Placebo-controlled comparison of dolasetron and metoclopramide in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing hysterectomy

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: In a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial, we compared the efficacy of dolasetron and metoclopramide in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in women undergoing hysterectomy. METHODS: Patients were allocated randomly to one of three groups: group A (n = 50) received 50 mg dolasetron orally, group B (n = 50) received 20 mg metoclopramide intravenously and placebo orally, group C (n = 50) received placebo orally. If patients complained of retching or vomiting, or if patients demanded an antiemetic, 1.25 mg droperidol was administrated 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. The Raatz test was used to analyse postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) scores. RESULTS: Dolasetron reduced the postoperative nausea and vomiting score significantly (P < 0.02 vs. metoclopramide; P < 0.0001 vs. placebo). Metoclopramide also reduced the postoperative nausea and vomiting score (P < 0.02 vs. placebo). Fisher's exact test showed a significant reduction of vomiting in the dolasetron group 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 (in Fisher's exact test). The use of postoperative droperidol per patient was significantly lower in the dolasetron group (P < 0.04 vs. metoclopramide; P < 0.0001 vs. placebo) than in the metoclopramide (P < 0.02 vs. placebo) and in the placebo groups. CONCLUSIONS: Oral dolasetron is more effective than either metoclopramide given intravenously or placebo for preventing vomiting after hysterectomy. It also was significantly superior to either metoclopramide or placebo concerning the PONV score and the need for droperidol rescue.     

Reduction of emetic symptoms during cesarean delivery with antiemetics: propofol at subhypnotic dose versus traditional antiemetics

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of propofol (at a subhypnotic dose), droperidol, and metoclopramide in reducing emetic symptoms during cesarean delivery. DESIGN: Randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study. SETTING: University hospital. PATIENTS: 100 ASA physical status I and II parturients undergoing cesarean delivery with spinal anesthesia. INTERVENTIONS: Patients received placebo (saline) followed by placebo (Intralipid(R)), placebo (saline) followed by propofol at a subhypnotic dose (1.0 mg/kg/hr), droperidol 1.25 mg followed by placebo (Intralipid(R)), or metoclopramide 10 mg followed by placebo (Intralipid(R)) intravenously (IV) immediately after clamping of the umbilical cord. MEASUREMENT AND MAIN RESULTS: The percentage of patients who were emesis-free, which was defined as experiencing no nausea, retching, or vomiting, in the intraoperative, postdelivery period was 80% with propofol, 80% with droperidol, and 78% with metoclopramide (p < 0.05), compared with placebo (40%). Severity of nausea was less inpatients who received propofol than in those who received placebo (p < 0.05), and there were no differences seen among the droperidol, metoclopramide, and placebo groups. No clinically serious adverse events as a result of the study drugs were observed in any of the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic antiemetic efficacy of propofol at a subhypnotic dose (1.0 mg/kg/hr), droperidol 1.25 mg, and metoclopramide 10 mg is comparable in parturients undergoing cesarean delivery. Moreover, propofol at a subhypnotic dose is effective in the prevention of severe nausea.     

Nausea and vomiting after dexamethasone versus droperidol following outpatient laparoscopy with a propofol-based general anesthetic

Background: The purpose of this randomized, double-blinded study was to compare the incidence and severity of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) after dexamethasone versus droperidol following gynecologic laparoscopy, a group at high risk for developing PONV.
Methods: Ninety-five patients who underwent a propofol-based general anesthetic received either dexamethasone 0.17 mg/kg IV, or droperidol 0.02 mg/kg IV, just prior to abdominal incision. Nausea, retching, vomiting, degree of sedation, and discharge times were assessed in the Post Anesthesia Care Unit (PACU), and the Ambulatory Care Unit (ACU). Following hospital discharge (24 h), the patients were contacted by telephone to assess any further complications.
Results: PONV in the PACU (14.6% vs. 14.9%) and ACU (8.3% vs. 14.9%) was as common after dexamethasone as after droperidol. PONV following hospital discharge was, however, less common after dexamethasone than after droperidol (4.2% vs. 17.0%, P =0.041). Postoperatively, no complications of therapy were detected.
Conclusions: We conclude that PONV is similar with dexamethasone and droperidol, but dexamethasone may have a longer duration of action in patients undergoing gynecologic laparoscopy.     

Comparison of oral dolasetron and ondansetron in the prophylaxis of postoperative nausea and vomiting in children

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: In a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial, we compared the efficacy of oral dolasetron and ondansetron in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in children after various surgical operations. METHODS: Children were assigned randomly to one of three groups (each contained 50 children) to receive dolasetron 1.8 mg kg(-1) or ondansetron 0.15 mg kg(-1) orally, or a placebo. All children received methylene blue capsules (10 mg) orally as an indicator before the induction of anaesthesia. Postoperatively, contamination of the mouth and the endotracheal tube by methylene blue was recorded, and postoperative nausea and vomiting was recorded for 0-1, 1-24 and 0-24 h. Metoclopramide (0.1 mg kg(-1)) intravenously was used as the rescue antiemetic. RESULTS: In the 0-1 h period after operation, there were no differences between the groups. In the 1-24 h period, dolasetron was significantly better than placebo (nausea 8 versus 24%; vomiting 4 versus 20%; total nausea and vomiting scores 16 versus 48%). Over the 0-24 h period, both dolasetron and ondansetron were significantly better than placebo (nausea 16 versus 26 versus 40%), vomiting (8 versus 16 versus 30%), and total nausea and vomiting scores (32 versus 48 versus 78%). There were no significant differences between dolasetron and ondansetron. There was no important methylene blue contamination, and little use of rescue metoclopramide. There were no important adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic oral dolasetron and ondansetron were effective in reducing postoperative nausea and vomiting in children.     

Prophylactic anti-emetic efficacy of ondansetron in laparoscopic cholecystectomy under total intravenous anaesthesiaA randomised, double-blind comparison with droperidol, metoclopramide and placebo

The prophylactic anti-emetic efficacy and safety of pre-operative intravenous ondansetron was evaluated in a randomised, double-blind, comparison with droperidol, metoclopramide and placebo in 160 ASA grade 1 and 2 patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy under total intravenous anaesthesia. The patients were randomly allocated to receive ondansetron (4 mg), droperidol (1.25 mg), metoclopramide (10 mg) or placebo given as a single intravenous dose immediately before induction of a standardised general anaesthetic. There were no significant differences between the four study groups with regard to the demographic and anaesthetic data, postoperative analgesia, postoperative sedation scores, duration of postoperative hospital stay and incidence of adverse events. The incidence of nausea and vomiting was significantly lower (p < 0.05) between 1 h and 4 h after surgery in the ondansetron group compared with the droperidol, metoclopramide and placebo groups. The incidence of nausea was similar in the four groups in the other study periods: 0-1 h and 4-24 h. The incidence of vomiting was lower in the ondansetron, droperidol and metoclopramide groups than in the placebo group between 1 and 4 h but was the same between 4 and 24 h. As a result of the lower incidence of nausea and vomiting between 1 h and 4 h in the ondansetron group, the overall incidence of nausea and vomiting was lower during the first 24 h after surgery in this group than in the other three groups.     

Prevention of nausea and vomiting with granisetron, droperidol and metoclopramide during and after spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

Background: Nausea and vomiting during and after spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section are distressing to the patient. This study was undertaken to evaluate the efficacy and safety of granisetron, droperidol and metoclopramide for the prevention of nausea and vomiting in parturients undergoing caesarean section under spinal anaesthesia.
Methods: In a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, 120 patients received granisetron 3 mg, droperidol 1.25 mg, metoclopramide 10 mg or placebo (saline) ( n =30 of each) i. v. immediately after clamping of the foetal umbilical cord. Nausea, vomiting and safety assessments were performed during and after spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section.
Results: The incidence of intraoperative, post-delivery nausea and vomiting was 13%, 17%, 20% and 63% after administration of granisetron, droperidol, metoclopramide and placebo, respectively; the corresponding incidence during 0–3 h after surgery was 7%, 27%, 27% and 43%; the corresponding incidence during 3–24 h after surgery was 7%, 20%, 23% and 37% ( P <0.05; overall Fisher's exact probability test). No clinically important adverse events were observed in any of the groups.
Conclusion: Granisetron is highly effective for preventing nausea and vomiting during and after spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section. Droperidol and metoclopramide are effective for the prevention of intraoperative, post-delivery emesis, but are ineffective for the reduction of the incidence of postoperative emesis.     

Ondansetron and dolasetron provide equivalent postoperative vomiting control after ambulatory tonsillectomy in dexamethasone-pretreated children

In this prospective, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study, we compared the incidence of emesis and 48-h recovery profiles after a single dose of preoperative ondansetron versus dolasetron in dexamethasone-pretreated children undergoing ambulatory tonsillectomy. One-hundred-forty-nine children, 2-12 yr old, ASA physical status I and II, completed the study. All children received standardized perioperative care, including premedication, surgical and anesthetic techniques, IV fluids, analgesics, and rescue antiemetic medications. Patients were randomized to receive ondansetron 0.15 mg/kg, maximum 4 mg (Group 1); dolasetron 0.5 mg/kg, maximum 25 mg (Group 2); or saline placebo (Group 3) IV before the initiation of surgery. In addition, all patients received dexamethasone 1 mg/kg (maximum 25 mg). Rescue antiemetics were administered for two or more episodes of retching/vomiting. The incidence of retching/vomiting before home discharge did not differ between the ondansetron and dolasetron groups and was significantly less frequent compared with the placebo group (10%, Group 1; 8%, Group 2; 30%, Group 3). Similar results were obtained at 24-48 h after discharge (6%, Groups 1 and 2; 18%, Group 3). The need for rescue antiemetics administered after the second retching/vomiting episode was significantly less in Groups 1 (4%) and 2 (6%) compared with Group 3 (22%) before home discharge. The complete response rate, defined as no retching/vomiting and no antiemetic for 48 h, was significantly increased in Groups 1 (76%) and 2 (74%) compared with Group 3 (44%). The antiemetic efficacy of prophylactic ondansetron and dolasetron was comparable in dexamethasone-pretreated children undergoing ambulatory tonsillectomy. IMPLICATIONS: The efficacy of a single dose of prophylactic ondansetron versus dolasetron in conjunction with dexamethasone was studied on posttonsillectomy retching/vomiting and 48-h recovery in children 2-12 yr old. Compared with placebo, ondansetron and dolasetron produced comparable reductions in the incidence of retching/vomiting and the need for rescue antiemetics.     

Metoclopramide does not decrease the incidence of nausea and vomiting after alfentanil for outpatient anaesthesia

Sixty patients were studied in a randomized, double-blind manner to determine whether metoclopramide added to droperidol decreased further the incidence of emetic symptoms (nausea, retching, vomiting) in outpatients receiving alfentanil anaesthesia for nasal surgery. Group 1 (n = 30) received metoclopramide 0.15 mg.kg-1 and Group 2 (n = 30) received placebo. In addition, both groups received droperidol 0.02 mg.kg-1 immediately before anaesthesia which was supplemented by alfentanil 20 micrograms.kg-1 at induction followed by an infusion of 0.25-1 micrograms.kg-1.min-1. Emetic symptoms were assessed 0-3 hr, 3-6 hr and 6-24 hr after surgery. Both groups received similar doses of alfentanil (mean +/- SD; Group 1 4641 +/- 1894 micrograms, Group 2 4714 +/- 1640 micrograms). The percentage of patients who had either nausea or vomiting at 0-3, 3-6 or 6-24 hr was 23%, 14% and 13% in Group 1; and 20%, 17% and 10% in Group 2. The overall incidence for each group was 8/30 (27%). There was no difference in the incidence of emetic symptoms between the groups at any time interval or throughout the study. Metoclopramide did not improve upon the antiemesis of droperidol during alfentanil anaesthesia for outpatient nasal surgery.     

Ondansetron versus dehydrobenzoperidol and metoclopramide for management of postoperative nausea in laparoscopic surgery patients.

BACKGROUND: In this prospective, randomized, double-blind study, we compared the efficacy of ondansetron versus dehydrobenzoperidol (droperidol) or metoclopramide in the treatment of established postoperative nausea and vomiting in 200 adult patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery under general anesthesia. METHODS: One hundred seventy-three American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) I and II patients satisfied inclusion criteria. Fifty-seven patients received ondansetron 4 mg (group O), 57 patients were given droperidol 1.25 mg (group D), and 59 patients received metoclopramide 10 mg (group M). Antiemetic efficacy was compared at 10 minutes and 30 minutes after the administration of the study drug. RESULTS: At 10 minutes, nausea scores in group O dropped from 8.3 to 3.7, in group D from 8.5 to 5, and in group M from 8.4 to 6.7; (P < 0.05 between the three groups). At 30 minutes, nausea scores were 1.3 in group O, 1.7 in group D, and 5 in group M; (P < 0.05 between group M and the other two groups). In the droperidol group, 25% of patients developed sedation. Patient satisfaction was best with ondansetron. CONCLUSIONS: Both ondansetron and droperidol were more effective in the treatment of established postoperative nausea and vomiting than was metoclopramide. However, patients were satisfied best with ondansetron, which acts faster and causes less sedation than droperidol.     

Prevention of nausea and vomiting in female patients undergoing breast surgery: A comparison with granisetron, droperidol, metoclopramide and placebo

Background : Breast surgery is associated with a relatively high incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). This study was undertaken to evaluate the efficacy of granisetron, droperidol and metoclopramide for preventing PONV after breast surgery.
Methods : In a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, 120 female patients received granisetron 40μg.kg^-1, droperidol 1.25 mg, metoclopramide 10 mg or placebo (saline) (n=30 for each) intravenously immediately before the induction of anaesthesia. A standard general anaesthetic technique was employed throughout. Postoperatively, during the first 24 h after anaesthesia, the incidence of PONV and adverse events was recorded.
Results : The incidence of PONV was 17% with granisetron, 37% with droperidol, 43% with metoclopramide and 50% with placebo ( P <0.05; overall Fisher's exact probability test). The incidence of adverse events was not different among the groups.
Conclusion : Granisetron is highly effective for reducing the incidence of PONV in female patients undergoing breast surgery. Droperidol and metoclopramide are ineffective in this population.     

Prophylactic anti-emetic therapy with granisetron, droperidol and metoclopramide in female patients undergoing middle ear surgery

The efficacy of granisetron, droperidol and metoclopramide for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in female patients undergoing middle ear surgery was compared. In a randomised, double-blind study, 180 patients received granisetron 40 micrograms.kg-1, droperidol 20 micrograms.kg-1 or metoclopramide 0.2 mg.kg-1 given intravenously immediately before induction of anaesthesia (n = 60 for each). A standardised general anaesthetic technique was employed throughout. A complete response, defined as no postoperative nausea and vomiting and no need for another rescue anti-emetic, during the first 3 h after anaesthesia was achieved in 83%, 58% and 55% of patients who had received granisetron, droperidol and metoclopramide, respectively. The corresponding incidence during the next 21 h after anaesthesia was 85%, 54% and 47% (p < 0.05). No clinically important adverse effects were observed in any of the groups. We conclude that prophylactic therapy with granisetron is superior to droperidol or metoclopramide in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting after middle ear surgery.     

RETRACTED ARTICLE: Dolasetron, but not metoclopramide prevents nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy

PURPOSE: Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is one of the most frequent complications of general anesthesia. The aim of the study was to compare the antiemetic efficacy of dolasetron and metoclopramide after inhalational or i.v. anesthesia (IVA). METHODS: In a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blinded trial we evaluated the efficacy of 12.5 mg dolasetron i.v. and 20 mg metoclopramide (MCP) i.v. in preventing PONV in 387 patients (ASA I-III) undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Patients were allocated randomly to one of three main groups: Group D (n = 129) received 12.5 mg dolasetron i.v., Group MCP (n = 129) 20 mg MCP i.v., and Group C (n = 129) saline as placebo i.v. Using a multifactorial study design, one third of each main group (n = 43) was further randomized to receive either general anesthesia with desflurane, isoflurane or IVA with propofol and remifentanil. PONV, postoperative piritramide and droperidol consumption were documented. RESULTS: Independent from the anesthesia regimen chosen, dolasetron reduced PONV (19%) significantly compared to MCP (45%) and placebo (46%). Furthermore we could show a significant difference in the incidence of PONV between IVA (28%) and isoflurane (46%), but not in comparison to desflurane (36%). Patients receiving IVA had a higher postoperative piritramide consumption compared to the two other groups. CONCLUSIONS: The results of our study suggest that dolasetron was more effective than MCP and placebo in preventing PONV. This action is independent of the anesthetic technique used.     

Low-dose dexamethasone reduces nausea and vomiting after epidural morphine: a comparison of metoclopramide with saline

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of a low dose of dexamethasone (5 mg) with metoclopramide 10 mg and saline in preventing nausea and vomiting after epidural morphine in posthysterectomy analgesia. DESIGN: Randomized, placebo-controlled study. SETTING: Inpatient surgery at Municipal Women's and Children's General Hospital. PATIENTS: 120 ASA physical status I and II women receiving epidural morphine for posthysterectomy analgesia. INTERVENTIONS: All patients received epidural morphine 3 mg for postoperative analgesia. The dexamethasone group (n = 40) received dexamethasone 5 mg, the metoclopramide group (n = 40) received metoclopramide 10 mg, and the saline group (n = 40) received saline. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The occurrence of nausea and vomiting appeared more frequently during 6 to 24 hours following the administration of epidural morphine. The total frequency of nausea and vomiting in the dexamethasone group was significantly lower than that of the metoclopramide and saline groups during this period, with reporting frequencies of 21%, 49%, and 53%, respectively (p <.05 each). However, the difference between metoclopramide and saline did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: Dexamethasone 5 mg was more effective than metoclopramide or saline in the prevention of nausea and vomiting associated with epidural morphine for postoperative analgesia.     

Comparison of domperidone, droperidol, and metoclopramide in the prevention and treatment of nausea and vomiting after balanced general anesthesia

Women (185) undergoing elective orthopedic surgery under balanced general anesthesia were given 5 or 10 mg of domperidone, 1.25 mg of droperidol, 10 mg of metoclopramide, or a saline placebo intravenously in a double-blind random fashion 5 minutes before the end of anesthesia to prevent postoperative vomiting. Administration of the same antiemetic was repeated intramuscularly during the first 24 hours postoperatively if the patient complained of nausea or retched or vomited. Sigificantly (p less than 0.05 to p less than 0.001), fewer of the patients given droperidol were nauseated (25%) or vomited (17%) in comparison with patients given saline (incidence of nausea was 55% and vomiting 40%). Incidences of nausea and vomiting were similar in patients given domperidone, metoclopramide, or saline. Furthermore, 39 to 45% of the patients given domperidone, metoclopramide, or saline needed additional doses of the same drug, whereas only 22% of the patient given droperidol required a second dose. It is concluded that droperidol is effective in the prevention and treatment of postoperative nausea and vomiting after balanced general anesthesia but that domperidone or metoclopramide are not.     

COMPARISON OF THE USE OF DOMPERIDONE, DROPERIDOL AND METOCLOPRAMIDE IN THE PREVENTION OF NAUSEA AND VOMITING FOLLOWING GYNAECOLOGICAL SURGERY IN DAY CASES

The efficacy of domperidone 20 mg, droperidol 2.5 mg, metoclopramide10 mg or placebo (saline) administered i.v. before inductionof anaesthesia, was studied in 199 women undergoing gynaecologicalsurgery as day cases. Following a standardized general anaesthetictechnique, droperidol or metoclopramide significantly reducedthe incidence of nausea and vomiting; domperidone decreasedthe incidence of postoperative nausea alone. The occurrenceof extrapyramidal reactions was similar in all groups. Patientstreated with antiemetics were no more sedated than those givenplacebo. Those receiving droperidol complained of significantlyless postoperative pain than those who had received domperidoneor metoclopramide.     

RETRACTED ARTICLE: Prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting with granisetron: a randomized,double-blind comparison with droperidol

The effects of granisetron for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting were investigated in a randomized, double-blind comparison with droperidol and placebo in 100 patients undergoing general anaesthesia for major gynaecological surgery. The patients received a single dose of either granisetron (40 μg · kg^{? 1}, n = 25), dropéridol (1.25 mg, n = 25; 2.5 mg n = 25) or placebo (saline, n = 25) iv over two to five minutes immediately before induction of anaesthesia. The antiemetic effects of these drugs were evaluated during the first three and the next 21 hr after recovery from anaesthesia. During 0– 3 hr after anaesthesia, the frequency of nausea and vomiting was 60%, 12%, 16% and 12% after administration of placebo, granisetron, droperidol 1.25 mg or droperidol 2.5 mg, respectively. The corresponding frequencies during 3– 24 hr after anaesthesia were 44%, 8%, 36% and 12%. The efficacy of granisetron in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting was almost equal to that of droperidol 2.5 mg. The awakening time in the patients who had received droperidol 2.5 mg was prolonged by approximately three minutes compared with the placebo group (P < 0.05), and postoperative drowsiness/sedation was observed in these patients. In conclusion, preoperative prophylactic administration of granisetron is superior to that of droperidol in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting after anaesthesia.     

The prophylactic effect of dexamethasone on postoperative nausea and vomiting in women undergoing thyroidectomy: a comparison of droperidol with saline.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the prophylactic effect of dexamethasone on postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in women undergoing thyroidectomy. Droperidol and saline served as controls. One hundred twenty women (n = 40 in each of three groups) undergoing thyroidectomy under general anesthesia were enrolled in this randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study. Immediately before the induction of anesthesia, Group 1 received IV dexamethasone 10 mg, whereas Groups 2 and 3 received IV droperidol 1.25 mg and saline, respectively. We found that both dexamethasone and droperidol significantly decreased the total incidence of PONV compared with saline, with an incidence of 32%, 35%, and 76%, respectively (P<0.01; Group 1 versus Group 3, Group 2 versus Group 3). Patients who received droperidol, however, reported a higher intensity of sore throat and a more frequent incidence of restlessness than those who received dexamethasone. We conclude that, although both dexamethasone and droperidol are effective as prophylactic antiemetics in women undergoing thyroidectomy, droperidol produces more side effects. IMPLICATIONS: We compared the prophylactic administration of dexamethasone to prevent nausea and vomiting with droperidol and saline in women undergoing thyroidectomy. Both dexamethasone and droperidol significantly reduced postoperative nausea and vomiting, but droperidol produced more side effects, which suggests that dexamethasone is a useful treatment in these patients.     

Haloperidol or droperidol with dexamethasone for antiemetic prophylaxis in laparoscopic cholecystectomy

OBJECTIVES: To compare haloperidol to droperidol, both with dexamethasone, for antiemetic prophylaxis in elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Prospective, randomized double-blind trial enrolling 75 ASA 1-2 patients who received anesthesia with propofol and remifentanil. After induction, 8 mg of intravenous dexamethasone was administered. After surgery, depending on group assignment, patients received 10 microg x kg(-1) of intravenous haloperidol (n = 25), 10 microg x kg(-1) of droperidol (n = 25), or physiologic saline solution (n = 25). Outcomes recorded were episodes of nausea or vomiting in the postoperative period (first 6 hours and/or 6-24 hours), requirement for antiemetic agents, morphine consumption, pain assessed on a visual analog scale, level of sedation, and adverse effects. RESULTS: Five patients in the haloperidol group, 6 in the droperidol group, and 13 in the control group experienced an episode of nausea or vomiting in the 24-hour postoperative period (P < .05 between the active treatment groups and the control group). One patient in the haloperidol group, 6 in the droperidol group, and 8 in the control group reported nausea in the first 6 hours (P < .05). Three patients in the haloperidol group, 1 in the droperidol group, and 8 in the control group reported nausea in the later postoperative period (6-24 hours) (P < .05, droperidol vs control). Three patients in the haloperidol group, 1 in the droperidol group, and 7 in the control group experienced late vomiting (P < .05, droperidol vs control). CONCLUSIONS: Either haloperidol or droperidol in combination with dexamethasone is more effective than dexamethasone alone for antiemetic prophylaxis after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.     

Prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in gynecologic surgery with 3 fixed doses of metoclopramide, droperidol or placebo

OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy and side effects of three doses of metoclopramide, droperidol or placebo administered every 8 h to prevent nausea and vomiting during the first 24 h after surgery. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Prospective, double blind study of 104 patients scheduled for major intraabdominal gynecological surgery under general anesthesia. The patients were randomly assigned to three groups: group M received 10 mg of metoclopramide, group D received 1.25 mg of droperidol and group P received a saline solution. The patients were premedicated with oral diazepam. All patients were anesthetized using similar techniques, with fentanyl, thiopental, vecuronium, oxygen/nitrogen protoxide and isoflurane. Muscle relaxation was reversed with atropine and neostigmine. Postoperative analgesia was given with endovenous morphine and metamizol. Immediately after surgery each patient received an endovenous dose of the assigned antiemetic drug. Patients were monitored for 24 h and observations were recorded every hour on the following scale: 0, for no emetic symptoms, 1 for nausea and 2 for vomiting. RESULTS: Fifteen patients (42.9%) in group D, 21 (60% in group M and 19 (54.3%) in group P experienced nausea during the 24 h after surgery, with no significant differences. However, the incidence of vomiting was significantly lower in group D, with 7 patients (20%) vomiting in group D versus 11 patients (31.43%) in group M and 17 (50%) in group P. Side effects were mild and required no treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Droperidol at a dose of 1.25 mg every 8 h is effective and safe for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting and has minimal side effects. Metoclopramide at a dose of 10 mg every 8 h, in our study, was no better for the same purpose than placebo.     

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.