Omitting fentanyl reduces nausea and vomiting, without increasing pain, after sevoflurane for day surgery*:

Intrathecal Morphine versus Morphine-Dexmedetomidine Combination for Postoperative Pain Control After Total Knee Replacement: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Objective

This prospective study aimed to compare the analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of intrathecal morphine, dexmedetomidine, and a combination of both in patients undergoing total knee replacement (TKR).

Patients and Methods

This randomized prospective study was carried out in Tanta university hospital in orthopedic surgery for 6 months on 105 adult patients with American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status Class II and III, aged > 50 years, and scheduled for total knee replacement surgery randomly allocated into morphine group received 0.5% heavy bupivacaine plus 0.1 mg of morphine, morphine/ dexmedetomidine group, received 0.5% heavy bupivacaine plus 0.1 mg of morphine and 5 mcg of dexmedetomidine and dexmedetomidine group received 0.5% heavy bupivacaine plus 5 mcg of dexmedetomidine. The time of the first required analgesia, postoperative pain severity, the total dose of morphine, postoperative complication, and the patient's level of sedation were recorded.

Results

About half of the patients in the dexmedetomidine group requested first rescue analgesia 6 hours after the operation, significantly shorter than the other two groups. On the other hand, the other two groups show no significant difference between them regarding the first required analgesia. At rest, the dexmedetomidine group have significantly higher VAS with a significant increase in patients who required morphine as rescue analgesia than the other two groups. While at movement, patients in the dexmedetomidine group felt pain at 4 hrs postoperatively with significantly higher VAS than the other two groups. At the same time, the sedation score was significantly lower in the dexmedetomidine group than in the other two groups. 22.2% of cases in the morphine group developed nausea and vomiting with a significant difference between the three groups.

Conclusion

Despite the absence of substantial side effects, our findings did not suggest enhanced analgesia with the combination of intrathecal morphine and dexmedetomidine.

Drugs for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in adults after general anaesthesia: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a common adverse effect of anaesthesia and surgery. Up to 80% of patients may be affected. These outcomes are a major cause of patient dissatisfaction and may lead to prolonged hospital stay and higher costs of care along with more severe complications. Many antiemetic drugs are available for prophylaxis. They have various mechanisms of action and side effects, but there is still uncertainty about which drugs are most effective with the fewest side effects.

OBJECTIVES

• To compare the efficacy and safety of different prophylactic pharmacologic interventions (antiemetic drugs) against no treatment, against placebo, or against each other (as monotherapy or combination prophylaxis) for prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in adults undergoing any type of surgery under general anaesthesia • To generate a clinically useful ranking of antiemetic drugs (monotherapy and combination prophylaxis) based on efficacy and safety • To identify the best dose or dose range of antiemetic drugs in terms of efficacy and safety SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP), ClinicalTrials.gov, and reference lists of relevant systematic reviews. The first search was performed in November 2017 and was updated in April 2020. In the update of the search, 39 eligible studies were found that were not included in the analysis (listed as awaiting classification).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing effectiveness or side effects of single antiemetic drugs in any dose or combination against each other or against an inactive control in adults undergoing any type of surgery under general anaesthesia. All antiemetic drugs belonged to one of the following substance classes: 5-HT₃ receptor antagonists, D₂ receptor antagonists, NK₁ receptor antagonists, corticosteroids, antihistamines, and anticholinergics. No language restrictions were applied. Abstract publications were excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

A review team of 11 authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias and subsequently extracted data. We performed pair-wise meta-analyses for drugs of direct interest (amisulpride, aprepitant, casopitant, dexamethasone, dimenhydrinate, dolasetron, droperidol, fosaprepitant, granisetron, haloperidol, meclizine, methylprednisolone, metoclopramide, ondansetron, palonosetron, perphenazine, promethazine, ramosetron, rolapitant, scopolamine, and tropisetron) compared to placebo (inactive control). We performed network meta-analyses (NMAs) to estimate the relative effects and ranking (with placebo as reference) of all available single drugs and combinations. Primary outcomes were vomiting within 24 hours postoperatively, serious adverse events (SAEs), and any adverse event (AE). Secondary outcomes were drug class-specific side effects (e.g. headache), mortality, early and late vomiting, nausea, and complete response. We performed subgroup network meta-analysis with dose of drugs as a moderator variable using dose ranges based on previous consensus recommendations. We assessed certainty of evidence of NMA treatment effects for all primary outcomes and drug class-specific side effects according to GRADE (CINeMA, Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis). We restricted GRADE assessment to single drugs of direct interest compared to placebo.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 585 studies (97,516 randomized participants). Most of these studies were small (median sample size of 100); they were published between 1965 and 2017 and were primarily conducted in Asia (51%), Europe (25%), and North America (16%). Mean age of the overall population was 42 years. Most participants were women (83%), had American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I and II (70%), received perioperative opioids (88%), and underwent gynaecologic (32%) or gastrointestinal surgery (19%) under general anaesthesia using volatile anaesthetics (88%). In this review, 44 single drugs and 51 drug combinations were compared. Most studies investigated only single drugs (72%) and included an inactive control arm (66%). The three most investigated single drugs in this review were ondansetron (246 studies), dexamethasone (120 studies), and droperidol (97 studies). Almost all studies (89%) reported at least one efficacy outcome relevant for this review. However, only 56% reported at least one relevant safety outcome. Altogether, 157 studies (27%) were assessed as having overall low risk of bias, 101 studies (17%) overall high risk of bias, and 327 studies (56%) overall unclear risk of bias. Vomiting within 24 hours postoperatively Relative effects from NMA for vomiting within 24 hours (282 RCTs, 50,812 participants, 28 single drugs, and 36 drug combinations) suggest that 29 out of 36 drug combinations and 10 out of 28 single drugs showed a clinically important benefit (defined as the upper end of the 95% confidence interval (CI) below a risk ratio (RR) of 0.8) compared to placebo. Combinations of drugs were generally more effective than single drugs in preventing vomiting. However, single NK₁ receptor antagonists showed treatment effects similar to most of the drug combinations. High-certainty evidence suggests that the following single drugs reduce vomiting (ordered by decreasing efficacy): aprepitant (RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.38, high certainty, rank 3/28 of single drugs); ramosetron (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.59, high certainty, rank 5/28); granisetron (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.54, high certainty, rank 6/28); dexamethasone (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.57, high certainty, rank 8/28); and ondansetron (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.60, high certainty, rank 13/28). Moderate-certainty evidence suggests that the following single drugs probably reduce vomiting: fosaprepitant (RR 0.06, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.21, moderate certainty, rank 1/28) and droperidol (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.69, moderate certainty, rank 20/28). Recommended and high doses of granisetron, dexamethasone, ondansetron, and droperidol showed clinically important benefit, but low doses showed no clinically important benefit. Aprepitant was used mainly at high doses, ramosetron at recommended doses, and fosaprepitant at doses of 150 mg (with no dose recommendation available). Frequency of SAEs Twenty-eight RCTs were included in the NMA for SAEs (10,766 participants, 13 single drugs, and eight drug combinations). The certainty of evidence for SAEs when using one of the best and most reliable anti-vomiting drugs (aprepitant, ramosetron, granisetron, dexamethasone, ondansetron, and droperidol compared to placebo) ranged from very low to low. Droperidol (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.08 to 9.71, low certainty, rank 6/13) may reduce SAEs. We are uncertain about the effects of aprepitant (RR 1.39, 95% CI 0.26 to 7.36, very low certainty, rank 11/13), ramosetron (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.05 to 15.74, very low certainty, rank 7/13), granisetron (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.11 to 13.15, very low certainty, rank 10/13), dexamethasone (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.28 to 4.85, very low certainty, rank 9/13), and ondansetron (RR 1.62, 95% CI 0.32 to 8.10, very low certainty, rank 12/13). No studies reporting SAEs were available for fosaprepitant. Frequency of any AE Sixty-one RCTs were included in the NMA for any AE (19,423 participants, 15 single drugs, and 11 drug combinations). The certainty of evidence for any AE when using one of the best and most reliable anti-vomiting drugs (aprepitant, ramosetron, granisetron, dexamethasone, ondansetron, and droperidol compared to placebo) ranged from very low to moderate. Granisetron (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.05, moderate certainty, rank 7/15) probably has no or little effect on any AE. Dexamethasone (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.08, low certainty, rank 2/15) and droperidol (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.98, low certainty, rank 6/15) may reduce any AE. Ondansetron (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.01, low certainty, rank 9/15) may have little or no effect on any AE. We are uncertain about the effects of aprepitant (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.97, very low certainty, rank 3/15) and ramosetron (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.54, very low certainty, rank 11/15) on any AE. No studies reporting any AE were available for fosaprepitant. Class-specific side effects For class-specific side effects (headache, constipation, wound infection, extrapyramidal symptoms, sedation, arrhythmia, and QT prolongation) of relevant substances, the certainty of evidence for the best and most reliable anti-vomiting drugs mostly ranged from very low to low. Exceptions were that ondansetron probably increases headache (RR 1.16, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.28, moderate certainty, rank 18/23) and probably reduces sedation (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.96, moderate certainty, rank 5/24) compared to placebo. The latter effect is limited to recommended and high doses of ondansetron. Droperidol probably reduces headache (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.86, moderate certainty, rank 5/23) compared to placebo. We have high-certainty evidence that dexamethasone (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.09, high certainty, rank 16/24) has no effect on sedation compared to placebo. No studies assessed substance class-specific side effects for fosaprepitant. Direction and magnitude of network effect estimates together with level of evidence certainty are graphically summarized for all pre-defined GRADE-relevant outcomes and all drugs of direct interest compared to placebo in http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4066353.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found high-certainty evidence that five single drugs (aprepitant, ramosetron, granisetron, dexamethasone, and ondansetron) reduce vomiting, and moderate-certainty evidence that two other single drugs (fosaprepitant and droperidol) probably reduce vomiting, compared to placebo. Four of the six substance classes (5-HT₃ receptor antagonists, D₂ receptor antagonists, NK₁ receptor antagonists, and corticosteroids) were thus represented by at least one drug with important benefit for prevention of vomiting. Combinations of drugs were generally more effective than the corresponding single drugs in preventing vomiting. NK₁ receptor antagonists were the most effective drug class and had comparable efficacy to most of the drug combinations. 5-HT₃ receptor antagonists were the best studied substance class. For most of the single drugs of direct interest, we found only very low to low certainty evidence for safety outcomes such as occurrence of SAEs, any AE, and substance class-specific side effects. Recommended and high doses of granisetron, dexamethasone, ondansetron, and droperidol were more effective than low doses for prevention of vomiting. Dose dependency of side effects was rarely found due to the limited number of studies, except for the less sedating effect of recommended and high doses of ondansetron. The results of the review are transferable mainly to patients at higher risk of nausea and vomiting (i.e. healthy women undergoing inhalational anaesthesia and receiving perioperative opioids). Overall study quality was limited, but certainty assessments of effect estimates consider this limitation. No further efficacy studies are needed as there is evidence of moderate to high certainty for seven single drugs with relevant benefit for prevention of vomiting. However, additional studies are needed to investigate potential side effects of these drugs and to examine higher-risk patient populations (e.g. individuals with diabetes and heart disease).

Effects of epidural anesthesia on postoperative nausea and vomiting in laparoscopic gynecological surgery: a randomized controlled trial

PURPOSE

Patients undergoing laparoscopic gynecological surgery are susceptible to postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). We hypothesized that a combination of epidural and general anesthesia to minimize intraoperative opioid administration would reduce the incidence of PONV following laparoscopic gynecological surgery.

METHODS

Women undergoing elective laparoscopic gynecological surgery were randomly assigned to receive general anesthesia alone (group G, n = 45) or general anesthesia with epidural anesthesia (group GE, n = 45). Patients in group G received fentanyl and remifentanil for intraoperative analgesia, and those in group GE received single-shot ropivacaine at the time of induction of anesthesia. The primary outcome was the incidence of PONV within 24 h of surgery. Secondary outcomes included the use of rescue metoclopramide within 24 h of surgery and the time to first incidence of PONV and first use of rescue metoclopramide.

RESULTS

The incidence of PONV within 24 h of surgery was 60.0% in group G and 44.4% in group GE [relative risk (RR): 0.53, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.23-1.23, p = 0.14]. There were no intergroup differences in the use of rescue metoclopramide (40.0% in group G, 24.4% in group GE, RR: 0.49, 95% CI 0.20-1.20, p = 0.11) and the time to first incidence of PONV and first use of rescue metoclopramide (p = 0.20 and 0.12, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Minimizing intraoperative opioid administration by combining epidural and general anesthesia did not reduce the 24-h incidence of PONV or rescue metoclopramide use after laparoscopic gynecological surgery.

Does small-dose fentanyl improve perioperative outcomes in the ambulatory setting? A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

BACKGROUND

Despite its widespread use, the beneficial effect of low-dose fentanyl administered at induction of anesthesia on perioperative outcomes has not been studied in the ambulatory setting. Therefore, this study was designed to test the hypothesis that administration of small-dose fentanyl vs. saline during induction reduces coughing and movements without adversely affecting recovery after day-surgery.

METHODS

One hundred consenting outpatients scheduled to undergo superficial surgical procedures under general anesthesia with a laryngeal mask airway (LMA) device for airway management were randomly assigned to one of two treatment groups: control (n = 50) or fentanyl (n = 50). After administration of 2 ml of the unlabelled study medication containing either fentanyl (100 μg) or saline, anesthesia was induced with lidocaine 30-50 mg and propofol 2 mg/kg IV followed by the insertion of an LMA device. General anesthesia was maintained using a propofol infusion, 75 μg/kg/min, and desflurane (2-5% end-tidal) in 100% oxygen.

RESULTS

Coughing was observed in six (12%) and ten (20%) in the fentanyl and control group, respectively (P = 0.41). The incidence of movements during surgery was lower in the fentanyl group (18% vs. 31%, P < 0001). There were no significant differences in early and late recovery times or pain scores between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Administration of a small-dose of fentanyl at induction of anesthesia significantly reduced purposeful movements during day-surgery under propofol-desflurane anesthesia. No significant difference was found in coughing or recovery times.

Predicted end-tidal sevoflurane concentration for insertion of a Laryngeal Mask Supreme: a prospective observational study

CONTEXT

The single-use Laryngeal Mask Airway (LMA) Supreme is a new supraglottic airway device. It has been reported to be reliable and easy-to-use in clinical practice; however, the anaesthetic techniques for its insertion are not standardised.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to determine the ED50 of end-tidal sevoflurane concentration for successful LMA Supreme insertion without the use of neuromuscular blockade.

DESIGN

A prospective observational study.

SETTING

A single tertiary care surgical centre.

PATIENTS

Thirty-one consecutive elective patients scheduled for minor elective surgery under general anaesthesia.

INTERVENTION

Patients were preoxygenated with 100% oxygen and anaesthetised using normal tidal volume inhalation of sevoflurane. The target sevoflurane concentration was determined using a modified Dixon's 'up-and-down' method (starting at 2.5% with 0.5% as the step size). After the predetermined end-tidal concentration had been established and maintained for 10 min, LMA Supreme insertion was attempted.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

The main outcome measure was the patient's response to LMA Supreme insertion, classified as either 'movement' or 'no movement'. The mean of the concentrations of seven cross-overs from 'movement' to 'no movement' was used to estimate the ED50.

RESULTS

The estimated sevoflurane concentration for successful LMA Supreme insertion in 50% of adults was 3.03 ± 0.75% (95% confidence interval 2.3 to 3.7%). The values of the ET50 and ET95 obtained by logistic regression were 2.83 and 5.30%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Sevoflurane alone can provide acceptable conditions for insertion of the LMA Supreme in adults, at an estimated minimum alveolar anaesthetic concentration of 3% with minimal adverse effects.

Esmolol versus ketamine-remifentanil combination for early postoperative analgesia after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized controlled trial

PURPOSE

Controversy surrounds the optimal technique to moderate pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). Opioid analgesics, sympatholytic drugs, and adjuvants, such as ketamine, have all been used. We compared esmolol with a combination of remifentanil plus ketamine in patients undergoing LC to determine the impact of these drugs on morphine requirements and pain control.

METHODS

Sixty American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I-II patients undergoing LC and anesthetized with sevoflurane were randomized to one of two groups. Group E patients received a bolus of esmolol 0.5 mg·kg(-1) iv at induction followed by an infusion of 5-15 μg·kg(-1)·min(-1), and Group R-K patients received a bolus of ketamine 0.5 mg·kg(-1) iv and remifentanil 0.5 μg·kg(-1) iv at induction followed by a remifentanil infusion titrated over a range of 0.1-0.5 μg·kg(-1)·min(-1). All patients received paracetamol, dexketoprofen, and levobupivacaine via infiltration of laparoscopic port sites. After surgery, a predetermined bolus of morphine was administered according to a verbal numerical rating scale (VNRS) for pain intensity. The primary outcome of interest was postoperative morphine requirement.

RESULTS

Median consumption of morphine was higher in Group R-K than in Group E (5 mg [4-6] vs 0 mg [0-2], respectively; P < 0.001). In the postanesthesia care unit, patients in Group R-K had higher pain scores than patients in Group E (difference in maximum VNRS, -11; 95% confidence interval (CI), -19 to -3). The concentration of sevoflurane to maintain a bispectral index~40 was higher in Group E than in Group R-K (between-group difference 0.3%; 95% CI, 0.15 to 0.40). The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting was similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Intraoperative esmolol infusion reduces morphine requirements and provides more effective analgesia compared with a combination of remifentanil-ketamine given by infusion in patients undergoing LC.

A short period of inhalation induction with sevoflurane prevents rocuronium-induced withdrawal in children

BACKGROUND

the aim of this study was to determine whether or not inhalation induction with sevoflurane can prevent the withdrawal movement associated with the injection of rocuronium.

METHODS

a total of 75 pediatric patients were randomly allocated to five groups (S 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0, and the control group). In the control group (n=15), 2.5% thiopental 5 mg/kg was injected intravenously. Rocuronium 0.4 mg/kg was injected immediately after loss of consciousness. In the S 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, or 3.0 group, rocuronium 0.4 mg/kg was injected at 1.5, 2, 2.5, or 3 min after inhalation induction, respectively, and the withdrawal response was recorded. End-tidal sevoflurane concentrations were recorded at the time of the rocuronium injection. The inhalation time of sevoflurane before rocuronium injection required to provide no withdrawal response in 50% and 95% of patients (IT(50) and IT(95) ) was calculated.

RESULTS

the incidence of withdrawal was 80% (12/15), 71.4% (10/14), 21% (3/14), 0% (0/14), and 0% (0/15) in group C, group S 1.5, group S 2.0, group S 2.5, and group S 3.0, respectively. IT(50) of the rocuronium injection time was 1.7 min (95% CI: 1.5-1.9) and IT(95) was 2.3 min (95% CI: 2.0- 2.9).

CONCLUSIONS

this study demonstrated that inhalation induction with sevoflurane can prevent the withdrawal movement induced by rocuronium in children, and IT(50) and IT(95) for the prevention of movement was 1.7 and 2.3 min, respectively.

Awake Blind Nasotracheal Intubation in Temporomandibular Joint Ankylosis Patients under Conscious Sedation Using Fentanyl and Midazolam

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Intubating a patient with temporomandibular joint ankylosis is always a challenge particularly when fibreoptic laryngoscope is not available. Awake blind nasotracheal intubation requires sufficient patient co operation and comfort. Presently available short-acting analgesics and amnesics are excellent choices for this exercise.

STUDY DESIGN

This prospective randomized double blind study was designed to determine an appropriate dosage of fentanyl for awake blind nasotracheal intubation. We compared two different dosage of fentanyl. Eighty patients were randomly assigned to receive midazolam 0.05 mg/kg and fentanyl 2μg/kg in bolus (group I), or midazolam 0.05 mg/kg, fentanyl 3μg/kg in bolus (group II).

RESULTS

Both dosage regimen ensured patient comfort and sedation. Patients in group II were more calm and sedated as compared to group I. Hemodynamics was also more stable in group II.

CONCLUSION

For awake blind nasotracheal intubation, we therefore recommend midazolam 0.05mg/kg plus fentanyl 3μg/kg in bolus.

The potential for mu-opioid receptor agonists to be anti-emetic in humans: a review of clinical data

In animal models of vomiting, mu-opioid (MOP, OP(3)) receptors mediate both emesis and anti-emesis. mu-receptors within the blood-brain barrier, mediating anti-emesis, are more rapidly accessible to lipid-soluble mu-opioid receptor agonists such as fentanyl than to morphine, and fentanyl has broad-spectrum anti-emetic effects in a number of species. Whether a similar situation exists in humans is not known. A search was performed for clinical studies comparing the emetic side effects of opioids administered peri-operatively in an attempt to identify differences between morphine and more lipid-soluble mu-receptor-selective agonists such as fentanyl. Overall, the evidence appears to suggest that fentanyl and other phenylpiperidines are associated with less nausea and vomiting than morphine, but not all studies support this, and fentanyl-like drugs are associated with nausea and vomiting per se. Good evidence, however, exists to show that fentanyl and alfentanil do not cause more nausea and vomiting than the ultra fast-acting remifentanil. Because remifentanil is cleared rapidly post-operatively, such trials suggest that the emetic side effects of fentanyl and alfentanil are minimal. The clinical evidence, although limited, is at least consistent with the possibility that central mu-opioid receptors may mediate anti-emesis in humans. It is possible that the role of mu-opioid agonists in anti-emesis may become clearer in the future as a result of the use of peripheral mu-opioid receptor antagonists.