The prevention of postoperative vomiting following strabismus surgery in children

Children recovering from anaesthesia for strabismus surgery are particularly prone to nausea and vomiting as a result of intraoperative vagus irritation. Besides being disturbing to the patient, vomiting can be dangerous during emergence from anesthesia and can result in delayed discharge. Droperidol is a powerful antiemetic drug that has been shown to reduce the incidence and severity of postoperative nausea and vomiting in pediatric strabismus patients, although the best timing for administration is not clear. MATERIAL AND METHODS. We compared three randomized groups totalling 61 patients. Droperidol 0.075 mg/kg i.v. was given either at induction of anesthesia after intubation (n = 20) or during the last muscle suture (n = 21). The third group received no antiemetic treatment. The patients' ages ranged from 3 to 14 years (mean 5.9 +/- 2.84 years). There was no difference in age or sex between the three groups. Anesthesia was standardized with rectal midazolam premedication, atropine, thiopental, succinylcholine, O2/N2O = 1:2, enflurane, intubation, and a gastric tube. RESULTS. Nausea, retching, or vomiting occurred in 2/20 children (10%) given droperidol preoperatively, 4/21 children (19%) with droperidol during the operation, and 9/20 children (45%) with no antiemetic treatment. The difference between groups I and III was significant (p less than 0.05). Comparison of groups II and III and groups I and II showed no statistical significance. Operation time was similar in each group and there was no delay in time of extubation. In each group 1 case of hypotension occurred. No child showed extrapyramidal symptoms. The lower incidence of vomiting in all study groups compared to the literature is thought to be due to three factors: (1) emptying the stomach at the end of the operation by a gastric tube, which is removed before extubation; (2) avoidance of opioids; (3) surgical procedure being done by a very experienced surgeon in 57/61 children (12 vomiting versus 45 not vomiting) in contrast to 3/4 children vomiting postoperatively after surgery by a less experienced surgeon. CONCLUSIONS. We recommend preoperative droperidol 75 micrograms/kg i.v. as the best prophylaxis of postoperative emesis without severe side effects in pediatric strabismus surgery.     

Comparison of anesthetic maintenance and recovery with propofol versus sevoflurane combined with remifentanil in craniotomy for supratentorial neoplasm

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of propofol versus sevoflurane associated with remifentanil on the maintenance of anesthesia and on recovery in patients undergoing elective supratentorial craniotomy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Prospective randomized trial enrolling 90 patients scheduled for excision of a brain neoplasm. All received an infusion of remifentanil at a dose of 0.5 microg x Kg(-1) x min(-1) until tracheal intubation and then 0.25 microg x Kg(-1) x min(-1) during surgery. Induction was achieved with propofol and anesthesia was maintained with either sevoflurane at a maximum alveolar concentration of 0.4 (45 patients) or propofol by target controlled infusion at a concentration of 2.5 microg x mL(-1) (45 patients, group P). Variables assessed were hemodynamic stability during anesthesia and times and quality of recovery from anesthesia (eye opening, initiation of spontaneous ventilation, extubation, cough reflex, and temporal and spacial orientation 3 minutes after extubation. During the first 24 hours after surgery, pain intensity was evaluated on a verbal visual analog scale (VAS) and the incidence of nausea and vomiting was recorded. RESULTS: Times until eye opening upon request and until extubation were significantly shorter in the sevoflurane group than in the propofol group: 3.7 (SD, 1.2) minutes vs 5 (3.1) minutes, respectively, for eye opening and 6.6 (1.2) minutes vs 8.1 (3.3) minutes for extubation (P<0.01). The incidence of nausea and vomiting was significantly higher in the sevoflurane group (40% vs 13%, respectively, P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Combining remifentanil with propofol or with sevoflurane provides satisfactory anesthesia during elective supratentorial craniotomy to remove a brain neoplasm. Hemodynamic stability is appropriate and recovery from anesthesia is rapid.     

Intrathecal fentanyl is superior to intravenous ondansetron for the prevention of perioperative nausea during cesarean delivery with spinal anesthesia

This study compares intrathecal (IT) fentanyl with IV ondansetron for preventing intraoperative nausea and vomiting during cesarean deliveries performed with spinal anesthesia. Thirty healthy parturients presenting for elective cesarean delivery with standardized bupivacaine spinal anesthesia were randomized to receive 20 microg IT fentanyl (Group F) or 4 mg IV ondansetron (Group O) by using double-blinded methodology. At eight specific intervals during the surgery, a blinded observer questioned the patient about nausea (1 = nausea, 0 = no nausea), observed for the presence of retching or vomiting (1 = vomiting or retching, 0 = no vomiting or retching), and recorded a verbal pain score (0-10, 0 = no pain, 10 = worst pain imaginable). Cumulative nausea, vomiting, and pain scores were calculated as the sum of the eight measurements. Intraoperative nausea was decreased in the IT fentanyl group compared with the IV ondansetron group: the median (interquartile range) difference in nausea scores was 1 (1, 2), P = 0.03. The incidence of vomiting and treatment for vomiting was not different (P = 0.7). The IT fentanyl group had a lower cumulative perioperative pain score than the IV ondansetron group; the median difference in the cumulative pain score was 12 (8, 16) (P = 0.0007). The IT fentanyl group required less supplementary intraoperative analgesia. The median difference in the cumulative fentanyl dose was 100 (75, 100) microg fentanyl, (P = 0.0002).     

The effects of systolic arterial blood pressure variations on postoperative nausea and vomiting

In this clinical study, we tested the hypothesis that a marked systolic blood pressure decrease >35% (DeltaSBP >35%) from preanesthetic baseline during the induction and maintenance of anesthesia is associated with more postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). In 300 ASA physical status I and II women undergoing elective gynecological surgery with general anesthesia, the maximum DeltaSBP during the induction as well as maintenance of general anesthesia were calculated. Observers blinded to hemodynamic variables assessed the incidence of PONV. The overall incidence of nausea (visual analog scale >4) and vomiting within the immediate observation period (0-2 h) was 39% and 25%, respectively. Frequency of nausea and vomiting in the late observation period was 21% and 9%, respectively. Women with a DeltaSBP >35% during the induction of anesthesia suffered from a more frequent incidence of PONV within the immediate (57% versus 35% and 41% versus 22%, respectively; P < 0.01) and within the late observation period (33% versus 18% and 19% versus 7%, respectively; P < or = 0.01). In women with a DeltaSBP >35% during maintenance of anesthesia, a more frequent incidence of nausea within the immediate observation period (53% versus 36%; P < 0.05) was found. We conclude that a maximum DeltaSBP >35% during the anesthetic induction is associated with an increased incidence of PONV after gynecological surgery during general anesthesia. IMPLICATIONS: A prospective clinical investigation revealed that a marked systolic blood pressure decrease >35% (DeltaSBP >35%) during the induction of general anesthesia is associated with an increased incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). The association between a DeltaSBP >35% during maintenance of general anesthesia and PONV is less pronounced.     

透皮东莨菪碱贴剂联合昂丹司琼对比单独应用昂丹司琼用于预防门诊手术后恶心呕吐的一项随机双盲多中心研究

背景手术后恶心、呕吐（PONV）是门诊手术常见的并发症。本试验目的是观察透皮东莨菪碱贴剂（TDS）联合静脉注射昂丹司琼（OND）对门诊患者PONV的疗效是否优于单独应用昂丹司琼。方法此项随机双盲多中心的临床试验纳入了620例接受门诊腹腔镜或隆胸手术的PONV高危女性患者,进入手术室前2小时分别给患者贴上TDS贴剂或外观相同的空白贴剂。在全麻诱导前2—5分钟给所有患者静脉注射OND4mg。手术后24~48小时评估止吐是否完善（彻底止吐标准为无呕吐或干呕,且没有追加止吐药）。同时记录发生呕吐、干呕、恶心以及追加止吐药的患者比例,记录手术后首次发生PONV的时间及离院时间,记录呕吐、干呕、恶心的发作次数与严重程度及患者对于止吐治疗的满意度。结果TDS＋OND组与OND组相比,手术后24小时恶心、呕吐的发生率显著降低,但手术后48小时两者差异无显著性。TDS＋OND组没有呕吐、干呕且未追加过止吐药的患者占48％,而OND组占39％（P〈0．02）。TDS＋OND组的彻底止吐（无恶心、呕吐或干呕,且未追加止吐药）率显著高于OND组（分别为35％和25％,P〈0．01）。TDS＋OND组手术后首次发生恶心、呕吐、干呕及追加止吐药的时间明显晚于OND组（P〈0．05）。前者不良反应的总发生率也低于后者（分别为36．7％和49％,P〈0．01）。结论与单独应用OND相比。TDS＋OND能更大程度地减少PONV,主要是通过减少不良反应而获得。     

Emergence and recovery characteristics of desflurane versus sevoflurane in morbidly obese adult surgical patients: a prospective, randomized study

We compared postoperative recovery after desflurane (n = 25) versus sevoflurane (n = 25) anesthesia in morbidly obese adults (body mass index >/=35) who underwent gastrointestinal bypass surgery via an open laparotomy. After premedication with midazolam and metoclopramide 1 h before surgery, epidural catheter placement, induction of anesthesia with fentanyl and propofol, and tracheal intubation facilitated with succinylcholine, anesthesia was maintained with age-adjusted 1 minimum alveolar concentration (MAC) desflurane or sevoflurane. Fentanyl IV, morphine or local anesthetics epidurally, and vasoactive drugs as needed were used to maintain arterial blood pressure at +/-20% of baseline value and to keep bispectral index of the electroencephalogram values between 40 to 60 U. Although patients were anesthetized with desflurane for a longer time (261 +/- 50 min versus 234 +/- 37 min, mean +/- sd; P < 0.05, desflurane versus sevoflurane, respectively) and for more MAC-hours (4.2 +/- 0.9 h versus 3.7 +/- 0.8 h; P < 0.05), significantly earlier recovery of response to command and tracheal extubation occurred in patients given desflurane than in patients given sevoflurane. The modified Aldrete score was greater in desflurane-anesthetized patients on admission to the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) (P = 0.01) but not at discharge (P = 0.47). On admission to PACU, patients given desflurane had higher oxygen saturations (97.0% +/- 2.4%) than patients given sevoflurane (94.8% +/- 4.4%, P = 0.035). Overall, the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting and the use of antiemetics did not differ between the two anesthetic groups. We conclude that morbidly obese adult patients who underwent major abdominal surgery in a prospective, randomized study awoke significantly faster after desflurane than after sevoflurane anesthesia and the patients anesthetized with desflurane had higher oxygen saturation on entry to the PACU.     

Dimenhydrinate and metoclopramide alone or in combination for prophylaxis of PONV

PURPOSE: Dimenhydrinate and metoclopramide are inexpensive antiemetic drugs. Metoclopramide, especially, has been studied extensively in the past, but there are no studies on the combination of both drugs for prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). METHODS: One hundred and sixty male inpatients undergoing endonasal surgery were randomized to receive one of four antiemetic regimens in a double-blind manner: placebo, 1 mg x kg(-1) dimenhydrinate, 0.3 mg x kg(-1) metoclopramide, or the combination of both drugs was administered after induction of anesthesia. Patients received a second dose of these drugs six hours after the first administration to mitigate their short half-life. Standardized general anesthesia included benzodiazepine premedication, propofol, desflurane in N2O/O2 vecuronium, and a continuous infusion of remifentanil. Postoperative analgesia and antiemetic rescue medication were standardized. Episodes of vomiting, retching, nausea, and the need for additional antiemetics were recorded for 24 hr. The incidences of PONV were analyzed with Fisher's Exact test and the severity of PONV (rated by a standardized scoring algorithm) with the Jonckheere-Terpestra-test. RESULTS: The incidence of patients free from PONV was 62.5% in the placebo-group and increased to 72.5% in the metoclopramide-group (P = 0.54), 75.0% in the dimenhydrinate-group (P = 0.34), and 85.0% in the combination- group (P = 0.025). In the latter group, the severity of PONV was reduced compared with placebo treatment (P = 0.017; Jonckheere-Terpestra-test). CONCLUSION: Dimenhydrinate and metoclopramide were ineffective in reducing the incidence and the severity of PONV. Their combination reduced the incidence of PONV compared with placebo.     

The effect of propofol vs desflurane on recovery from anesthesia with remifentanil in outpatient surgery]

OBJECTIVES: To compare the effect on parameters of postanesthetic recovery of propofol and desflurane administered with high doses of remifentanil for major outpatient surgery. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seventy patients were randomly assigned to receive propofol (target concentration 1.5-2 microg/ml) or desflurane in perfusion (end expiratory concentration 0.5 MAC) during maintenance of anesthesia with remifentanil (0.25-1 microg/kg/min). The anesthetic agents were withdrawn after surgery. We recorded the times until eye opening, respiration, tracheal extubation, ability to cough, response to verbal orders and orientation. We also recorded the time until a score of 10 on the Aldrete recovery scale was attained, pain on a visual analog scale, sedation on the Ramsay scale, and instances of nausea or vomiting during the first 24 h after surgery. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences in patient characteristics, type of surgery or anesthesia were found. Times until early signs of postanesthetic recovery (eye opening, spontaneous breathing, tracheal extubation) were significantly less (p < 0.05) in the desflurane group. The groups were similar for all other parameters compared (times until ability to cough, respond to verbal orders, orientation and a score of 10 on the Aldrete scale). Duration of stay in the postanesthetic recovery unit, time in the day surgery ward and intensity of postoperative pain were also similar. The rate of postoperative nausea or vomiting was significantly lower in the propofol group. CONCLUSION: During anesthesia with remifentanil, the administration of desflurane is associated with better psychomotor recovery parameters than is propofol, but the rate of nausea and vomiting is higher with desflurane.     

Droperidol and dimenhydrinate alone or in combination for the prevention of post-operative nausea and vomiting after nasal surgery in male patients

Droperidol and dimenhydrinate are inexpensive antiemetic drugs. Droperidol, especially, has been studied extensively, but there are no studies on the combination of both drugs for prevention of post-operative nausea and vomiting. One hundred and forty male hospitalized patients undergoing nasal surgery were randomized to receive one of four anti-emetic regimes: placebo, dimenhydrinate (1 mg kg-1), droperidol (15 micrograms kg-1), or the combination of both drugs (droperidol 15 micrograms kg-1 + dimenhydrinate 1 mg kg-1) administered after induction of anaesthesia. Patients in the dimenhydrinate-group and the combination-group received a second dose of dimenhydrinate 6 h after the first administration to mitigate the short half-life of the drug. For general anaesthesia a standardized technique, including benzodiazepine premedication, propofol, desflurane in N2O/O2, vecuronium, and a continuous infusion of remifentanil, was used. Post-operative analgesia and anti-emetic rescue medication were standardized. Episodes of vomiting, retching, nausea, and the need for additional anti-emetics were recorded for 24 h. The main endpoint of this study was the number of patients who were completely free of post-operative nausea and vomiting (Fisher's Exact Test). Furthermore, the severity of post-operative nausea and vomiting was analysed using a standardized scoring algorithm. The incidence of patients completely free of post-operative nausea and vomiting was 62.9% in the placebo-group, 77.1% in the dimenhydrinate-group (P = 0.21), and 82.9% in the droperidol-group (P = 0.07). This increased to 94.3% in the combination-group (P = 0.0015). In all three treatment groups the severity of post-operative nausea and vomiting was reduced significantly compared with placebo treatment (P = 0.0003). The incidence of side effects was similar in the four groups. Dimenhydrinate was ineffective in reducing the incidence of post-operative nausea and vomiting and droperidol only reduced the severity of post-operative nausea and vomiting. However, the combination of both drugs significantly reduces the incidence of post-operative nausea and vomiting when compared with placebo treatment.     

Effects of perioperative central neuraxial analgesia on outcome after coronary artery bypass surgery: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Perioperative central neuraxial analgesia may improve outcome after coronary artery bypass surgery due to attenuation of stress response and superior analgesia. METHODS: MEDLINE and other databases were searched for randomized controlled trials in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass who were randomized to either general anesthesia (GA) versus general anesthesia-thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) or general anesthesia-intrathecal analgesia (IT). RESULTS: Fifteen trials enrolling 1178 patients were included for TEA analysis. TEA did not affect incidences of mortality (0.7% TEA vs. 0.3% GA) or myocardial infarction (2.3% TEA vs. 3.4% GA). TEA significantly reduced the risk of dysrhythmias with an odds ratio of 0.52, pulmonary complications with an odds ratio of 0.41, and time to tracheal extubation by 4.5 h and reduced analog pain scores at rest by 7.8 mm and with activity by 11.6 mm. Seventeen trials enrolling 668 patients were included for IT analysis. IT had no significant effect on incidences of mortality (0.3% IT vs. 0.6% GA), myocardial infarction (3.9% IT vs. 5.7% GA), dysrhythmias (24.8% vs. 29.1%), nausea/vomiting (31.3% vs. 28.5%), or time to tracheal extubation (10.4 h IT vs. 10.9 h GA). IT modestly decreased systemic morphine use by 11 mg and decreased pain scores by 16 mm. IT significantly increased the incidence of pruritus (10% vs. 2.5%). CONCLUSIONS: There were no differences in the rates of mortality or myocardial infarction after coronary artery bypass grafting with central neuraxial analgesia. There were associated improvements in faster time until tracheal extubation, decreased pulmonary complications and cardiac dysrhythmias, and reduced pain scores.     

预防性使用地塞米松可降低双腔气管导管拔管后咽痛及声嘶发生率

背景：手术后咽痛及声嘶是气管插管，特别是双腔气管导管插管后的主要并发症。我们开展此项前瞻、随机、双盲的安慰剂对照研究，来评价地塞米松用以降低手术后咽痛及声嘶发生率和严重程度的效能。方法本研究选择了166例（18～75岁）使用双腔气管导管插管的胸外科手术患者。在全麻诱导之前，以双盲、前瞻性的随机方法分为地塞米松（静脉给予）0．1mg／kg组（D1组）、0．2mg／kg组（D2组）和安慰剂组（P组）。分别记录Cormack—Lehane评分的声门暴露度、双腔管插管阻力、尝试插管次数、完成插管时间以及插管维持时间。在拔管后1及24小时，利用视觉模拟评分（VAS，0=没有疼痛；100=可以想象的最剧烈疼痛）来评价咽痛及声嘶程度。结果拔管1小时后，咽痛、声嘶发生率及咽痛程度与P组（53％，36％，VAS30．9）相比，D1组（31％，P=0．021；11％，P=0．003；VAS12．4，P〈0．001）与D2组（11％，P=0．001；4％，P=0．001；VAS6．6，P〈0．001）均低。拔管24小时后，D2组（27％，P=0．002；15％，P=0．001；VAS29．9，P〈0．002）咽痛、声嘶发生率及咽痛程度显著低于D1组（47％，31％，VAS43．9）及P组（57％，45％，VAS51．3）。同时未发现与注射地塞米松相关的并发症的发生。结论预防性使用0．2mg／kg地塞米松能显著降低双腔气管导管拔管后１及24小时咽痛、声嘶发生率及严重程度。     

Ondansetron, orally disintegrating tablets versus intravenous injection for prevention of intrathecal morphine-induced nausea, vomiting, and pruritus in young males

In this study we compared the efficacy of orally disintegrating tablets (ODT) and IV ondansetron for preventing spinal morphine-induced pruritus and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in healthy young male patients. Patients who received bupivacaine with 0.20 mg morphine for spinal anesthesia were randomly assigned to the ODT group (ODT ondansetron 8 mg, n = 50), the IV group (4 mg ondansetron IV, n = 50), or the placebo group (n = 50). Each individual was assessed for pruritus, postoperative nausea and vomiting, and pain at 0, 2, 6, 12, 18, and 24 h after surgery using three distinct visual analog scales. The frequencies of postoperative nausea and vomiting and frequencies of requirement for rescue antiemetic and antipruritic were recorded. There were no significant differences among the three groups with respect to incidence or severity of PONV or postoperative pain visual analog scale scores. The incidences of pruritus in the ODT (56%) and IV (66%) groups were significantly different from that in the placebo group (86%) (P < 0.02 for both). Only the ODT group had significantly lower mean pruritus visual analog scale scores at 0, 2, 6, and 12 h postsurgery than the placebo group (P < 0.023 for all). The frequency of requirement for rescue antipruritic was significantly less in the ODT group than the placebo group (P = 0.013). Both ODT ondansetron 8 mg and IV ondansetron 4 mg are more effective than placebo for preventing spinal morphine-induced pruritus, but neither form of this agent reduces spinal morphine-induced postoperative nausea and vomiting in this patient group.     

Effects of Perioperative Central Neuraxial Analgesia on Outcome after Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery: A Meta-analysis

Background: Perioperative central neuraxial analgesia may improve outcome after coronary artery bypass surgery due to attenuation of stress response and superior analgesia.

Methods: MEDLINE and other databases were searched for randomized controlled trials in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass who were randomized to either general anesthesia (GA) versus general anesthesia-thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) or general anesthesia-intrathecal analgesia (IT).

Results: Fifteen trials enrolling 1,178 patients were included for TEA analysis. TEA did not affect incidences of mortality (0.7% TEA vs. 0.3% GA) or myocardial infarction (2.3% TEA vs. 3.4% GA). TEA significantly reduced the risk of dysrhythmias with an odds ratio of 0.52, pulmonary complications with an odds ratio of 0.41, and time to tracheal extubation by 4.5 h and reduced analog pain scores at rest by 7.8 mm and with activity by 11.6 mm. Seventeen trials enrolling 668 patients were included for IT analysis. IT had no significant effect on incidences of mortality (0.3% IT vs. 0.6% GA), myocardial infarction (3.9% IT vs. 5.7% GA), dysrhythmias (24.8% vs. 29.1%), nausea/vomiting (31.3% vs. 28.5%), or time to tracheal extubation (10.4 h IT vs. 10.9 h GA). IT modestly decreased systemic morphine use by 11 mg and decreased pain scores by 16 mm. IT significantly increased the incidence of pruritus (10% vs. 2.5%).     

Transdermal scopolamine reduces nausea and vomiting after outpatient laparoscopy

The authors evaluated the effect of transdermal scopolamine on the incidence of postoperative nausea, retching, and vomiting after outpatient laparoscopy in a double-blind, placebo-controlled study. A Band-Aid-like patch containing either scopolamine or placebo was placed behind the ear the night before surgery. Anesthesia was induced with fentanyl (0.5-2 micrograms/kg iv), thiopental (3-5 mg/kg iv), and succinylcholine (1-1.5 mg/kg iv) and maintained with isoflurane (0.2-2%) and nitrous oxide (60%) in oxygen. Scopolamine-treated patients had less nausea, retching, and vomiting compared with placebo-treated patients (P = 0.0029). Severe nausea and/or vomiting was present in 62% of the placebo group but only 37% of those getting the scopolamine patch. Repeated episodes of retching and vomiting were also less frequent in the scopolamine group compared with the placebo group (23% vs. 41%; P = 0.0213) as was the need for additional antiemetic therapy (13% vs. 32%; P = 0.0013). Patients in the scopolamine group were also discharged from the hospital sooner (4 +/- 1.3 vs. 4.5 +/- 1.5 h; P = 0.0487). Side effects were more frequent among those patients treated with the scopolamine patch (91% vs. 45%; P less than 0.05) but were not troublesome. The authors conclude that transdermal scopolamine is a safe and effective antiemetic for outpatients undergoing laparoscopy.     

地佐辛预防瑞芬太尼复合麻醉患者术后痛觉过敏的效果

目的 评价地佐辛预防瑞芬太尼复合麻醉患者术后痛觉过敏的效果.方法 择期行腹腔镜胆囊切除术患者100例,年龄20～64岁,体重45～65 kg,ASA分级Ⅰ或Ⅱ级,采用随机数学表法,将其随机分为4组(n=25):芬太尼组(F组)、低剂量地佐辛组(D1组)、中剂量地佐辛组(D2组)和高剂量地佐辛组(D3组).静脉注射咪达唑仑、异丙酚、瑞芬太尼和顺阿曲库铵麻醉诱导,气管内插管后机械通气.麻醉维持:靶控输注瑞芬太尼,效应室靶浓度4 μg/L,静脉输注异丙酚4～6 mg·kg-1·h-1,间断静脉注射顺阿曲库铵0.03 mg/kg.手术结束前30 min时D1组、D2组和D3组分别肌肉注射地佐辛0.1、0.2、0.3 mg/kg,F组手术结束前15 min静脉注射芬太尼1 μg/kg.记录苏醒时间、拔除气管导管时间,记录苏醒后即刻、1h、2 h(T0 ～ T2)时视觉模拟评分(VAS)、布氏舒适评分(BCS)和镇静和躁动评分(SAS),记录拔除气管导管后呼吸抑制、恶心呕吐及尿潴留的发生情况.结果 与F组比较,D1组、D2组和D3组苏醒时间和拔除气管导管时间缩短,呼吸抑制和恶心呕吐发生率降低;D1组各时点VAS评分升高,BCS评分降低,D2组和D3组T0时VAS评分升高,T1,2时VAS评分降低,T0～2时SAS评分降低(P＜0.05);与D2组比较,D3组T0～2时SAS评分降低,呼吸抑制发生率升高(P＜0.05);4组无一例患者发生尿潴留.结论 手术结束前30 min肌肉注射地佐辛0.2 mg/kg可减轻瑞芬太尼复合麻醉患者麻醉恢复期痛觉过敏,且副作用小.     

Prophylaxis of postoperative nausea and vomiting with oral, long-acting dimenhydrinate in gynecologic outpatient laparoscopy

Dimenhydrinate is an inexpensive antiemetic with few side effects available as an oral, long-acting (LA) formulation (Gravol L/A) containing 25 mg of immediate and 50 mg of sustained release drug. We designed this double-blind comparison trial to assess the efficacy of dimenhydrinate LA versus droperidol alone and the combination for prophylaxis of nausea, vomiting, and retching in outpatient gynecologic laparoscopy. One-hundred-forty-one women were randomized into 3 groups: 1) droperidol (placebo capsule preoperatively and IV droperidol 0.625 mg before induction), 2) dimenhydrinate LA preoperatively and IV placebo before induction, or 3) combination. Information regarding nausea, vomiting, retching, pain, and sedation was recorded in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) and collected by telephone for the presence of symptoms: on arrival home; at bedtime; upon arising, and at lunchtime the following day. The overall incidence of complete treatment failure (rescue medication in PACU or nausea, vomiting, or retching at any time point) was 28 of 46 (61%), 28 of 48 (58%), and 22 of 47 (47%); and for treatment failure vomiting (rescue medication in PACU or vomiting or retching at any time point) was 16 of 46 (35%), 11 of 48 (23%), and 5 of 47 (11%), for the droperidol, dimenhydrinate, and combination groups, respectively (P = 0.007 for droperidol versus combination). There were no differences in sedation or pain. Preoperative administration of an oral dose of LA dimenhydrinate in combination with droperidol when compared with droperidol alone effectively reduced the incidence of vomiting but not nausea in women undergoing elective outpatient gynecologic laparoscopy. IMPLICATIONS: Dimenhydrinate is an inexpensive antiemetic with few side effects available as a long-acting oral formulation. Women undergoing outpatient gynecologic laparoscopy were given droperidol, an effective antiemetic, dimenhydrinate alone, or the combination of the two drugs. Dimenhydrinate plus droperidol significantly reduced the overall incidence of vomiting, but not nausea, when compared with droperidol alone.     

Prophylactic antiemetic effect of midazolam after middle ear surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the prophylactic antiemetic effect of midazolam after middle ear surgery. STUDY DESIGN: A prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Ninety women patients undergoing middle ear surgery with general anesthesia received intravenously either midazolam 0.075 mg/kg or normal saline (n = 45 each) after induction of anesthesia. The incidence and severity of postoperative nausea and vomiting, rescue antiemetics, pain intensity, and side effects such as headache, dizziness, and drowsiness were assessed during the first 24 hours after anesthesia. RESULTS: Midazolam groups showed total incidence and severity of nausea and vomiting. Patients who required rescue antiemetics were significantly lower than in saline group (P < 0.05), but there were no significant differences in pain intensity and side effects such as headache, dizziness, and drowsiness between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Midazolam 0.075 mg/kg is effective for reducing nausea and vomiting after middle ear surgery.     

The effect of dexamethasone on side effects after coronary revascularization procedures

Corticosteroids decrease side effects after noncardiac elective surgery. We designed this randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study to test the hypothesis that standard doses of dexamethasone (4 mg x2) would reduce postoperative nausea, vomiting, and pain, decrease the incidence of atrial fibrillation (AF), and improve appetite after cardiac surgery, thereby facilitating the recovery process. A total of 300 patients undergoing coronary revascularization surgery were enrolled in this clinical study. The anesthetic management was standardized in all patients. Dexamethasone (4 mg/mL) or saline (1 mL) was administered after the induction of anesthesia and a second dose of the same study drug was given on the morning after surgery. The incidence of AF was determined by analyzing the first 72 h of continuously recorded electrocardiogram records after cardiac surgery. The patients were assessed at 24- and 48-h intervals after surgery, as well as at the time of hospital discharge, to determine the incidence and severity of postoperative side effects (e.g., nausea, vomiting, pain) and patient satisfaction scores. Dexamethasone significantly reduced the need for antiemetic rescue medication on the first postoperative day (30% versus 42%), and the incidences of nausea (15% versus 26%) and vomiting (5% versus 16%) on the second postoperative day (P < 0.05). In addition, dexamethasone significantly reduced the percentage of patients with a depressed appetite on the second postoperative day. However, the corticosteroid failed to decrease the incidence of AF (27% versus 32%) or the total dosage of opioid analgesic medication administered in the postoperative period. We conclude that dexamethasone (8 mg in divided doses) was beneficial in reducing emetic symptoms and improving appetite after cardiac surgery. However, this dose of the corticosteroid does not seem to have antiarrhythmic or analgesic-sparing properties. IMPLICATIONS: Dexamethasone (8 mg IV) was beneficial in reducing emetic symptoms and increasing appetite after cardiac surgery. However, this dose of the corticosteroid failed to decrease postoperative pain or the incidence of new-onset atrial fibrillation.     

Early vs late intraoperative administration of tropisetron for the prevention of nausea and vomiting in children undergoing tonsillectomy and/or adenoidectomy

BACKGROUND: Tropisetron is a long-acting 5HT3 receptor antagonist and was shown to be effective in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) after tonsillectomy. The aim of the study was to compare the effects of early vs late intraoperative administration of tropisetron with regard to prevention of PONV during the first 48 h after extubation. METHODS: In a randomized double-blind study, we investigated 120 children aged 1-12 years undergoing general anesthesia for tonsillectomy or adenotonsillectomy. Patients received 0.1 mg x kg(-1) tropisetron (maximum 2 mg) immediately after inhalational induction (early) and establishment of intravenous access or after the end of surgery before extubation (late). PONV and the need for antiemetic rescue medications were recorded within the following 48 h. Patient data were analyzed using t-test, chi-squared test (significance level of alpha = 0.05) and Spearman rank correlation test. RESULTS: The overall incidence of vomiting was 55.3%, with 60% (36/60) in the early treatment and 51.6% (31/60) in the late treatment group (P = 0.46). The observed time course 48 h postoperatively showed no difference regarding the number of vomiting episodes between the two groups and the need for antiemetic rescue medication. The incidence of nausea was higher in the late application group in the first 6 h after extubation (P = 0.001) and higher in the early application group between 24 and 48 h after extubation (P = 0.02). Morphine and the age over 3 years had a strong influence on the incidence of vomiting. CONCLUSION: The intraoperative time point (early vs late) of intravenous administration of a single prophylactic dose of tropisetron has no impact on the incidence of PONV during the first 48 h after tonsillectomy and/or adenoidectomy in children.