防治术后恶心呕吐的研究进展

背景 术后恶心呕吐(postoperative nausea and vomiting,PONV)是麻醉手术后最常见的并发症之一,其发生率可高达30％.虽然国际上已公布了防治PONV共识和指南,但尚存在缺陷的PONV预测模型和复杂的防治策略成为临床防治PONV最大的障碍. 目的 探究在临床工作中防治PONV的主要障碍,为临床防治PONV工作提供更有效的途径. 内容 尚存在缺陷的PONV预测模型和复杂的防治策略是临床防治PONV最大的障碍,多模式防治PONV是一种简单、有效的预防PONV发生的方法. 趋向 多模式防治PONV更容易被临床麻醉医生接受和应用,新型的抗PONV药物和传统经典的抗呕吐药物为临床多模式防治提供了更大的选择空间.     

Preventing Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting After Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind Study

Background

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) are potential complications in patients after laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). Combination antiemetic therapy often is effective for preventing PONV in patients undergoing LC, and combinations of antiemetics targeting different sites of activity may be more effective than monotherapy.

Objective

The aim of this study was to compare the administration of a subhypnotic dose of propofol combined with dexamethasone with one of propofol combined with metoclopramide to prevent PONV after LC.

Methods

Sixty adult patients scheduled for LC were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 treatment groups. The patients in group 1 received 0.5 mg/kg propofol plus 8 mg dexamethasone, and those in group 2 received 0.5 mg/kg propofol plus 0.2 mg/kg metoclopramide. The number of patients experiencing nausea and vomiting at 0 to 4, 4 to 12, and 12 to 24 hours postoperatively and as well as additional use of rescue antiemetics were recorded.

Results

The total PONV rates up to 24 hours postanesthesia were 23.3% and 50% for group 1 and group 2, respectively. Comparisons of the data revealed that at 0 to 4 hours, the number of patients experiencing vomiting was 6 (20%) in group 1 and14 (46.7%) in group 2 (P = 0.028). The frequency of vomiting in group 1 was significantly lower than that for group 2 (P = 0.028), and the rate of rescue antiemetic use in group 2 was higher than that in group 1 (20% vs 46.7%; P = 0.028). In the evaluation of PONV based on the nausea and vomiting scale scores, the mean PONV score was 0.4 (0.2) in group 1 compared with 1.0 (0.2) in group 2 (P = 0.017). There were no significant differences between the values at 4 to 12 hours and at 12 to 24 hours. The frequency of adverse reactions (respiratory depression: 1.3%, 1.3%; laryngospasm: 1.3%, 0%; cough: 1.3%, 0%; hiccup: 1.3%, 0%;) was not significantly different in the 2 groups.

Conclusions

Administration of a subhypnotic dose of 0.5 mg/kg propofol plus 8 mg dexamethasone at the end of surgery was more effective than administration of 0.5 mg/kg propofol plus metoclopramide in preventing PONV in the early postoperative period in adult patients undergoing LC.     

格拉司琼预防曲马多术后静脉自控镇痛恶心呕吐的疗效观察

目的观察格拉司琼用于预防曲马多术后静脉自控镇痛恶心呕吐的疗效。方法择期手术患者90例,ASA分级Ⅰ-Ⅱ,随机分为A、B、C 3组,每组30例。A组曲马多900 mg＋生理盐水至100 mL电子泵静脉镇痛;B组手术结束静脉注射氟哌利多2.5 mg后,以氟哌利多5 mg＋曲马多900 mg＋生理盐水至100 mL电子泵静脉镇痛;C组手术结束静脉注射格拉司琼3 mg后,以曲马多900 mg＋生理盐水至100 mL电子泵静脉镇痛,观察术后4、8、12、244、8 h恶心呕吐的发生情况。结果与对照组比较,格拉司琼组嗜睡的发生率无明显变化（P〉0.05）,但氟哌利多组嗜睡的发生率明显增加（P〈0.01）。格拉司琼组恶心、呕吐的发生率分别为16.7%、13.3%,与氯哌利多组（83.3%、73.3%）、对照组（96.7%、93.3%）相比,均有极显著性差异（P〈0.01）。对照组和氟哌利多组各有6例和3例因呕吐明显而用格拉司琼止吐。结论格拉司琼作为新型的强效止吐药与曲马多术后静脉自控镇痛复合应用具有用药方便,镇痛防恶心呕吐效果完全、耐受性好等优点,临床应用具有广阔前景。     

盐酸帕洛诺司琼预防硬膜外自控镇痛所致恶心呕吐的分析

【摘要】　目的 观察盐酸帕洛诺司琼预防术后硬膜外腔自控镇痛引起恶心呕吐副作用的效果。方法 选取择期硬膜外麻醉下开腹胆囊切除术后施行硬膜外腔自控镇痛(PCEA)的患者60例,PCEA采用吗啡6 mg+0.125%布比卡因混合液(100 mL)。将患者分为盐酸帕洛诺司琼组,氟哌啶组和对照组(每20例),在术前静脉给予盐酸帕洛诺司琼0.25 mg,氟哌啶2.5 mg和生理盐水100 mL。术后记录使用PCEA镇痛期间的恶心例数及其严重程度;呕吐例数及次数;出现呕吐后给予胃复安,非那根,地塞米松等药物止吐的控制率。结果 对照组13例出现Ⅰ~Ⅲ级恶心呕吐的不良反应,盐酸帕洛诺司琼组患者1例1级恶心呕吐的发生,与其他两组相比P<0.001;氟哌啶组出现5例Ⅰ~Ⅱ级恶心呕吐的,与对照组相比P=0.022。结论 术前预防性给予盐酸帕洛诺司琼可显著降低胆囊切除术后PCEA引起恶心呕吐副作用的发生。     

胃复安、非那根联合用药与格拉斯琼在防治化疗引起呕吐的疗效观察

目的观察以胃复安、非那根联合用药防治顺铂化疗引起呕吐的疗效。方法随机分为两组，一组为观察组，接受胃复安、非那根联合止吐，一组为对照组，接受格拉斯琼止吐。结果联合用药取得与格拉斯琼相似的止吐效果。结论胃复安＋非那根药价低，疗效好，在非禁忌病人及经济困难病人可选用。     

Postoperative nausea and vomiting prophylaxis: The efficacy of a novel antiemetic drug (palonosetron) combined with dexamethasone

BackgroundPalonosetron is a new, potent, and long-acting 5HT3-receptors antagonist that had been approved by the FDA for use in postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) prophylaxis. This study is designed to evaluate its efficacy combined with dexamethasone in PONV prophylaxis in highrisk patients scheduled for laparoscopic surgeries.MethodsIn this double-blind, active-controlled study, 150 patients aged 20–55 years, ASA I–II, and with Apfel’s PONV score 2–4 were equally randomized to receive dexamethasone 8 mg before anesthesia induction and saline 30 min before the end of surgery (group D + S), dexamethasone 8 mg before anesthesia induction and metoclopramide 25 mg 30 min before the end of surgery (group D + M), or dexamethasone 8 mg combined with palonosetron 0.075 mg before anesthesia induction and saline 30 min before the end of surgery (group D + P). Incidences of early and late PONV, complete response, adverse events from antiemetics used, and overall patients’ satisfaction were recorded.ResultsThe incidence of PONV was comparable in the three groups 0–6 h postoperatively. Palonosetron–dexamethasone and dexamethasone–metoclopramide combination therapies significantly reduced the incidence of PONV at 6–12 h postoperatively compared to dexamethasone monotherapy (12% and 16%, vs. 36%, respectively, with P < 0.05). Moreover, palonosetron–dexamethasone combination therapy significantly reduced the incidence of PONV at 12–24 h postoperatively compared to both dexamethasone monotherapy (16% vs. 48%, P < 0.01), and dexamethasone–metoclopramide combination therapy (16% vs. 40%, P < 0.05). The incidence of adverse drug effects was comparable in the three groups. The overall patients’ satisfaction was significantly higher in palonosetron–dexamethasone combination therapy compared to other groups.ConclusionPalonosetron–dexamethasone combination is effective and safe in PONV (early and late) prophylaxis in high-risk patients undergoing laparoscopic surgeries with known high-risk of PONV.