Supplemental 80% oxygen does not attenuate post-operative nausea and vomiting after breast surgery

BACKGROUND: Although supplemental oxygen has been shown to be as effective as ondansetron in the prevention of post-operative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in one study in abdominal surgery patients, the antiemetic efficacy of supplemental oxygen is controversial on the basis of studies with other patients. We compared the efficacy of 80% and 30% oxygen in decreasing PONV in breast surgery. Ondansetron was used as an active control. METHODS: Ninety patients were given a standardized sevoflurane anesthetic. They were randomly assigned to three groups: 30% oxygen in nitrogen and saline 2 ml intravenously (i.v.) at the end of surgery (group 30); 80% oxygen in nitrogen and saline 2 ml (group 80); and 30% oxygen in nitrogen and ondansetron 4 mg (group O). Oxygen was administered during surgery and up to 2 h after surgery. RESULTS: The incidence of total response (no retching or vomiting, no nausea) during the first 24 post-operative hours was not different between group 80 (17%) and group 30 (11%) but was higher in group O (43%) than in group 30 (P<0.05). Compared with group O, patients in group 80 experienced more vomiting during the study period 0-24 h (66% vs. 32%; P<0.05) and more nausea during the period 6-24 h (72% vs. 39%; P<0.05). There was no difference between the groups in their risk for PONV, pain scores, opioid consumption, or patient satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, supplemental 80% oxygen administration failed to decrease PONV in breast surgery.     

Supplemental oxygen for prevention of nausea and vomiting after breast surgery

Background. Administration of supplemental oxygen 80% has beenshown to halve the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting(PONV). We tested the efficacy of supplemental oxygen 50% indecreasing the incidence of PONV after breast surgery. Methods. One hundred patients receiving standardized sevofluraneanaesthesia were randomly assigned to two groups: oxygen 30%administration (Group 30); and oxygen 50% administration (Group50). Oxygen was administered during surgery and for 2 hfrom the end of surgery. Results. The incidence of PONV over 24 h after surgeryshowed no difference between the groups: 82% in Group 30 and89% in Group 50. However, during the postoperative oxygen administration,eight patients vomited in Group 30, compared with none in Group50 (P<0.05). After oxygen therapy ceased, there was no differencein the incidence of vomiting between the groups. Nausea andneed for rescue antiemetics did not differ between the groups. Conclusion. The incidence of vomiting decreased during the shortpostoperative administration of supplemental oxygen 50%. However,perioperative oxygen 50% administration did not prevent PONVover the 24-h follow-up period in patients undergoing breastsurgery performed under general anaesthesia. Br J Anaesth 2003; 91: 284–7     

Cost-effectiveness of three combinations of antiemetics in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting

Background. This study compares the cost-effectiveness of threecombinations of antiemetics in the prevention of postoperativenausea and vomiting (PONV). Methods. We conducted a prospective, double-blind study. NinetyASA I–II females, 18–65 yr, undergoing general anaesthesiafor major gynaecological surgery, with standardized postoperativeanalgesia (intrathecal 0.2 mg plus i.v. PCA morphine), wererandomly assigned to receive: ondansetron 4 mg plus droperidol1.25 mg after induction and droperidol 1.25 mg 12 h later (Group1); dexamethasone 8 mg plus droperidol 1.25 mg after inductionand droperidol 1.25 mg 12 h later (Group 2); ondansetron 4 mgplus dexamethasone 8 mg after induction and placebo 12 h later(Group 3). A decision analysis tree was used to divide eachgroup into nine mutually exclusive subgroups, depending on theincidence of PONV, need for rescue therapy, side effects andtheir treatment. Direct cost and probabilities were calculatedfor each subgroup, then a cost-effectiveness analysis was conductedfrom the hospital point of view. Results. Groups 1 and 3 were more effective (80 and 70%) thanGroup 2 (40%, P=0.004) in preventing PONV but also more expensive.Compared with Group 2, the incremental cost per extra patientwithout PONV was €6.99 (95% CI, –1.26 to 36.57) forGroup 1 and €13.55 (95% CI, 0.89–132.90) for Group3. Conclusion. Ondansetron+droperidol is cheaper and at least aseffective as ondansetron+ dexamethasone, and it is more effectivethan dexamethasone+droperidol with a reasonable extra cost. Br J Anaesth 2003; 91: 589–92     

Comparison of ondansetron and droperidol in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting after laparoscopic surgery in women

Background : Women undergoing laparoscopic surgery are susceptible to postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). Ondansetron and droperidol are useful antiemetics. This study was designed to ascertain primarily the relative difference in efficacy of ondansetron and droperidol and secondarily between these drugs and placebo in the prevention of PONV after laparoscopic surgery. Methods : The prophylactic antiemetic efficacy of ondansetron and droperidol was compared in a prospective, randomised, double–blind, placebo–controlled trial of 439 female inpatients scheduled for laparoscopic surgery. During induction of standardised general anaesthesia the patients received intravenously either ondansetron 8 mg (n=195), droperidol 1.25 mg (n=193) or placebo (n=51). The occurrence of nausea, vomiting, sideeffects and the need for rescue antiemetic medication were recorded for 24 h postoperatively. Results : The proportion of patients with nausea was 48%, 50% and 67% in the ondansetron, droperidol and placebo groups, respectively; with a significant difference when both ondansetron (P=0.02) and droperidol (P=0.04) were compared with placebo. Vomiting occurred in 18%, 26% and 37% of the patients in the three groups, respectively (P=0.05 between ondansetron and droperidol, P=0.004 between ondansetron and placebo, P=0.16 between droperidol and placebo). The proportion of patients given rescue medication was 34%, 28% and 49%, respectively (P=0.23 for ondansetron and droperidol, P=0.07 for ondansetron and placebo, P=0.007 for droperidol and placebo). During early recovery the patients treated with ondansetron were significantly more alert than after droperidol. Serious side–effects were not observed. Headache was significantly more common after ondansetron than after droperidol treatment. Conclusions : The efficacy of prophylactic ondansetron and droperidol in reducing postoperative nausea associated with laparoscopic surgery in female inpatients was similar, but ondansetron appeared to be slightly more efficient than droperidol in preventing vomiting. Ondansetron and droperidol were both significantly better than placebo in the prophylaxis of PONV.     

Inspired oxygen fraction of 0.8 compared with 0.4 does not further reduce postoperative nausea and vomiting in dolasetron-treated patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Background. Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is oneof the most frequent complications after general anaesthesia.Single-dose antiemetic prophylaxis has limited efficacy in high-riskpatients. Adding a simple potential antiemetic approach, suchas increasing the inspired oxygen fraction, to the antiemeticportfolio would preserve pharmacological interventions for treatmentof symptoms in the postoperative period. However, the antiemeticeffect of a high inspired oxygen fraction is still discussedcontroversially. The aim of the study was to evaluate whetheran inspired oxygen fraction of 0.8 decreases PONV in patientsreceiving the 5-HT₃-antagonist dolasetron. Methods. In a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blindedtrial we studied 377 patients (ASA I–III) undergoing electivelaparoscopic cholecystectomy. Induction of anaesthesia was standardized,including thiopental fentanyl and cis-atracurium. For all patientsthe individual risk for PONV was calculated using the Koivurantascore and all patients received 12.5 mg dolasetron i.v. beforesurgery. Patients were allocated randomly to one of three groups:Group A (n=125) received 80% oxygen in air, Group B (n=125)40% oxygen in air and Group C (n=127) 40% oxygen in nitrousoxide. Postoperative nausea, postoperative vomiting (PV), ornausea, vomiting, or both (PONV) was assessed in the early (0–4h) and overall postoperative period (0–24 h) by an anaesthesiologistunaware of patient allocation. Results. There was a significantly lower incidence of PONV andPV in Groups A (PONV: 11.2%; PV: 3.2%) and B (PONV: 10.4%; PV:3.2%) compared with Group C (PONV: 26.7%; PV: 13.3%), but therewere no significant differences between Groups A and B. Conclusions. An inspired oxygen fraction of 0.8 does not furtherdecrease PONV or vomiting in dolasetron-treated patients undergoinglaparoscopic cholecystectomy. The lower incidence of PONV inGroups A and B compared with Group C is most likely caused bythe omission of nitrous oxide.      

Double–blind comparison of transdermal scopolamine, droperidol and placebo against postoperative nausea and vomiting

Since transdermal scopolamine (TS) seems effective against seasickness, we compared its antiemetic effect with intravenous droperidol (DHBP), our routine antidote for postoperative emesis. Ninety-six female patients (ASA I-II) scheduled for short-stay surgery were randomly allocated to three study groups after giving their informed consent. The three groups were as follows: TS adhesive, delivering 140 micrograms initially and 5 micrograms/h thereafter + placebo 0.5 ml i.v. 5 min before the end of surgery; transdermal placebo adhesive preoperatively + DHBP 0.5 ml (1.25 mg) i.v. 5 min before the end of surgery; transdermal placebo + 0.5 ml placebo i.v. as indicated above. Oxycodone i.m. and glycopyrrolate i.v. were given for premedication together with the test adhesive. Anaesthesia was induced with thiopental and maintained with nitrous oxide and oxygen, enflurane, vecuronium and fentanyl. Neostigmine and glycopyrrolate were administered for reversal. In the recovery room no differences in nausea or vomiting were observed between the groups. Sedation was significantly more marked (P less than 0.15-0.0001) after DHBP than after either TS or the given DHBP and 6% of those given the placebo (P less than 0.05). During the following 24 h nausea was reported more by the placebo patients (25) than by those on TS (20) or DHBP (15) (P less than 0.05). However, actual vomiting on the ward did not differ between the groups. Visual disturbances were more frequent after TS (P less than 0.01). We conclude that prophylactic transdermal scopolamine does not diminish postoperative emetic sequelae.     

Tropisetron or droperidol in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting

BACKGROUND: Women undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy are susceptible to postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). This study was undertaken to evaluate the efficacy of tropisetron or droperidol for preventing PONV after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. METHODS: In a prospective, randomised, double-blind trial, 120 female patients received either tropisetron 5 mg or droperidol 1.25 mg intravenously at the beginning of surgery. A standard general anaesthetic technique and postoperative analgesia were used. Nausea, emetic episodes and the need for rescue medication were recorded for 24 h postoperatively. RESULTS: Nausea was experienced by 55% of the patients in the tropisetron group and by 62% in the droperidol group (ns). The incidence of emetic episodes was 20% and 52% (P=0.001) in the two groups, respectively. Rescue antiemetic medication was needed in 42% and 50% (ns) of the patients, respectively. Patients in the droperidol group were more drowsy in comparison with patients in the tropisetron group, mean sedation score being 6.7 vs 5.7, respectively (P=0.023). No difference in other side-effects was observed. CONCLUSION: Tropisetron, when compared with droperidol, had no better efficacy on the prevention of postoperative nausea but resulted in a significantly lower incidence of vomiting after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.     

Prevention and control of postoperative nausea and vomiting in post-craniotomy patients

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) are the most frequent side-effects in the postoperative period, impairing subjective well-being and having economic impact due to delayed discharge. However, emetic symptoms can also cause major medical complications, and post-craniotomy patients may be at an increased risk. A review and critical appraisal of the existing literature on PONV in post-craniotomy patients, and a comparison of these findings with the current knowledge on PONV in the general surgical population, leads to the following conclusions: (1) Despite the lack of a documented case of harm caused by retching or vomiting in a post-craniotomy patient, the potential risk caused by arterial hypertension and high intra-abdominal/intra-thoracic pressure leading to high intracranial pressure, forces to avoid PONV in these patients. (2) There is unclarity about a specifically increased (or decreased) risk for PONV in post-craniotomy patients compared with other surgical procedures. (3) The decision whether or not to administer an antiemetic should not be based primarily on risk scores for PONV but on the likelihood for potential catastrophic consequences of PONV. If such a risk cannot be ruled out, a multimodal antiemetic approach should be considered regardless of the individual risk. (4) Randomized controlled trials with antiemetics in post-craniotomy patients are limited with respect to sample size and methodological quality. This also impacts upon the meaning of meta-analyses performed with trials that showed marked heterogeneity and inconclusive results. (5) No studies on the treatment of established PONV are available. This highlights the need to transfer knowledge about PONV treatment from other surgical procedures. (6) Despite the possibility that PONV in post-craniotomy patients can be triggered by specific conditions (e.g. surgery near the area postrema at the floor of the fourth ventricle with the vomiting centre located nearby), recommendations based on trials in post-craniotomy patients may be flawed. Thus, general knowledge on prevention and treatment of PONV must adopted for craniotomy settings.     

Oral clonidine premedication does not reduce postoperative vomiting in children undergoing strabismus surgery

BACKGROUND: We evaluated the effect of oral clonidine on postoperative vomiting (POV) in children undergoing strabismus surgery. METHODS: Eighty ASA physical status I children aged 3-12 years were randomly assigned to one of two groups in a double-blinded manner. One hour before surgery, each patient in the clonidine group (n=40) received clonidine 4 micro g kg-1 in apple juice 0.2 ml kg-1, and each of the controls (n=40) received apple juice 0.2 ml kg-1 only. The protocol for general anesthesia was propofol-sevoflurane in N2O/O2. A paracetamol suppository was administered in each case to prevent postoperative pain. Patient responses during 0-48 h after anesthesia were recorded as complete (no POV, no antiemetic rescue required), retching, vomiting, or rescue antiemetic. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the clonidine and control groups regarding the number of patients with complete response (21 vs. 18, respectively) retching (10 vs. 14, respectively), vomiting (19 vs. 22, respectively), or rescue antiemetic (9 vs. 12, respectively) during the first 48 h. CONCLUSION: Oral premedication with clonidine 4 micro g kg-1 did not reduce the rate of POV in the children undergoing strabismus surgery.     

Dolasetron decreases postoperative nausea and vomiting after breast surgery

In a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial, we compared the efficacy of dolasetron, dexamethasone, and metoclopramide in a preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in women undergoing breast surgery. Patients were allocated randomly to one of four groups (20 patients each): group A received 12.5 mg dolasetron, group B received 8 mg dexamethasone, group C received 20 mg metoclopramide, and group D received placebo intravenously. If patients complained of retching or vomiting or if patients demanded an antiemetic, 1.25 mg droperidol was administered intravenously. To quantify postoperative nausea and vomiting, the following score was used: 0 = no nausea, 1 = nausea, 2 = retching, 3 = single vomiting, 4 = multiple vomiting. Dolasetron and dexamethasone reduced the postoperative nausea and vomiting score significantly (p < 0.02 versus metoclopramide; p < 0.0001 versus placebo). Metoclopramide also reduced the postoperative nausea and vomiting score (p < 0.02 versus placebo). Fisher's exact test showed a significant reduction of vomiting in the dolasetron and dexamethasone groups compared with metoclopramide-treated patients (p < 0.007) and placebo-treated patients (p < 0.000006) and a significantly lower rate of nausea in comparison to the placebo group (p < 0.009). There were no significant differences between the metoclopramide and the placebo groups (using Fisher's exact test). The use of postoperative droperidol was significantly lower in both the dolasetron group (p < 0.04 versus metoclopramide; p < 0.0001 versus placebo) and dexamethasone group (p < 0.04 versus metoclopramide; p < 0.0001 versus placebo), as well as in the metoclopramide group (p < 0.02 versus placebo). Intravenous dolasetron and dexamethasone were equally effective and both are more effective than metoclopramide for preventing vomiting after breast surgery. Also both were significantly superior to either metoclopramide or placebo for postoperative nausea and vomiting and the need for droperidol rescue.     

The effect of smoking on postoperative nausea and vomiting

In an attempt to quantify the postoperative effects of smoking, 327 consecutive patients undergoing arthroscopic day case knee surgery were given a standard anaesthetic consisting of an intravenous induction with propofol and fentanyl followed by inhalational maintenance using isoflurane in an oxygen and nitrous oxide mixture. Pre-operatively, patients were asked inter alia to give details of social smoking habits. Postoperatively, patients were given standard analgesic and anti-emetic drugs. Prior to discharge patients were asked to give details of postoperative nausea and vomiting together with details of the severity of postoperative pain. There were 85 smokers and 242 nonsmokers. Of the 327 patients, a total of 42 (13%) complained of postoperative nausea and vomiting. Of the smokers, only 6% complained of postoperative nausea and vomiting in contrast to 15% of the nonsmokers (p < 0.05). It is postulated that enzyme induction is the most likely reason for this anti-emetic effect. Possible ways in which this clinically beneficial mechanism can be utilised to improve outcome after anaesthesia are discussed.     

Low-dose haloperidol prevents post-operative nausea and vomiting after ambulatory laparoscopic surgery

Background: We evaluated the prophylactic effect of low-dose haloperidol (1 mg) on post-operative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in women undergoing ambulatory laparoscopic surgery. Droperidol (0.625 mg) and saline were controls.
Methods: One hundred and fifty women undergoing ambulatory laparoscopic surgery under general anaesthesia were enrolled in this randomized, double-blind, and placebo-controlled study. After tracheal intubation, the haloperidol group ( n =50) received intravenous haloperidol (1 mg), the droperidol group ( n =50) received intravenous droperidol (0.625 mg), and the saline group ( n =50) received intravenous saline.
Results: Haloperidol- and droperidol-group patients reported a lower incidence of PONV [24% and 23% vs. 49% (saline group); P <0.05] and requested fewer doses of rescue antiemetics [13% and 16% vs. 38% (saline group); P <0.05] during the first four post-operative hours. During the 24-h post-operative period, haloperidol- and droperidol-group patients also reported a lower incidence of PONV [31% and 32% vs. 62% (saline group); P <0.01]. No differences were found between the haloperidol and droperidol groups.
Conclusion: Like droperidol (0.625 mg), prophylactic intravenous haloperidol (1 mg) significantly reduced the incidence of PONV in women undergoing ambulatory laparoscopic surgery.     

Supplemental oxygen does not prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting after gynecological laparoscopy

Purpose

Postoperative nausea and vomiting are among the most common and distressing side effects of general anesthesia. Supplemental intraoperative 80% oxygen reduces postoperative nausea and vomiting following open and laparoscopic abdominal surgery. However, this benefit has not been observed in other patient populations. We undertook this study to evaluate the effect of 80% supplemental intraoperative oxygen on the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting following ambulatory surgery for laparoscopic tubal ligation.

Methods

Following Research Ethics Board approval, 304 subjects were enrolled into one of two arms of a randomized prospective controlled study. The intervention group (n = 147) breathed 80% oxygen and the control group (n = 145) breathed routine 30% oxygen (balance medical air) while both groups were receiving a standardized general anesthetic. Nausea was assessed as: none, mild, moderate, or severe; vomiting was any emetic episode or retching. Any assessment either greater than none (nausea) or greater than zero (vomiting) was considered positive.

Results

The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting up to 24 hr following surgery was 69% in the 80% oxygen intervention group and 65% in the 30% oxygen control group (P = 0.62). There were no differences in nausea alone, vomiting, or antiemetic use in the postoperative anesthetic care unit or at any time (pre- or post-discharge) up to 24 hr after surgery.

Conclusions

This trial of 304 women did not demonstrate that administering intraoperative supplemental 80% oxygen during ambulatory surgery for laparoscopic tubal ligation prevented postoperative nausea or vomiting during the initial postoperative 24 hr compared with women who received routine 30% oxygen.     

Effect of intraoperative intravenous crystalloid infusion on postoperative nausea and vomiting after gynaecological laparoscopy: comparison of 30 and 10 ml kg(-1)

Background. I.V. fluid administration has been shown to reducepostoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). The optimum dose isunknown. We tested the hypothesis that administration of i.v.crystalloid of 30 ml kg^–1 would reduce the incidence ofPONV compared with 10 ml kg^–1 of the same fluid. Methods. A total of 141 ASA I female patients undergoing electivegynaecological laparoscopy were randomized, in double-blindfashion, to receive either 10 ml kg^–1 (n=71; CSL-10 group)or 30 ml kg^–1 (n=70; CSL-30 group) of i.v. compound sodiumlactate (CSL). Results. In the first 48 h after anaesthesia, the incidenceof vomiting was lower in the CSL-30 group than in the CSL-10group (8.6% vs 25.7%, P=0.01). Anti-emetic use was less in theCSL-30 group at 0.5 h (2.9% vs 14.3%, P=0.04). The incidenceof severe nausea was significantly reduced in the treatmentgroup at awakening (2.9% vs 15.7%, P=0.02), 2 h (0.0% vs 8.6%,P=0.04) and cumulatively (5.7% vs 27.1%, P=0.001). The numbersneeded to treat to prevent vomiting, severe nausea and antiemeticuse in the first 48 h were 6, 5 and 6, respectively. Conclusion. I.V. administration of CSL 30 ml kg^–1 to healthywomen undergoing day-case gynaecological laparoscopy reducedthe incidence of vomiting, nausea and anti-emetic use when comparedwith CSL 10 ml kg^–1.     

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

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.     

Nitrous oxide does not increase nausea and vomiting following gynaecological laparoscopy

The effect of three different anaesthetic techniques on the incidence and severity of postoperative emesis (nausea, retching and vomiting) was studied in 150 patients undergoing gynaecological laparoscopy. Patients were anaesthetized with isoflurane in nitrous oxide and oxygen (Group A), enflurane in nitrous oxide and oxygen (Group B) or with isoflurane in air and oxygen (Group C). Groups had been predetermined by date of birth. During the first 24 hours after the operation no difference was found at any time in the incidence or severity of emesis among the groups. The overall incidence of emesis during the first 24 hours postoperatively was 54, 48 and 52 per cent, in groups A, B and C, respectively. It is concluded that nitrous oxide does not increase the incidence of emesis after isoflurane anaesthesia and that isoflurane and enflurane anaesthesia are associated with similar incidences of nausea and vomiting after gynaecological laparoscopy.