive esketamine (0.2 mg/kg) or sufentanil (0.1 μg/kg) combined with propofol (1.5-3 mg/kg). The primary outcome was quality of recovery on postoperative day (POD) 1. Secondary outcomes included quality of recovery on POD2, sedation success rate, length of post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) stay, injection pain, postoperative pain, nausea and vomiting, fatigue, patient and clinician satisfaction, sleep quality, and anxiety and depression. RESULTS: A total of 126 patients were randomized, with 63 assigned to the esketamine group and 63 to the sufentanil group. Of these, 125 patients were included in the final analysis (62 in the esketamine group and 63 in the sufentanil group), as one patient lacked follow-up data. The mean (SD) QoR-15 score on POD1 was 137.9 (14.5) in the esketamine group and 137.8 (10.7) in the sufentanil group, with no significant difference between groups (absolute difference, 0.2; 95% CI, -4.2 to 4.6; p = 0.93). For secondary outcomes, the esketamine group had a longer PACU stay (median, 28.0 vs. 23.0 min; p < 0.001), a lower incidence of severe injection pain (22.6% vs. 50.8%; p = 0.002), a higher proportion of patients with pain scores ≥ 4 at 30 min postoperatively (30.6% vs. 6.3%; p = 0.001), and higher fatigue scores (median, 3.0 vs. 2.0; p = 0.01). Other secondary outcomes did not differ significantly between groups. CONCLUSION: Among patients undergoing sedation for outpatient gynecological procedures, esketamine did not significantly improve quality of recovery on POD1 compared to sufentanil. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR2500098466.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Effect of transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation on postoperative pain in patients undergoing thoracoscopic partial lung resection: a randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative pain after thoracic surgery remains common and challenging. Transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation (taVNS) is a noninvasive neuromodulation technique with potential analgesic effects. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of taVNS for postoperative pain management in patients undergoing thoracoscopic partial lung resection. METHODS: Adults undergoing thoracoscopic partial lung resection were randomized to active or sham taVNS. The primary outcome was cough pain intensity at 48h post-surgery, assessed by Numeric Rating Scale (NRS). Secondary outcomes included cough pain at 24h and 72h, resting pain, moderate-to-severe pain incidence, opioid consumption, quality of recovery, postoperative pulmonary complications , chest tube duration, hospital stay, postoperative nausea/vomiting, and adverse events. RESULTS: Among 119 analyzed patients (active n = 60, sham n = 59), active taVNS reduced cough pain scores at 24h, 48h, and 72h postoperatively, as well as resting pain (p < 0.05). It also lowered the incidence of moderate-to-severe cough pain at 24h and 48h, reduced cumulative postoperative opioid use at 24h and 72h, and decreased rescue analgesia on postoperative day 3 (p < 0.05). Active taVNS was associated with a lower incidence of postoperative pneumothorax (p < 0.05). No serious adverse events occurred. CONCLUSION: Perioperative taVNS was associated with a modest analgesic benefit and reduced postoperative opioid requirements after thoracoscopic partial lung resection. The observed reduction in postoperative pneumothorax requires cautious interpretation, and further multicenter trials are needed to determine its clinical utility.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Risk of adverse events in elotuzumab-treated patients with multiple myeloma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Elotuzumab, an anti-SLAMF7 monoclonal antibody for multiple myeloma (MM), lacks a comprehensive safety profile from meta-analysis. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE and CENTRAL through February 13, 2025 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating elotuzumab in MM. Pooled relative risks(RRs) of adverse events observed in elotuzumab-containing regimens versus control therapies. RESULTS: 6 RCTs (N=1,736) were included. Elotuzumabsignificantly reduced incidence of neutropenia (RR = 0.86, 95% CI: 0.76-0.98), but increased risks of cough (RR = 1.41, 95% CI: 0.96-2.09), pneumonia (RR = 1.30, 95% CI: 1.07-1.59), diarrhea (RR = 1.16, 95% CI: 1.05-1.30), pyrexia (RR = 1.47, 95% CI: 1.10-1.96) and infections (RR = 1.09, 95% CI: 1.03-1.15). No significant differences were observed for anemia, thrombocytopenia, respiratory infections, nausea, appetite loss, back pain, muscle spasms, peripheral edema, insomnia, rash, pruritus, fatigue, or hypokalemia. For grade 3-4 events, elotuzumab was associated with higher risks of lymphopenia (RR = 1.86, 95% CI: 1.31-2.64, p = 0.0005, I2 = 9%), diarrhea (RR = 1.47, 95% CI: 1.00-2.17), pneumonia (RR = 1.57, 95% CI: 1.11-2.23), cataracts (RR = 2.87, 95% CI: 1.15-7.21) and infections (RR = 1.30, 95% CI: 1.04-1.62). CONCLUSION: Elotuzumab in MM appears safe but with a specific adverse events pattern : lower neutropenia, but higher respiratory, gastrointestinal, metabolic, and infectious events. Differences may be influenced by longer treatment and corticosteroid use; therefore, interpretation of outcomes such as hyperglycemia and cataracts requires particular caution.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Effect of intraoperative 40-hz gamma-frequency auditory stimulation on postoperative delirium in older adults undergoing major surgery: a randomized clinical trial protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Postoperative delirium (POD) is a common and clinically significant complication among older adults undergoing major surgery under general anesthesia. Gamma-frequency (40-Hz) auditory stimulation has demonstrated potential neuroprotective and cognition-enhancing effects, suggesting a plausible role in perioperative delirium prevention. However, direct clinical evidence supporting intraoperative 40-Hz auditory stimulation in reducing POD remains limited, warranting rigorous evaluation in a randomized trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This prospective, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial will enroll 550 older adults scheduled for major noncardiac, nonneurosurgical surgery under general anesthesia. Participants will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either the active stimulation group, receiving intraoperative 40-Hz gamma-frequency auditory stimulation delivered via headphones for 2 h following successful anesthesia induction, or the sham stimulation group, wearing headphones without active auditory output. The primary outcome is the incidence of POD on postoperative day 1 though 3, assessed using the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM) or the CAM for the ICU (CAM-ICU). Secondary outcomes include POD severity, sleep quality, pain scores, analgesic consumption, the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), rescue antiemetic use, duration of post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) stay, length of hospital stay, quality of postoperative recovery, incidence of perioperative adverse events; postoperative morbidity, health-related quality of life, and all-cause 30-day mortality. DISCUSSION: This trial will determine whether intraoperative 40-Hz gamma-frequency auditory stimulation reduces the incidence of POD among older adults undergoing major surgery under general anesthesia. If efficacious, this noninvasive intervention could constitute a feasible perioperative strategy to mitigate delirium risk and enhance postoperative recovery. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2500115156).

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Feasibility and barriers to same-day physical therapy following lumbar fusion surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility of same-day (postoperative day 0; POD0) physical therapy (PT) following lumbar fusion and to identify factors associated with failure to participate. METHODS: This retrospective study analyzed prospectively collected data from patients undergoing single-level posterior spinal fusion (PSF), with or without anterior (ALIF) or lateral (LLIF) interbody fusion, between January and December 2024 at a single institution. A standardized POD0 PT protocol was implemented for eligible patients. Patients were categorized into two groups: successful POD0 PT (ambulatory on POD0) and unable to participate. Demographic and surgical variables were compared between groups. Reasons for inability to participate were recorded and categorized. RESULTS: Among 129 patients in whom POD0 PT was attempted, 84 (65%) successfully participated, while 45 (35%) were unable. There were no significant differences in age, sex, BMI, ASA class, operative time, estimated blood loss, or surgical approach between groups. Patients who successfully completed POD0 PT had a significantly shorter hospital length of stay compared to those who did not (3.4 ± 1.6 vs 5.8 ± 2.9 days, P < 0.001), with no differences in complication rates, discharge disposition, emergency department visits, or reoperation rates. The most common barriers to POD0 PT were postoperative pain, medical issues (e.g., orthostatic hypotension, nausea, dizziness), and anesthesia-related somnolence. Less common factors included postoperative restrictions and logistical issues such as brace availability. CONCLUSIONS: POD0 PT following lumbar fusion is feasible in the majority of patients and is associated with a shorter hospital stay without increased complications. Failure to participate was not associated with the baseline patient or surgical characteristics evaluated in this study. Instead, the most common barriers were postoperative pain, transient medical issues, and anesthesia-related somnolence, suggesting that optimization of modifiable perioperative factors may improve the implementation of POD0 PT.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Oliceridine used for patient-controlled analgesia on postoperative quality of recovery in patients undergoing laparoscopic gynecological tumour resection: a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Oliceridine, a novel biased μ-opioid receptor agonist, is widely used perioperatively, yet limited data exists regarding its impact on postoperative quality of recovery. This study investigated the effect of oliceridine-based patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) on postoperative quality of recovery among patients undergoing laparoscopic gynecological tumour resection. METHODS: Ninety‑four female patients scheduled for elective laparoscopic gynecological tumour resection were included. Patients were randomized to two groups: oliceridine group (loading dose 1.5 mg, PCIA 0.55 mg/kg) or sufentanil group (loading dose 10 μg, PCIA 3 μg/kg). The primary outcome was the Quality of Recovery-40 (QoR-40) score on postoperative day 1. The secondary outcomes included the QoR-40 score, the numeric rating scale (NRS) pain score, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale-Anxiety (HADS-A) score, the Fatigue, Resistance, Ambulation, Illness and Loss of weight (FRAIL) index and adverse events within 3 postoperative days. RESULTS: Higher QoR-40 scores were found in the oliceridine group on postoperative day 1 (182.9 ± 3.1 versus 177.5 ± 3.9, p < 0.001). Compared with the sufentanil group, the oliceridine group showed better QoR-40 scores within 3 days after operation. No significant differences were observed in NRS pain scores or HADS-A scores between the two groups (all p > 0.05). However, the median FRAIL score in the oliceridine group was lower on postoperative day 2 (p = 0.018). CONCLUSION: Oliceridine used in PCIA improves early postoperative recovery quality of patients undergoing laparoscopic gynecological tumour resection. It provides analgesic effect comparable to sufentanil and lowers incidences of postoperative frailty, nausea and vomiting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR.org.cn, identifier: ChiCTR2400094271.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Comparing the efficacy and safety of unilateral versus bilateral spinal anesthesia: a meta-analysis and systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Unilateral spinal anesthesia has gained increasing attention in recent years. Emerging evidence suggests that it provides comparable analgesia to conventional bilateral spinal anesthesia while reducing adverse effects, and its efficacy and safety compared to bilateral spinal anesthesia remains controversial. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate and compare the efficacy and safety of unilateral versus bilateral spinal anesthesia. DESIGN: Systematic reviews and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). DATA SOURCES: A systematic search was conducted across PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library from inception to December 10, 2024. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Included studies were randomized controlled trials involving adult patients (≥18 years) undergoing surgery under spinal anesthesia, comparing unilateral versus bilateral spinal anesthesia for efficacy and adverse effects. Studies that focused exclusively on either unilateral or bilateral spinal anesthesia were excluded. The comparator group used the same local anesthetic as the experimental group, with no restrictions on adjuncts (e.g. fentanyl, morphine). RESULTS: Nineteen randomized controlled trials including 1191 patients met the inclusion criteria. Compared with bilateral spinal anesthesia, unilateral spinal anesthesia has a longer onset of sensory blockade (MD = 2.58, 95% CI: 0.93 to 4.22, p = 0.002), a shorter duration of sensory blockade (MD = -27.83, 95% CI: -39.25 to -16.42, p < 0.00001). In addition, unilateral spinal anesthesia significantly reduced the incidence of hypotension (RR = 0.40, 95% CI: 0.31 to 0.52, p < 0.0001), nausea and vomiting (RR = 0.20, 95% CI: 0.07 to 0.56, p = 0.002), and post-dural puncture headache (RR = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.23 to 0.81, p = 0.009). No statistically significant differences were observed in bradycardia and urinary retention. Collectively, these findings support unilateral spinal anesthesia as a strategy that may enhance perioperative safety while maintaining adequate anesthetic efficacy in appropriately selected patients. CONCLUSIONS: Unilateral spinal anesthesia may offer a favorable balance between anesthetic efficacy and safety compared with bilateral spinal anesthesia, although its clinical utility may depend on surgical duration and patient characteristics.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Comparison of short-term clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction between intraoral scanning and conventional impressions for complete-arch implant prostheses: a pilot RCT.

OBJECTIVE: To compare framework passive fit, subjective evaluations, and short-term clinical outcomes between conventional impressions (CI) and intraoral scanning (IOS) for complete-arch implant-supported fixed dental prostheses (CIFDPs). METHODS: In this randomized controlled trial, 22 patients were allocated to the CI or IOS groups. All participants received a definitive one-piece CIFDP. The primary outcome was framework passive fit, assessed using the Vision and Tactile Score (V&T score), which included framework lift-off, the single-screw test, the full-screw test, smoothness of screw insertion, and radiographic gap assessment. Secondary outcomes included operator evaluation, patient satisfaction using a visual analog scale (VAS), early implant survival, marginal bone loss (MBL), modified Plaque Index (mPII), and complications at the 6-month follow-up. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients were enrolled (CI: n = 11; IOS: n = 11), and one patient in the CI group was lost to follow-up. No statistically significant difference in the V&T score was observed between the CI and IOS groups (4.66 ± 0.17 vs. 4.65 ± 0.28; P = 0.93). The operator reported greater nervousness during the CI procedure than during IOS (21.82 ± 15.69 vs. 8.64 ± 7.47; P < 0.05). Patients in the CI group reported significantly greater discomfort, including nausea and anxiety, than those in the IOS group (P < 0.05). At the 6-month follow-up, the early implant survival rate was 100% in both groups. No significant differences were found between the groups in MBL (0.09 ± 0.09 vs. 0.06 ± 0.10 mm; P = 0.43) or mPII (0.10 ± 0.12 vs. 0.10 ± 0.28; P = 0.99). CONCLUSION: IOS and CI achieved comparable short-term clinical outcomes in patients who met the predefined inclusion criteria, including controlled implant number, spacing, and angulation. IOS provided a more favorable experience for both operators and patients. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: In complete-arch implant restorations, intraoral scanning may provide clinical outcomes comparable to those of conventional impressions while improving patient comfort.

Humans↗