Prophylactic antiemetic effect of midazolam after middle ear surgery

The effect of perioperative benzodiazepine administration on postoperative nausea and vomiting: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Despite recent systematic reviews suggesting their benefit for postoperative nausea, vomiting, or both (PONV) prevention, benzodiazepines have not been incorporated into guidelines for PONV prophylaxis because of concerns about possible adverse effects. We conducted an updated meta-analysis to inform future practice guidelines.

METHODS

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of all languages comparing benzodiazepines with non-benzodiazepine comparators in adults undergoing inpatient surgery. Our outcomes were postoperative nausea, vomiting, or both. We assessed risk of bias for RCTs using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. We pooled data using a random-effects model and assessed the quality of evidence for each outcome using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

RESULTS

We screened 31 413 abstracts and 950 full texts. We included 119 RCTs; 104 were included in quantitative synthesis. Based on moderate certainty evidence, we found that perioperative benzodiazepine administration reduced the incidence of PONV (52 studies, n=5086, relative risk [RR]: 0.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.66-0.89; number needed to treat [NNT] 16; moderate certainty), postoperative nausea (55 studies, n=5916, RR: 0.72, 95% CI 0.62-0.83; NNT 21; moderate certainty), and postoperative vomiting (52 studies, n=5909, RR: 0.74, 95% CI 0.60-0.91; NNT 55; moderate certainty).

CONCLUSIONS

Moderate quality evidence shows that perioperative benzodiazepine administration decreases the incidence of PONV. The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis will inform future clinical practice guidelines.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW PROTOCOL

The protocol for this systematic review was pre-registered with PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42022361088) and published in BMJ Open (PMID 31831540).

Comparison of Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting Incidence between Remimazolam and Sevoflurane in Tympanoplasty with Mastoidectomy: A Single-Center, Double-Blind, Randomized Controlled Trial

Background and Objectives: Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a common adverse effect of general anesthesia, especially in middle ear surgery. Remimazolam is a newer benzodiazepine recently approved for use in general anesthesia. This study aimed to compare the incidence rate of PONV after tympanoplasty with mastoidectomy between using remimazolam and sevoflurane. Materials and Methods: This study included 80 patients undergoing elective tympanoplasty with mastoidectomy. The patients were randomly assigned to either the remimazolam or sevoflurane group. The primary outcome was the incidence rate of PONV 12 h after surgery. The secondary outcomes were the incidence rate of PONV 12-24 and 24-48 h after surgery, severity of PONV, incidence rate of vomiting, administration of rescue antiemetics, hemodynamic stability, and recovery profiles. Results: The incidence rate of PONV 0-12 h after tympanoplasty with mastoidectomy was significantly lower in the remimazolam group compared with that in the sevoflurane group (28.9 vs. 57.9%; p = 0.011). However, the incidence rate of delayed PONV did not differ between the two groups. PONV severity in the early periods after the surgery was significantly lower in the remimazolam group than in the sevoflurane group. The incidence rate of adverse hemodynamic events was lower in the remimazolam group than in the sevoflurane group, but there was no difference in the overall trends of hemodynamic data between the two groups. There was no difference in recovery profiles between the two groups. Conclusions: Remimazolam can significantly reduce the incidence rate of early PONV after tympanoplasty with mastoidectomy under general anesthesia.

Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting in Opioid-Free Anesthesia Versus Opioid Based Anesthesia in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy

Background: Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a usual complication in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Minimized opioid use due to surgery has been shown to have a better effect on patient recovery after surgery. In this study we evaluate the effect of opioid free anesthesia for postoperative nausea and vomiting in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Materials and methods: 80 patients aged 20-65 years old were included in this randomized, clinical and prospective trial. The patients belonged to the ASA classifications 1 and 2 and were scheduled for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Patients were classified into two groups: group 1 (fentanyl group- FG), which included 40 patients who received opioid anesthesia, and group 2 (opioid free anesthesia group-OFAG) which included 40 patients who received opioid free anesthesia. In patients from group 1 (fentanyl group -FG) introduction to general anesthesia consisted of giving midazolam at 0.04 mg/kg, fentanyl at 0.002 mg/kg, 2 mg/kg of propofol and 0.6 mg/kg of rocuronium bromide. These patients received fractionated bolus doses of fentanyl during surgery. Prior to general anesthesia these patients did not receive dexamethasone. The patients from group 2 (opioid free anesthesia group - OFAG) received dexamethasone at 0.1 mg/kg and 1 g of paracetamol before introduction to anesthesia as a pre-emptive analgesia. Introduction to anesthesia consisted of giving midazolam at 0.04 mg/kg, lidocaine at 1 mg/kg, propofol at 2 mg/kg, ketamine at 0.5 mg/kg, and 0.6 mg/kg of rocuronium bromide. Immediately after intubation, continuous intravenous infusion with lidocaine at 2 mg/kg/h and magnesium sulfate at 1.5 g/h was given. In this group, fentanyl was not given either during the introduction of anesthesia or during the intraoperative period. Immediately after extraction of the gallbladder patients from group 2 (OFAG) received 2.5 g of metamizole intravenously. PONV were recorded in the postoperative period of 24 hours after surgery. Results: There was no significant difference with respect to age, weight, sex, duration of surgery, and anesthesia time. PONV at different time intervals were statistically not significant at all postoperative time points - 1 hr, 4 hr, 8 hr, 12 hr and 24 hr after surgery in fentanyl group compared to opioid free anesthesia group. Even not statistically significant, PONV have occurred more often in patients who received opioid anesthesia. Conclusion: Postoperative nausea and vomiting occurs more often in patients who received opioids during laparoscopic cholecystectomy compared to patients who received opioid free anesthesia, but without statistical significance.

Management strategies for the treatment and prevention of postoperative/postdischarge nausea and vomiting: an updated review

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) and postdischarge nausea and vomiting (PDNV) remain common and distressing complications following surgery. The routine use of opioid analgesics for perioperative pain management is a major contributing factor to both PONV and PDNV after surgery. PONV and PDNV can delay discharge from the hospital or surgicenter, delay the return to normal activities of daily living after discharge home, and increase medical costs. The high incidence of PONV and PDNV has persisted despite the introduction of many new antiemetic drugs (and more aggressive use of antiemetic prophylaxis) over the last two decades as a result of growth in minimally invasive ambulatory surgery and the increased emphasis on earlier mobilization and discharge after both minor and major surgical procedures (e.g. enhanced recovery protocols). Pharmacologic management of PONV should be tailored to the patient’s risk level using the validated PONV and PDNV risk-scoring systems to encourage cost-effective practices and minimize the potential for adverse side effects due to drug interactions in the perioperative period. A combination of prophylactic antiemetic drugs with different mechanisms of action should be administered to patients with moderate to high risk of developing PONV. In addition to utilizing prophylactic antiemetic drugs, the management of perioperative pain using opioid-sparing multimodal analgesic techniques is critically important for achieving an enhanced recovery after surgery. In conclusion, the utilization of strategies to reduce the baseline risk of PONV (e.g. adequate hydration and the use of nonpharmacologic antiemetic and opioid-sparing analgesic techniques) and implementing multimodal antiemetic and analgesic regimens will reduce the likelihood of patients developing PONV and PDNV after surgery.

New insights into the pathophysiology and risk factors for PONV

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) affects patient outcomes and satisfaction. New research has centered on evaluation of post-discharge and opioid-related nausea and vomiting. Mechanical and drug effects stimulate the release of central nervous system neurotransmitters acting at receptors in the vomiting center, area postrema, and nucleus of the solitary tract. Brain surgery has allowed insight into specific central emetogenic areas. Stimuli from peripheral organs act through afferent vagus neurons and a parasympathetic response causing nausea and vomiting. Opioids stimulate mu receptors in the chemoreceptor trigger zone and cholinergic receptors in the vestibular system. Opioids also affect gastrointestinal (GI) tract mechanics by decreasing gastric emptying, intestinal motility, GI peristalsis, and secretions. Regional blocks and non-opioid multimodal analgesia help to decrease nausea and vomiting. Patient, surgery, and anesthesia factors contribute to risk and degree of PONV experienced. Pharmacogenetics plays a role in gene typing as antiemetic medication metabolism results in varying drug effectiveness. Risk scoring systems are available. Individualized multimodal plans can be designed as part of an enhanced recovery after surgery protocol.

Geranisetron versus gabapentin in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting after middle ear surgery in adults: A double-blinded randomized clinical trial study

Background:

The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) after middle ear surgery is high. In this study we want to compare the effects of intravenous granisetron and oral gabapentin as a premedication before surgery on the incidence and severity of PONV after middle ear surgery in adult patents.

Materials and Methods:

We enrolled 90 patients that were randomly divided into the three groups of 30 in each. Group I received granisetron 3 mg iv 2 minutes before induction of anesthesia; Group II received oral gabapentin 300 mg 1 hour before anesthesia and Group III received placebo. The incidence and severity of PONV were recorded each 15 minutes in the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) and each 8 hours until 24 hours after discharge from the PACU.

Result:

The incidence and severity of nausea and vomiting at different time intervals in Groups I and Group II was significantly lower compared with Group III (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in the incidence of side effects of study drug administration including respiratory depression, apnea, extra pyramidal disorders, drowsiness, dizziness, vertigo and headache in three groups.

Conclusion:

The study was shown that using gabapentin and granisetron have equal anti-emetic effects, but significant differences were seen between these two groups compared to the control group. These submit the efficiency of these drugs in preventing PONV.

A prospective controlled study to assess the antiemetic effect of midazolam following intragastric balloon insertion

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Obesity is a chronic disease with considerable morbidity and mortality. The intragastric balloon appears attractive for a group of patients who do not respond to medical therapy and who are not surgical candidates. Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) are distressing adverse effects for these patients. Midazolam has been used as an antiemetic, both as a preventive or rescue medication. The study aims at studying effect of combined use of ondansetron and midazolam to decrease the PONV following intragastric balloon insertion.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study was conducted on 54 patients presented for intragastric balloon insertion during the period between 1(st) of January 2012 and 31 December 2012. Patients were randomly allocated into two groups; Ondansetron group and ondansetron/midazolam group. Patients were assessed for the incidence of nausea and vomiting, nausea and vomiting score, degree of sedation and occurrence of adverse effects during the first 24 h after the operation.

RESULTS

Incidence of nausea and/or vomiting during the first 24 h postoperatively was 66% in the ondansetron group, while 34.5% among the ondansetron-midazolam group. There was significant reduction of nausea and/or vomiting in the second group. Degree of postoperative sedation was also significantly different between the two groups in the immediate postoperative period and 30min postoperatively.

CONCLUSION

Use of midazolam combined with ondansetron provides significant reduction and therefore better outcome regarding nausea and vomiting following intragastric balloon insertion.

Consensus guidelines for the management of postoperative nausea and vomiting

The present guidelines are the most recent data on postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) and an update on the 2 previous sets of guidelines published in 2003 and 2007. These guidelines were compiled by a multidisciplinary international panel of individuals with interest and expertise in PONV under the auspices of the Society for Ambulatory Anesthesia. The panel members critically and systematically evaluated the current medical literature on PONV to provide an evidence-based reference tool for the management of adults and children who are undergoing surgery and are at increased risk for PONV. These guidelines identify patients at risk for PONV in adults and children; recommend approaches for reducing baseline risks for PONV; identify the most effective antiemetic single therapy and combination therapy regimens for PONV prophylaxis, including nonpharmacologic approaches; recommend strategies for treatment of PONV when it occurs; provide an algorithm for the management of individuals at increased risk for PONV as well as steps to ensure PONV prevention and treatment are implemented in the clinical setting.

Prophylactic administration of haloperidol plus midazolam reduces postoperative nausea and vomiting better than using each drug alone in patients undergoing middle ear surgery

Aims:

The efficacy of using midazolam or haloperidol for prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) has been investigated before. The main object of the present study was to evaluate the anti-emetic effects of combining administration of intravenous haloperidol with intravenous midazolam on PONV in patients underwent middle ear surgery in comparison with using each drug alone.

Methods:

Study design was randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled. 80 patients, aged 18-60 years, scheduled for middle ear surgery in Kashani Hospital Medical Center under general anesthesia were enrolled in this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Patients were divided into 4 groups of 20 each and received haloperidol 2 mg i.v. (Group H); midazolam 2 mg i.v. (Group M); haloperidol 2 mg plus midazolam 2 mg i.v. (Group HM); saline i.v. (Group C). The incidences of PONV and complete response were evaluated at 0-2 hours after arrival to the PACU and 2-24 hours after arrival to the ward in 4 groups.

Results:

Patients in group HM had significantly lower incidence of PONV compared with groups H, M, and C throughout 0-24 h (P<00.5). The HM group had the lowest incidence of PONV (0-2, 2-24, and 0-24 h) and the highest incidence of complete response. Postoperative anti-emetic requirement was significantly less in group HM compared with group M or H (P<0.05).

Conclusion:

Combine administration of haloperidol 2 mg plus midazolam 2 mg significantly reduced PONV better than using each drug alone in patients underwent middle ear surgery under general anesthesia.

Comparison of the antiemetic effect of ramosetron and combined ramosetron and midazolam in children: a double-blind, randomised clinical trial

CONTEXT

Postoperative nausea and vomiting remains a clinically important problem after strabismus surgery in children.

OBJECTIVE

To study the benefit of adding midazolam to ramosetron on the incidence of postoperative nausea, retching or vomiting and on the incidence of postoperative agitation.

DESIGN

A randomised, double-blind comparison.

SETTING

The operating theatre suite and day care unit of Seoul National University Hospital. The study period was January to December 2010.

PATIENTS

In total, 405 paediatric patients (aged 4-12 years) undergoing strabismus surgery were enrolled and randomly assigned to one of two groups, ramosetron or ramosetron with midazolam.

INTERVENTION

Patients received either ramosetron 6 μg kg or ramosetron 6 μg kg and midazolam 0.1 mg kg prior to induction of anaesthesia.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The incidences of nausea, retching or vomiting in the first 48 h after surgery, and the incidence of emergence agitation in the post-anaesthetic care unit.

RESULT

The incidences of nausea, retching or vomiting during the first and second 24-h periods after surgery were similar in the two groups. There was a small, clinically insignificant reduction in delirium scores in the ramosetron with midazolam group.

CONCLUSION

Adding midazolam to ramosetron had no advantages over ramosetron alone in reducing the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting in children undergoing strabismus surgery.

Comparing the preventive effect of midazolam and midazolam-dexamethasone on postoperative nausea and vomiting in elective middle ear surgery

Background:

Nausea and vomiting are common postoperative complications with incidence of 20–80% depends on the surgery type, anesthetic drugs, age, sex, etc. This complication may lead to patient discomfort, intraocular, and intracerebral pressures increase, sutures rupture, esophageal injury, and rarely death. Many studies reported that midazolam and dexamethasone alone can decrease postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), but their combination has never been studied yet. The aim of this study was to compare the effect of midazolam and midazolam-dexamethasone on PONV after middle ear surgery.

Materials and Methods:

66 ASA I and II patients aged 15–65 year scheduled for elective middle ear surgery under general anesthesia randomly divided into two groups. Immediately after induction of the anesthesia group one (M) received midazolam 0.075 mg/kg and group two (M+D) received combination of midazolam (0.075 mg/kg) plus dexamethasone (0.05 mg/kg). Then the severity of nausea was measured by visual analog scales 0–10 (VAS) in recovery room at 6, 12, and 24 h after surgery. Metoclopramid (0.1 mg/kg) was administrated I.V. slowly if nausea score was above 3 or patient had vomiting. The postoperative need for antiemetics and the duration of stay in recovery room were recorded. Values of P<0.05 were considered statistically significant.

Results:

There were no significant differences in age, gender, and weight between the two groups. There was no significant difference in the mean nausea scores between two groups except after 12 h postoperatively (1.39 ± 3.19 in M group vs. 0.42 ± 1.71 in M+D group). The mean vomiting frequency was significantly less in midazolam-dexamethasone group in the recovery room (0.9 ± 0.29 vs. 0 ± 0) and at 6–12 h (1.09 ± 2.41 vs. 0.3 ± 0.8), and 12–24 h (0.42 ± 1.32 vs. 0.03 ± 0.17) postoperatively. During the first 24 h postoperatively, the metoclopramid consumption was significantly less in combination therapy (6.48 ± 9.54) than in the midazolam group (12.9 ± 23.44) (Value<0.5).

Conclusion:

The combination of midazolam-dexametazone is more effective than midazolam alone in prevention of postoperative vomiting after middle ear surgery. Therefore, we recommend combination therapy for patients who are prone to PONV.

Multimodal therapies for postoperative nausea and vomiting, and pain

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) and pain are two of the major concerns for patients presenting for surgery. The causes of PONV are multifactorial and can largely be categorized as patient risk factors, anaesthetic technique, and surgical procedure. Antiemetics work on several different receptor sites to prevent or treat PONV. This is probably why numerous studies have now demonstrated that using more than one antiemetic is usually more effective and results in fewer side-effects than simply increasing the dose of a single antiemetic. A multimodal approach to PONV should not be limited to drug therapy alone but should involve a holistic approach starting before operation and continuing intraoperatively with risk reduction strategies to which are added prophylactic antiemetics according to the assessed patient risk for PONV. With the increasing understanding of the pathophysiology of acute pain, especially the occurrence of peripheral and central hypersensitization, it is unlikely that a single drug or intervention is sufficiently broad in its action to be adequately effective, especially with moderate or greater pain. Although morphine and its congeners are usually the foundation of pain management regimens, as their dose increases so does the incidence of side-effects. Thus, the approach for the management of acute postoperative pain is to use multiple drugs or modalities (e.g. regional anaesthesia) to maximize pain relief and reduce side-effects.

Postoperative nausea and vomiting after mastoidectomy with tympanoplasty: a comparison between TIVA with propofol-remifentanil and balanced anesthesia with sevoflurane-remifentanil

BACKGROUND

There is growing interest in the anesthetic approach using total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) with propofol and remifentanil for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). The aim of this study was to compare between the two anesthetic techniques for preventing PONV in the patients undergoing mastoidectomy with tympanoplasty.

METHODS

After obtaining informed consent, 62 patients aged between 20 to 60 years undergoing elective mastoidectomy and tympanoplasty were randomized into two equal study groups: group P/R (n = 31) included patients undergoing TIVA with propofol and remifentanil, and group S/R (n = 31) included patients undergoing balanced anesthesia with sevoflurane and remifentanil. The incidences of PONV and complete response (no PONV, no rescue) were assessed at 1 and 24 h after surgery, using the Rhodes Index. Also, the usage of rescue antiemetics and pain intensity were recorded.

RESULTS

The Rhodes Index including the occurrence score, distress score and experience score was significantly lower in the P/R group compared to that in the S/R group during the study period (P < 0.05), and the incidence of complete response was significantly higher in the P/R group compared to that in the S/R group, during the first 24 h after surgery. 4 patients in the S/R group requested antiemetics during the first 1 h after surgery. There were no significant differences in pain intensity among groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to balanced anesthesia with sevoflurane and remifentanil, TIVA with propofol and remifentanil was followed by significantly lower incidence and severity of PONV.

Anti-Emetic Effect of Midazolam Added to Morphine Patient-Controlled Analgesia After Total Abdominal Hysterectomy

Nausea and vomiting are frequent adverse effects of patient-controlled analgesia with opioids. This study was designed to compare the effect of midazolam to that of ondansetron for prevention of nausea and vomiting during morphine patient-controlled analgesia. In a randomised, double-blind, prospective trial, 90 patients were allocated to one of three groups of 30 each, to receive one of three patient-controlled analgesia regimens to manage postoperative pain: a combination of midazolam and morphine (group M), a mixture of ondansetron and morphine (group O) or morphine alone (group C). Patients were assessed for the incidence of nausea and vomiting, the degree of sedation (awake, mild, moderate, deep) and other side-effects during the first 24 hours after the operation. The frequency of nausea and vomiting was significantly lower in groups M (27%) and O (37%) compared with group C (70%) (P <0.05). The incidence of mild sedation in group M was significantly higher than that in groups O or C (P <0.05). We conclude that midazolam is as effective as ondansetron in preventing opioid-induced nausea and vomiting following total abdominal hysterectomy and has acceptable side-effects.

Antiemetic Efficacy of Dexamethasone Combined with Midazolam after Middle Ear Surgery

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the antiemetic efficacy of dexamethasone combined with midazolam after middle ear surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: A prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

SETTING: University hospital.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS: The study population consisted of 120 American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I or II, adult female patients undergoing middle ear surgery under general anesthesia. Patients were randomized into three groups of 40 each who received a dexamethasone dose of 10 mg/kg (group D), a combination of dexamethasone 10 mg and midazolam 0.075 mg/kg (group DM), and normal saline (group C) immediately after the induction of anesthesia. The incidence of nausea and vomiting, usage of rescue antiemetics, pain intensity, and side effects, such as headache and dizziness, were assessed during the first 24 hours after surgery.

RESULTS: The overall incidence of nausea and vomiting was significantly lower in group D (35%, P < 0.05) and group DM (25%, P < 0.05) compared with that in group C (65%). The incidences of vomiting and usage of rescue antiemetic drugs in group DM were lower than those in group D ( P < 0.05). There were no significant differences among groups in pain intensity and side effects, such as headache and dizziness.

CONCLUSIONS: The combination of dexamethasone and midazolam was better than dexamethasone alone in reducing the incidence of vomiting and the rescue antiemetic requirements in women patients undergoing middle ear surgery. However, this combination treatment did not significantly decrease the overall incidence of nausea and vomiting compared with the use of dexamethasone alone.