Dexamethasone in combination with dolasetron for prophylaxis in the ambulatory setting: effect on outcome after laparoscopic cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND: Postoperative nausea and vomiting after laparoscopic cholecystectomy remains a common problem despite routine antiemetic prophylaxis. Therefore, the authors investigated the effect of administering 4 mg intravenous dexamethasone as an adjunct to a 5-HT3 antagonist (12.5 mg intravenous dolasetron) with respect to patient outcome. METHODS: Outpatients (N = 140) were enrolled in this prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, institutional review board-approved protocol involving two antiemetic treatment groups. After induction of anesthesia, the control group received 1 ml intravenous saline, whereas the dexamethasone group received 4 mg intravenous dexamethasone. Both groups received 12.5 mg intravenous dolasetron at the time of gallbladder removal. A blinded observer recorded the recovery times, emetic episodes, rescue antiemetics, maximum nausea score, and time to achieve discharge criteria. Postdischarge side effects, as well as patient satisfaction and quality of recovery scores were assessed at 24 h after surgery. RESULTS: Although there was no difference in the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting in the early recovery period, the dexamethasone group had a shorter stay in the day-surgery unit (136 +/- 57 vs. 179 +/- 62 min) and more rapidly achieved discharge criteria (161 +/- 32 vs. 209 +/- 39 min). In addition, fewer patients in the dexamethasone group experienced nausea at home within 24 h after discharge (13 vs. 28%, P < 0.05). Finally, the dexamethasone group reported higher quality of recovery and patient satisfaction scores (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The authors conclude that the adjunctive use of 4 mg intravenous dexamethasone shortened the time to achieve discharge criteria and improved the quality of recovery and patient satisfaction scores after laparoscopic cholecystectomy procedures in outpatients receiving prophylaxis with 12.5 mg intravenous dolasetron.     

Postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing total abdominal hysterectomy under spinal anaesthesia: a randomized study of ondansetron prophylaxis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Patients undergoing total abdominal hysterectomy under general anaesthesia have a high risk of developing postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence of PONV in patients undergoing total abdominal hysterectomy under spinal anaesthesia with intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) using morphine and to compare its incidence with and without antiemetic prophylaxis. METHODS: Thirty-four patients undergoing total abdominal hysterectomy under spinal anaesthesia with i.v. PCA morphine postoperatively were divided into two groups. The first (n = 17) received ondansetron prophylaxis near the end of surgery while the second (n = 17) received no prophylaxis. Morphine consumption, emetic episodes (on a 3-point scale), patient satisfaction (visual analogue score), sedation and pruritus were evaluated 2, 4, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24h postoperatively. RESULTS: Patient characteristics, postoperative morphine consumption (43.3 +/- 7.6 vs. 40.3 +/- 12.3 mg) and peristaltic recovery time (16.9 +/- 5 vs. 18.4 +/- 5.2 h) were similar in both groups. Overall nausea and vomiting were significantly lower in the ondansetron prophylaxis group than in the group without prophylaxis (52.9% vs. 88.2%, P < 0.05). Though nausea alone was higher in the prophylaxis group (41.2% vs. 29.4%), nausea with vomiting was significantly lower in the prophylaxis group (11.8% vs. 58.8%, P < 0.01). Patients' satisfaction scores were higher in the ondansetron group at all times and the difference was significant (P < 0.05) 4 h postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of PONV in patients undergoing total abdominal hysterectomy under spinal anaesthesia with i.v. PCA morphine is very high (88.2%). Antiemetic prophylaxis with ondansetron is highly recommended in this patients group resulting in a lower incidence of nausea and vomiting, and significantly improves patient' satisfaction and life quality in the early postoperative period.     

Dexamethasone in Combination with Dolasetron for Prophylaxis in the Ambulatory Setting: Effect on Outcome after Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy

Background: Postoperative nausea and vomiting after laparoscopic cholecystectomy remains a common problem despite routine antiemetic prophylaxis. Therefore, the authors investigated the effect of administering 4 mg intravenous dexamethasone as an adjunct to a 5-HT3 antagonist (12.5 mg intravenous dolasetron) with respect to patient outcome.

Methods: Outpatients (N = 140) were enrolled in this prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, institutional review board-approved protocol involving two antiemetic treatment groups. After induction of anesthesia, the control group received 1 ml intravenous saline, whereas the dexamethasone group received 4 mg intravenous dexamethasone. Both groups received 12.5 mg intravenous dolasetron at the time of gallbladder removal. A blinded observer recorded the recovery times, emetic episodes, rescue antiemetics, maximum nausea score, and time to achieve discharge criteria. Postdischarge side effects, as well as patient satisfaction and quality of recovery scores were assessed at 24 h after surgery.

Results: Although there was no difference in the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting in the early recovery period, the dexamethasone group had a shorter stay in the day-surgery unit (136 +/- 57 vs. 179 +/- 62 min) and more rapidly achieved discharge criteria (161 +/- 32 vs. 209 +/- 39 min). In addition, fewer patients in the dexamethasone group experienced nausea at home within 24 h after discharge (13 vs. 28%, P < 0.05). Finally, the dexamethasone group reported higher quality of recovery and patient satisfaction scores (P < 0.05).     

The effect of anaesthetic technique on postoperative nausea and vomiting after day-case gynaecological laparoscopy

Gynaecological surgery is of high emetogenic potential and both total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) and prophylactic antiemetic therapy may reduce the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). We studied 144 patients scheduled for day-case gynaecological laparoscopy in a randomized trial comparing balanced inhalational anaesthesia and prophylactic dolasetron (group I+D) with propofol TIVA and dolasetron (group T+D) or TIVA alone (group T). The primary outcome of "complete response" (no vomiting, no treatment for PONV) was not significantly different among groups (34%, 51%, 32%; groups I+D vs T+D vs T, P=0.12). During the first hour after surgery, group I+D had nausea of greater severity (P<0.03). During hospital admission, group T had more vomiting (P<0.03). From discharge until 24 hours postoperatively, 55% of group I+D experience nausea and 38% vomited. The incidence and severity of nausea were significantly lower in the TIVA groups (P<0.04 and <0.05 respectively). There were no significant differences between groups T+D and T, although comparing all groups the complete response rate was highest and the post-discharge incidence and severity of nausea lowest in group T+D. In conclusion, propofol TIVA, with or without dolasetron, reduced postoperative nausea, but not perioperative vomiting or antiemetic requirement, when compared with inhalational anaesthesia plus dolasetron.     

Prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting using ondansetron, a new, selective, 5-HT3 receptor antagonist.

The effect of ondansetron, a 5-HT3 antagonist, in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting was investigated in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of 84 patients undergoing gynecologic operation and receiving the same general anesthetic. The patients received premedication with either 16 mg oral ondansetron, or a matching placebo. The same medication was given postoperatively 8 h after the first dose. During the first hour after recovery from anesthesia, the frequencies of nausea and vomiting were 52% and 40%, respectively, in patients given placebos. In the ondansetron group nausea and vomiting developed in 17% and 12%, respectively, values significantly different from those with placebos (P less than 0.005). Similar differences were observed throughout the entire 24-h period after recovery, the incidence of nausea and vomiting being 67% and 60%, respectively, in the placebo group and 29% and 26% in the ondansetron treatment group. Ondansetron appears to be a promising antiemetic for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting.     

Effect of prophylactic ondansetron on postoperative nausea and vomiting after elective craniotomy.

This prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study was designed to evaluate the efficacy of ondansetron, a 5-HT3 antagonist, in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) after elective craniotomy in adult patients. The authors also tried to discover certain predictors for postcraniotomy nausea and vomiting. We studied 170 ASA physical status I and II patients, aged 15 to 70 years, undergoing elective craniotomy for resecting various intracranial tumors and vascular lesions. A standardized anesthesia technique and postoperative analgesia were used for all patients. Patients were divided into two groups and received either saline placebo (Group 1) or ondansetron 4 mg (Group 2) intravenously at the time of dural closure. Patients were extubated at the end of surgery and episodes of nausea and vomiting were noted for 24 hours postoperatively in the neurosurgical intensive care unit. Demographic data, duration of surgery, and anesthesia and analgesic requirements were comparable in both groups. Overall, a 24-hour incidence of postoperative emesis was significantly reduced in patients who received ondansetron compared with those who received a saline placebo (39% in Group 1 and 11% in Group 2, P = .001). There was a significant reduction in the frequency of emetic episodes and rescue antiemetic requirement in patients treated with ondansetron; however, ondansetron did not significantly reduce the incidence of nausea alone (14% in Group 2 vs 5% in Group 1, P = .065). Prophylactic ondansetron had a favorable influence on PONV outcome measures such as patient satisfaction and number needed to prevent emesis (3.5). Side effects were similar in both groups. We conclude that ondansetron 4 mg given at the time of dural closure is safe and effective in preventing emetic episodes after elective craniotomy in adult patients.     

Treatment of postoperative nausea and vomiting with ondansetron: a randomized, double-blind comparison with placebo

Postoperative nausea and vomiting are common after recovery from general anesthesia. The antiemetic effect and safety of ondansetron, a selective serotonin type 3 (5-HT3) receptor antagonist, was determined in 36 patients suffering from nausea or vomiting during recovery from intravenous anesthesia by giving either a single intravenous dose of ondansetron (8 mg, n = 18) or placebo (n = 18) over 2-5 min in a randomized, double-blind manner. A "rescue" antiemetic was provided in case of continued vomiting or at the patient's request. Antiemetic efficacy was defined as no request for rescue antiemetic and/or no vomiting episode during the next 4 h. There was no significant difference in the demographic data between the groups. Administration of ondansetron or placebo had no significant effect on vital signs. Ondansetron was an effective antiemetic in 78% (14/18) and placebo was effective in 28% (5/18) of the patients. Laboratory studies 24 h later showed no signs of hematologic, hepatic, or renal alterations. Ondansetron at a dose of 8 mg administered intravenously over 2-5 min appears to be a safe and effective antiemetic for the treatment of nausea and/or vomiting after intravenous anesthesia.     

Randomized,double-blinded comparison of tropisetron and placebo for prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting after supratentorial craniotomy

This prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blinded study was designed to evaluate the efficacy of tropisetron in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting after elective supratentorial craniotomy in adult patients. We studied 65 ASA physical status I-III patients aged 18 to 76 years who were undergoing elective craniotomy for resection of various supratentorial tumors. Patients were divided into two groups and received either 2 mg of tropisetron (group T) or saline placebo (group P) intravenously at the time of dural closure. A standard general anesthetic technique was used. Episodes of nausea and vomiting and the need for rescue antiemetic medication were recorded during 24 hours postoperatively. Demographic data, duration of surgery and anesthesia, and sedation scores were comparable in both groups. Nausea occurred in 30% of group T patients and in 46.7% of group P patients (P >.05). The incidence of emetic episodes was 26.7% and 56.7% in the two groups (P <.05). Rescue antiemetic medication was needed in 26.7% and 60% of the patients (P <.05). Administration of a single dose of tropisetron (2 mg intravenously) given at the time of dural closure was effective in reducing postoperative nausea and vomiting after elective craniotomy for supratentorial tumor resection in adult patients.     

Prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting with granisetron and dolasetron in relation to CYP2D6 genotype

We investigated the efficacy of granisetron and dolasetron in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting. Because the metabolism of the various antiemetic 5-hydroxytryptamine type 3 (5-HT3) antagonists involves different isoforms of the hepatic cytochrome P450 system, we examined the relationship between the clinical efficacy of these drugs and polymorphic cytochrome P450 2D6 (CYP2D6) genotype. This prospective, randomized, double-blind study involved 150 adult patients with a moderate to high risk for postoperative nausea and vomiting. All subjects received dexamethasone at induction of anesthesia followed by either 12.5 mg of dolasetron or 1 mg of granisetron. We analyzed the number of complete responders (no vomiting or rescue medication) during the first 24 hours after surgery. CYP2D6 genotyping was performed using a TaqMan real-time polymerase chain reaction. A complete response was more frequent in the granisetron group (54.7%) compared with the dolasetron group (38.7%, P < 0.05). In subjects receiving dolasetron, carriers of the duplication of the CYP2D6 allele predicting ultrarapid metabolizer status had more frequent vomiting episodes (P < 0.05) than patients in the granisetron group. It is postulated that the difference in the antiemetic efficacy between two investigated 5-HT3 receptor antagonists may be associated with differences in the carrier status for the duplication of the CYP2D6 allele.     

A randomized controlled comparison of electro-acupoint stimulation or ondansetron versus placebo for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting

In this study we evaluated the efficacy of electro-acupoint stimulation, ondansetron versus placebo for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). Patients undergoing major breast surgery under general anesthesia were randomized into active electro-acupoint stimulation (A), ondansetron 4 mg IV (O), or sham control (placement of electrodes without electro-acupoint stimulation; placebo [P]). The anesthetic regimen was standardized. The incidence of nausea, vomiting, rescue antiemetic use, pain, and patient satisfaction with management of PONV were assessed at 0, 30, 60, 90, 120 min, and at 24 h. The complete response (no nausea, vomiting, or use of rescue antiemetic) was significantly more frequent in the active treatment groups compared with placebo both at 2 h (A/O/P = 77%/64%/42%, respectively; P = 0.01) and 24 h postoperatively (A/O/P = 73%/52%/38%, respectively; P = 0.006). The need for rescue antiemetic was less in the treatment groups (A/O/P = 19%/28%/54%; P = 0.04). Specifically, the incidence and severity of nausea were significantly less in the A group compared with the other groups, and in the O group compared with the P group (A/O/P = 19%/40%/79%, respectively). The A group experienced less pain in the postanesthesia care unit, compared with the O and P groups. Patients in the treatment groups were more satisfied with their management of PONV compared with placebo. When used for the prevention of PONV, electro-acupoint stimulation or ondansetron was more effective than placebo with greater degree of patient satisfaction, but electro-acupoint stimulation seems to be more effective in controlling nausea, compared with ondansetron. Stimulation at P6 also has analgesic effects.     

Tropisetron vs ondansetron for prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized double-blind,placebo-controlled study

Background: Postoperative nausea and vomiting are observed in increased frequency after laparoscopic surgery. This study was performed in order to compare the efficacy of two 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 (5-HT3) receptor antagonists, ondansetron and tropisetron, in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Methods: Using a randomized, double-blind study design, 87 ASA I and II patients scheduled for laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomly assigned to receive 4 mg ondansetron (Group A, n = 29), 5 mg tropisetron (Group B, n = 31), or placebo (Group C, n = 27) intravenously (IV) before induction of anesthesia. The end points evaluated were frequency of nausea, nausea intensity rated on a scale from 1 (mild) to 5 (most severe), frequency of vomiting, and need for rescue antiemetics. These parameters were measured immediately after surgery (0 h), at 3 h, 6 h, and 12 h postoperatively. Results: The frequency of nausea was significantly higher in group A (31.2%) compared to group B (14%) at 12 h postoperatively (p <0.01). However, patients of group A had significantly lower nausea scores at 3 h postoperatively compared to group B. Postoperative vomiting occurred in 13.8% of patients in group A and 9.6% of patients in group B throughout the whole study period (p = n.s.). The need for rescue antiemetics was similar between groups A and B. Both groups were superior to placebo concerning all studied parameters. Conclusion: Our results show that ondansetron may be more effective in controlling nausea intensity during the first 3 h after laparoscopic cholecystectomy, while tropisetron has a longer-acting activity, with a major impact on nausea frequency at 12 h postoperatively.     

Use of Anti-Emetics after Intragastric Balloon Placement: Experience with Three Different Drug Treatments

Background: Tropisetron treatment was compared with alizapride treatment. The secondary aim was to assess whether droperidol supplement would still improve the therapeutic outcome of tropisetron. Materials and Methods: A series of 51 obese patients was treated with an intragastric balloon to obtain weight reduction. Patients were divided at random into 3 groups. Each group received a different antiemetic and spasmolytic regimen to control postoperative nausea and vomiting for 24 hours. Statistical analysis of both parameters showed that all 3 populations are comparable and the studied incidence of vomiting was only influenced by the choice of the antiemetics used. A specially developed form was completed during the recovery period every 6 hours until 24 hours postoperatively and recorded all episodes of vomiting. The incidence of vomiting was then calculated as number of episodes/24 hours Results: The incidence of vomiting was significantly lower in the tropisetron group compared to the alizapride group. There was no significant difference between the tropisetron group and the tropisetron plus droperidol group. Conclusion: To decrease the incidence of vomiting in patients undergoing intragastric balloon placement, tropisetron proved to be the most effective antiemetic. A supplement of droperidol gave no better results but impaired postoperative mood and wellbeing. Alizapride was least effective.     

Tropisetron in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting

STUDY OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy of tropisetron, a selective 5-HT(3) receptor antagonist, in preventing nausea and vomiting in high-risk inpatients undergoing various surgical procedures. DESIGN: Prospective, open, nonrandomized, observational, interventional study. SETTING: Postanesthesia care unit, and surgical wards of the University Hospital Center, Charleroi. PATIENTS: A total of 1,132 elective surgical inpatients (>15 years of age) in two separate surveys. The first prospective survey covered all surgical adult inpatients (n = 671) after various surgical procedures over a 3-month period. A new 3-month survey was performed to assess the effectiveness of the preventive measure and included another 461 patients. INTERVENTIONS: Risk factors associated with nausea and vomiting were recorded in the first survey and used to establish an antiemetic policy. This consisted in the administration of tropisetron 2 mg intravenously after anesthesia induction, if two patient-related risk factors associated with high-risk surgery and general anesthesia were present. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Nausea frequency and intensity, assessed every 4 hours using a visual analog scale (VAS), frequency and times of vomiting episodes and the need for rescue medication were recorded for 72 hours postoperatively. Nausea was experienced by 18.8% and vomiting by 9.8% of the patients in the first survey (211 high risk-patients of 671). In the second survey, 137 patients of 461, considered at high-risk received prophylactic tropisetron. The proportion of patients having nausea decreased to 11.1% (p,178 0.01) and vomiting episodes to 2.8% (p < 0.001). Twenty-six of the tropisetron-treated patients (19%) suffered subsequent postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). Patient satisfaction with tropisetron was high. CONCLUSION: Prophylactic tropisetron can reduce the incidence of PONV in selected high-risk inpatients undergoing various types of surgical procedures.     

Prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting by ondansetron]

This study was carried out to assess the efficacy of oral ondansetron, a new 5HT3 receptor antagonist, in patients undergoing thyroid surgery. It included 60 patients, randomly assigned to two groups, and receiving orally, 1 h before induction of anaesthesia, either 8 mg of ondansetron (n = 29) or a placebo (n = 30). One patient was excluded. The same anaesthetic protocol, consisting of 3 to 5 micrograms.kg-1 of fentanyl, 4 to 6 mg.kg-1 of thiopentone, and 0.5 mg.kg-1 of atracurium, was used in all. Anaesthesia was maintained with 50% nitrous oxide in oxygen with 0.8 to 1% endtidal concentration of isoflurane and additional boluses of 0.1 mg of fentanyl as required. The incidence and intensity of nausea, graded mild, moderate or severe, and the incidence of vomiting were recorded postoperatively. During the first twelve hours after surgery, 40% of patients in the placebo group had nausea (16.7% mild, 20% moderate and 6.7% severe), and 50% vomited. In the ondansetron group, nausea and vomiting occurred in 13.8% and 20.4% of patients respectively. The 4 patients in the latter group complained of major nausea. The differences between the groups were statistically significant: p = 0.025 for nausea and p = 0.042 for vomiting. It is concluded that oral ondansetron, 8 mg taken orally 1 h before surgery, significantly reduces the incidence of nausea and vomiting during the first twelve postoperative hours. As it is easy to use and has no side-effects, it might be of interest in day-case surgery patients, despite its high cost.     

Ondansetron/promethazine combination or promethazine alone reduces nausea and vomiting after middle ear surgery

STUDY OBJECTIVES: To determine the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting when a combination of ondansetron and promethazine is given prophylactically, and to ascertain the effect of postoperative nausea and vomiting on recovery room duration and patient satisfaction. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study. SETTING: University-affiliated tertiary-care hospital. PATIENTS: 87 ASA physical status I and II adult patients scheduled for middle ear surgery. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive one of the following interventions intravenously: ondansetron 4 mg (Group 1), promethazine 25 mg (Group 2), ondansetron 2 mg plus promethazine 12.5 mg (Group 3, combination), or placebo (Group 4). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Independent, study blinded observers recorded complaints of nausea and number of episodes of vomiting for 24 hours following the patient's first response to commands. All patients were contacted the day after discharge to inquire about nausea and vomiting. The awakening time, postanesthesia care unit and day surgery unit durations, opioid use, and side effects were recorded. At the end of the 24-hour period, the study blinded observers asked patients for an overall assessment of their global anesthesia experience using an 11-point scale. During the 24-hour period, the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting was reduced from 74% (placebo) to 39% (promethazine; p = 0.03) and 29% (combination; p = 0.003). Compared with placebo, the severity of vomiting was significantly less in the combination group (p = 0.04). The number of very satisfied patients correlated negatively with the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (p < 0.0001) and with the severity of vomiting (p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: The prophylactic use of an antiemetic with middle ear surgery may reduce postoperative nausea and vomiting over 24 hours, and the ondansetron/promethazine combination or promethazine alone are cost-effective choices. Finally, the combination reduced significantly the severity of vomiting.     

Prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting after intrathecal morphine for Cesarean section: a randomized comparison of dexamethasone, droperidol, and a combination

BACKGROUND: Intrathecal morphine provides good analgesia after cesarean delivery but the side effects include nausea and vomiting. Low-dose droperidol (0.625 mg) combined with dexamethasone 4 mg is postulated to have an additive antiemetic effect with less side effects. We therefore compared single doses of dexamethasone and droperidol alone with a low-dose combination of the two, to prevent spinal morphine-induced nausea and vomiting after cesarean section. METHODS: In a double-blind study, 120 women undergoing elective cesarean section under spinal anesthesia (using 0.5% bupivacaine 10 mg and morphine 0.2 mg) were allocated randomly to receive dexamethasone 8 mg, droperidol 1.25 mg, dexamethasone 4 mg and droperidol 0.625 mg, or placebo, before the end of surgery. The incidences of nausea and vomiting, sedative score, pain score, and side effects were recorded. RESULTS: The incidence of nausea and vomiting within 6 h postoperatively was lower and incidence of no nausea and vomiting for 24 h postoperatively was significantly higher for the combination group compared to the placebo group and the dexamethasone only group. Sedation scores within 3 h postoperatively and incidence of restlessness for the combination group were significantly lower than in the droperidol only group. CONCLUSION: An additive antiemetic effect and no significant side effects were shown for the combination of dexamethasone 4 mg and droperidol 0.625 mg. This combination was more effective than either dexamethasone 8 mg or droperidol 1.25 mg alone in preventing nausea and vomiting after spinal anesthesia using 0.5% bupivacaine and morphine 0.2 mg.     

A randomized, double-blind comparison of ondansetron versus placebo for prevention of nausea and vomiting after infratentorial craniotomy

Ondansetron was compared with placebo for nausea and vomiting prophylaxis after fentanyl/isoflurane/relaxant anesthesia and infratentorial craniotomy. Eight milligrams intravenous ondansetron or vehicle was administered at skin closure. Nausea, emesis, and antiemetic use were recorded at 0, 0.5, 1, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 48 hours. There were no significant intergroup differences for nausea incidence at any interval, but cumulatively the placebo group was 3.2 times more likely to develop nausea during the first 12 hours (P = .04). Nausea incidence was bimodal in both groups, peaking during the first 1 to 4 hours. A nadir occurred at 8 to 12 hours, but nausea increased during the next 36 hours. By 48 hours, approximately 40% of patients in both groups were still nauseated. Reduced vomiting frequency was seen with ondansetron at 4, 8, 12, and 24 hours (P < .05). Despite rescue antiemetics, emesis occurred in an irregular pattern with episodes still observed in 35% of placebo patients at 48 hours. For ondansetron, emesis was infrequent for the first 12 hours but then a persistent increase was observed (48 hours, 22%). The incidence of rescue antiemetic use was 65% for both groups. There was no effect of gender. Nausea and vomiting are frequent and protracted after infratentorial craniotomy. Administration of single-dose ondansetron (8 mg intravenously) at wound closure was partially effective in reducing acute nausea and vomiting but had little delayed benefit. Scheduled prophylactic administration of antiemetic therapy during the first 48 hours after infratentorial craniotomy should be evaluated for efficacy and safety.     

Impact of an antiemetic protocol on postoperative nausea and vomiting in children

The objective of the study was to demonstrate a decreased incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in children through the use of an antiemetic protocol. PONV was recorded in children (1.5-15 years) after inpatient surgery under general anaesthesia in a prospective, interview based survey. Group 1 consisted of children having surgery 1 month before the introduction of a formalized antiemetic protocol and group 2, 2 months after its introduction. Data were collected over a 1-month period in each group. Outcome measures of nausea, emesis, antiemetic requirement and patient satisfaction were monitored for the first 24-h postoperative period. There were 272 children enrolled: 138 in group 1 and 134 in group 2. There was a difference between the two groups for gender (P=0.03), type of surgery (P=0.017), perioperative opioid (P=0.003) and perioperative antiemetic use (P=0.024). However, multivariate analysis did not demonstrate an impact on outcome from these factors. The incidence of postoperative nausea (PON) and postoperative vomiting (POV) following the introduction of the protocol was 36% and 34%, respectively. Moderate to severe nausea was decreased after introduction of the protocol (18% versus 9%, P=0.028) but moderate to severe vomiting failed to reach significance (19% versus 11%, P=0.078). The proportion of children who had repeated nausea decreased after the introduction of the protocol (17% versus 8%, P=0.02) but repeated episodes of vomiting remained unchanged (19% versus 14%). This was attributed to a significant increase in antiemetic prescribing by protocol in group 2 (10% versus 59%, P < 0.001). Patient satisfaction was high in both groups (85% versus 90%). The introduction of a postoperative antiemetic protocol improved prescribing frequency. This resulted in a decreased incidence of moderate to severe PON and a reduction in the number of patients with repeated nausea.     

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.     

Dexamethasone decreases epidural morphine-related nausea and vomiting.

The aim of our study was to compare the antiemetic effect of IV dexamethasone with saline control in preventing epidural morphine-related nausea and vomiting. Eighty patients requiring epidural anesthesia for abdominal total hysterectomy were enrolled in a randomized, double-blinded, and placebo-controlled study. At the end of surgery, all patients received epidural morphine 3 mg for relief of postoperative pain. Before the morphine injection, the dexamethasone group (n = 40) received IV dexamethasone 8 mg, whereas the saline group (n = 40) received IV saline. We found that the incidence of postoperative vomiting was 5% in the dexamethasone group and 25% in the saline group (P<0.05). The total incidence of nausea and vomiting was 16% in the dexamethasone group and 56% in the saline group (P<0.001). IV dexamethasone 8 mg significantly decreases the incidence of epidural morphine-related nausea and vomiting. IMPLICATIONS: We evaluated IV dexamethasone versus saline control in preventing epidural morphine-related nausea and vomiting in patients receiving epidural morphine for postoperative pain control. We found that IV dexamethasone significantly decreased the total incidence of nausea and vomiting after epidural morphine. IV dexamethasone may be a valuable treatment for preventing epidural morphine-related nausea and vomiting.