Comparison of granisetron and granisetron plus dexamethasone for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting after laparoscopic cholecystectomy

The effect of dexamethasone and bupivacaine on postoperative pain and nausea and vomiting by preperitoneal nerve blocking in laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized clinical trial

Background

This study aims to examine the effects of preperitoneal administration of dexamethasone and bupivacaine surrounding laparoscopic trocars on postoperative pain (POP) and nausea and vomiting (PONV) in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC).

Method

In this randomized triple-blinded trial with a 1:1 randomization ratio, 104 patients with chronic cholecystitis were candidates for elective LC. A total of 40 mg (8 ml) of bupivacaine was mixed with 8 mg (2 ml) of dexamethasone or normal saline. The solution was injected preperitoneally via an 18G needle parallel and lateral to trocars until a bulge in the interior surface of the parietal peritoneum was observed by the camera. Primary outcomes were the severity of POP based on 0-10 Likert visual analog scale (VAS) and rates of PONV and secondary outcomes were rate of postoperative opioid usage and any side-effects.

Result

The mean VAS score was significantly lower in the dexamethasone group (3.5 vs. 6.2, P<0.001). The dexamethasone group had 46.2% and 26.9% lower rates of nausea and vomiting after LC compared to the other group (P=0.001 and 0.015, respectively). Postoperative opioid use was lower in the dexamethasone group, but its difference was insignificant (P=0.3).

Conclusions

Preperitoneal dexamethasone injection around laparoscopic trocars may lower the intensity of POP and PONV rates. Perioperative local corticosteroids can be used as an effective, available, and inexpensive analgesic and antiemetic prevention for laparoscopic procedures.

Comparison of efficacy between palonosetron-midazolam combination and palonosetron alone for prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing breast surgery and patient controlled analgesia: A prospective, randomized, double-blind study: A CONSORT-compliant study

BACKGROUND

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a common complaint in patients following general anesthesia. Various antiemetics, including 5-hydroxytryptamine type 3 (5-HT3) receptor antagonists, are effective but still have limited efficacy. Therefore, combination therapy is preferable to using a single drug alone in high-risk patients. We performed a comparative study on the antiemetic effect of palonosetron, a 5-HT3 receptor antagonist, monotherapy vs palonosetron-midazolam combination therapy for the prevention of PONV.

METHODS

A total of 104 female patients scheduled for breast cancer surgery were enrolled. They were randomly divided into 2 groups, a palonosetron monotherapy group (group P) and palonosetron-midazolam combination therapy group (group PM). Both groups received 0.075 mg palonosetron intravenously after induction of anesthesia. Patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) was applied according to the allocated group. Intravenous (IV)-PCA in group P consisted of fentanyl 20 μg/kg plus normal saline (total volume: 100 ml); IV-PCA in group PM consisted of fentanyl 20 μg/kg plus midazolam 4 mg plus normal saline (total volume: 100 ml). Efficacy parameters were collected during 0 to 1, 1 to 6, 6 to 24, and 24 to 48 hours postoperative time intervals. These measures included complete response (defined as no PONV and no rescue anti-emetic use) rate, incidence of PONV, sedation score, rescue antiemetic use, rescue analgesic use, and numerical rating scale (NRS) for pain. The complete response rate during the 0 to 24 hours interval was analyzed as the primary outcome.

RESULTS

Although the complete response rate between 0 and 24 hours was higher in group PM (42.3% and 48.1% in group P and PM, respectively), there was no statistically significant difference (P = .55). The complete response rates in other time intervals were not different between the 2 groups as well. The sedation score and NRS score also showed no differences between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination therapy of palonosetron with midazolam did not lead to a greater reduction in the incidence of PONV than monotherapy in patients undergoing breast surgery and receiving IV-PCA containing fentanyl.

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).

WITHDRAWN: Drugs for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting

BACKGROUND

Drugs can prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting, but their relative efficacies and side effects have not been compared within one systematic review.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to assess the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting by drugs and the development of any side effects.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, Issue 2, 2004), MEDLINE (January 1966 to May 2004), EMBASE (January 1985 to May 2004), CINAHL (1982 to May 2004), AMED (1985 to May 2004), SIGLE (to May 2004), ISI WOS (to May 2004), LILAC (to May 2004) and INGENTA bibliographies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials that compared a drug with placebo or another drug, or compared doses or timing of administration, that reported postoperative nausea or vomiting as an outcome.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted outcome data.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 737 studies involving 103,237 people. Compared to placebo, eight drugs prevented postoperative nausea and vomiting: droperidol, metoclopramide, ondansetron, tropisetron, dolasetron, dexamethasone, cyclizine and granisetron. Publication bias makes evidence for differences among these drugs unreliable. The relative risks (RR) versus placebo varied between 0.60 and 0.80, depending upon the drug and outcome. Evidence for side effects was sparse: droperidol was sedative (RR 1.32) and headache was more common after ondansetron (RR 1.16).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Either nausea or vomiting is reported to affect, at most, 80 out of 100 people after surgery. If all 100 of these people are given one of the listed drugs, about 28 would benefit and 72 would not. Nausea and vomiting are usually less common and, therefore, drugs are less useful. For 100 people, of whom 30 would vomit or feel sick after surgery if given placebo, 10 people would benefit from a drug and 90 would not. Between one to five patients out of every 100 people may experience a mild side effect, such as sedation or headache, when given an antiemetic drug. Collaborative research should focus on determining whether antiemetic drugs cause more severe, probably rare, side effects. Further comparison of the antiemetic effect of one drug versus another is not a research priority.

Granisetron plus dexamethasone for prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery: A meta-analysis

Objective

This study was designed to compare the effectiveness of granisetron plus dexamethasone for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery.

Methods

We searched the literature in the Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE, and CNKI.

Results

In total, 11 randomized controlled trials were enrolled in this analysis. The meta-analysis showed that granisetron in combination with dexamethasone was significantly more effective than granisetron alone in preventing PONV in patients undergoing laparoscopy surgery. No significant differences in adverse reactions (dizziness and headache) were found in association with dexamethasone.

Conclusion

Granisetron in combination with dexamethasone was significantly more effective than granisetron alone in preventing PONV in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery, with no difference in adverse reactions between the two groups. Granisetron alone or granisetron plus dexamethasone can be used to prevent PONV in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery.

Dexamethasone combined with other antiemetics versus single antiemetics for prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

A systematic review and meta-analysis of published randomized controlled trials was performed to update the present evidence about the safety and efficacy of dexamethasone combined with other antiemetics versus single antiemetics for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

METHODS

A computer literature search of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and Embase was conducted to identify the relevant randomized controlled trials. In addition, a manual search of reference lists of the retrieved articles was conducted. Relevant outcomes were pooled as odds ratio (OR) by RevMan version 5.3 for windows.

RESULTS

Pooled data from 14 RCTs (1542 patients) favored dexamethasone combined with other antiemetics over single antiemetics as a prophylaxis against postoperative nausea and vomiting after laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the early postoperative period (OR = 0.39, 95% CI [0.27 to 0.54], p < 0.00001), late postoperative period (OR = 0.36, 95% CI [0.23 to 0.56], p < 0.00001), and overall postoperative period (OR = 0.34, 95% CI [0.23 to 0.51], p < 0.00001). Subsequently, rescue antiemetic usage was significantly lower in the combination group (OR = 0.25, 95% CI [0.16 to 0.41], p < 0.00001). Subgroup analysis showed that all combinations of dexamethasone and other antiemetics were superior to corresponding singel antiemetics except for the combination of dexamethasone and ramosetron which was not superior to ramosetron alone in all postoperative periods and the combination of dexamethasone and granisetron which was not superior to granisetron alone in the early postoperative period (OR = 0.26, 95% CI [0.07 to 1.01], p = 0.05). For all adverse events, there was no significant difference between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Dexamethasone combined with other antiemetics provided better prophylaxis than single antiemetics against postoperative nausea and vomiting after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The underlying mechanism of dexamethasone action and its optimal dose should be further investigated.

Evidence-Based Practice in Laparoscopic Surgery: Perioperative Care

Best practices for reducing risks of postoperative infection, venous thromboembolism, and nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery are uncertain. As a result, perioperative care varies widely. We reviewed evidence from randomized clinical trials on the effectiveness of interventions for postoperative infection, venous thromboembolism, and nausea and vomiting Data sources were the Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials, reference lists of published trials, and randomized clinical trials published in English since 1990. Trials were also limited to those focused on patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery. Data from 98 randomized clinical trials were included in the final analysis. Routine antibiotic use in laparoscopic cholecystectomy, and possibly other clean procedures not involving placement of prostheses, is likely unnecessary. Similarly, venous thromboembolism prophylaxis is probably unnecessary for low-risk patients undergoing brief procedures. Of a wide variety of methods for reducing postoperative nausea and vomiting, serotonin receptor antagonists appear the most effective and should be considered for routine prophylaxis.

Effective Dose of Ramosetron for Prophylaxis of Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting in High-Risk Patients

BACKGROUND

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) are common adverse events with an incidence of up to 80% in high-risk patients. Ramosetron, a selective 5-HT3 receptor antagonist, is widely used to prevent PONV. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effective dose of ramosetron for the prevention of PONV in high-risk patients.

METHODS

Fifty-one patients were randomly allocated to 3 groups and were administered ramosetron 0.3 mg (group A), 0.45 mg (group B), or 0.6 mg (group C), at the end of their surgery. The episodes of PONV were assessed 1, 6, 24, and 48 hours after the injection and all the adverse events were observed.

RESULTS

The complete response rate in the postoperative period 6-24 hours after the anesthesia was higher in group C than in group A: 93% versus 44%. Group C's experience score of Rhodes index was lower than group A's: 0.81 ± 2.56 versus 3.94 ± 5.25. No adverse drug reaction could be observed in all groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The effective dose of ramosetron to be injected for the near-complete prophylaxis of PONV 6 to 24 hours after surgery in high-risk patients is a 0.6 mg bolus injection at the end of the surgery.

Comparison of ramosetron, dexamethasone, and a combination of ramosetron and dexamethasone for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in Korean women undergoing thyroidectomy: A double-blind, randomized, controlled study

BACKGROUND

Thyroidectomy is associated with a relatively high incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), ranging from 51% to 76%. Because these symptoms are distressing for patients, prophylactic medication to avoid or reduce PONV is recommended.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the present study was to compare the efficacy of ramosetron, dexamethasone, and a combination of ramosetron and dexamethasone in preventing PONV in Korean women undergoing thyroidectomy.

METHODS

In this double-blind, randomized, controlled trial, consecutive adult female patients who were scheduled to undergo thyroidectomy under general anesthesia at the Kyungpook National University Hospital (Daegu, Korea) were randomly assigned to receive ramosetron 0.3 mg alone, dexamethasone 8 mg alone, or a combination of ramosetron 0.3 mg and dexamethasone 8 mg administered intravenously as a single dose immediately after induction of anesthesia. The primary end point of this study was the total PONV rate up to 24 hours postanesthesia. The secondary end points were the incidence of nausea, incidence of vomiting, severity of nausea (0 = no nausea to 10 = nausea as bad as it could be), use of rescue antiemetic drugs, and the occurrence of adverse events (AEs) determined through interview or spontaneous patient report for 24 hours postanesthesia.

RESULTS

A total of 198 female patients were approached for study inclusion, 18 of whom were excluded. Therefore, 180 Korean women (mean [SD] age, 46.5 [12.6] years; height, 159.8 [2.7] cm; weight, 53.2 [3.6] kg) were enrolled and completed the study. The total PONV rates up to 24 hours postanesthesia were 35%, 13%, and 10% in the dexamethasone, ramosetron, and combination groups, respectively. The PONV rate was significantly lower in the combination group than in the dexamethasone alone group (P = 0.006). The PONV rate was not significantly different in the combination group compared with the ramosetron alone group. The PONV rate in the dexamethasone alone group was significantly higher than that in the ramosetron alone group (P = 0.03). The severity of nausea (median [25th-75th percentiles], 0 [0-0] vs 0 [0-4]; P = 0.009) and rate of use of rescue antiemetic drugs (5% vs 27%; P = 0.006) were significantly lower in the combination group than in the dexamethasone alone group, whereas the severity of nausea (median [25th-75th percentiles], 0 [0-0] vs 0 [0-0]) and rate of use of rescue antiemetic drugs (5% vs 7%) were not significantly different between the combination and ramosetron alone groups. The severity of nausea (median [25th-75th percentiles], 0 [0-4] vs 0 [0-0]; P = 0.033) and the rate of use of rescue antiemetic drugs (27% vs 7%; P = 0.018) were significantly higher in the dexamethasone alone group than in the ramosetron alone group. The rates of AEs (headache: 15%, 20%, and 18%; dizziness: 18%, 22%, and 15%) were not significantly different in the dexamethasone alone, ramosetron alone, or combination groups, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of ramosetron and dexamethasone was more effective in reducing PONV than was dexamethasone monotherapy. However, the combination did not show additional benefits compared with ramosetron alone in preventing PONV after thyroidectomy in these Korean women.

Dexamethasone to prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting: an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Dexamethasone has an established role in decreasing postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV); however, the optimal dexamethasone dose for reducing PONV when it is used as a single or combination prophylactic strategy has not been clearly defined. In this study, we evaluated the use of 4 mg to 5 mg and 8 mg to 10 mg IV doses of dexamethasone to prevent PONV when used as a single drug or as part of a combination preventive therapy.

METHODS

A wide search was performed to identify randomized clinical trials that evaluated systemic dexamethasone as a prophylactic drug to reduce postoperative nausea and/or vomiting. The effects of dexamethasone dose were evaluated by pooling studies into 2 groups: 4 mg to 5 mg and 8 mg to 10 mg. The first group represents the suggested dexamethasone dose to prevent PONV by the Society for Ambulatory Anesthesia (SAMBA) guidelines, and the second group represents twice the dose range recommended by the guidelines. The SAMBA guidelines were developed in response to studies, which have been performed to examine different dosages of dexamethasone.

RESULTS

Sixty randomized clinical trials with 6696 subjects were included. The 4-mg to 5-mg dose dexamethasone group experienced reduced 24-hour PONV compared with control, odds ratio (OR, 0.31; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.23-0.41), and number needed to treat (NNT, 3.7; 95% CI, 3.0-4.7). When used together with a second antiemetic, the 4-mg to 5-mg dexamethasone group also experienced reduced 24-hour PONV compared with control (OR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.35-0.72; NNT, 6.6; 95% CI, 4.3-12.8). The 8-mg to 10-mg dose dexamethasone group experienced decreased 24-hour PONV compared with control (OR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.20-0.32; NNT, 3.8; 95% CI, 3.0-4.3). Asymmetric funnel plots were observed in the 8-mg to 10-mg dose analysis, suggesting the possibility of publication bias. When used together with a second antiemetic, the 8-mg to 10-mg dose group also experienced reduced incidence of 24-hour PONV (OR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.22-0.53; NNT, 6.2; 95% CI, 4.5-10). In studies that provided a direct comparison between groups, there was no clinical advantage of the 8-mg to 10-mg dexamethasone dose compared with the 4-mg to 5-mg dose on the incidence of postoperative nausea and/or vomiting.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results showed that a 4-mg to 5-mg dose of dexamethasone seems to have similar clinical effects in the reduction of PONV as the 8-mg to 10-mg dose when dexamethasone was used as a single drug or as a combination therapy. These findings support the current recommendation of the SAMBA guidelines for PONV, which favors the 4-mg to 5-mg dose regimen of systemic dexamethasone.

Impact of perioperative dexamethasone on postoperative analgesia and side-effects: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of a single perioperative dose of dexamethasone are unclear. We performed a systematic review to evaluate the impact of a single i.v. dose of dexamethasone on postoperative pain and explore adverse events associated with this treatment.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Register were searched for randomized, controlled studies that compared dexamethasone vs placebo or an antiemetic in adult patients undergoing general anaesthesia and reported pain outcomes.

RESULTS

Forty-five studies involving 5796 patients receiving dexamethasone 1.25-20 mg were included. Patients receiving dexamethasone had lower pain scores at 2 h {mean difference (MD) -0.49 [95% confidence interval (CI): -0.83, -0.15]} and 24 h [MD -0.48 (95% CI: -0.62, -0.35)] after surgery. Dexamethasone-treated patients used less opioids at 2 h [MD -0.87 mg morphine equivalents (95% CI: -1.40 to -0.33)] and 24 h [MD -2.33 mg morphine equivalents (95% CI: -4.39, -0.26)], required less rescue analgesia for intolerable pain [relative risk 0.80 (95% CI: 0.69, 0.93)], had longer time to first dose of analgesic [MD 12.06 min (95% CI: 0.80, 23.32)], and shorter stays in the post-anaesthesia care unit [MD -5.32 min (95% CI: -10.49 to -0.15)]. There was no dose-response with regard to the opioid-sparing effect. There was no increase in infection or delayed wound healing with dexamethasone, but blood glucose levels were higher at 24 h [MD 0.39 mmol litre(-1) (95% CI: 0.04, 0.74)].

CONCLUSIONS

A single i.v. perioperative dose of dexamethasone had small but statistically significant analgesic benefits.

Granisetron versus dexamethasone in prophylaxis of nausea and vomiting after laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Background

Post-operative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is one of the common problems after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Objectives

The current study aimed to compare Dexamethasone effect with that of Granisetron in prevention of PONV.

Patients and Methods

In the current study 104 patients aged 20-60 with ASA class I or II who were candidates for laparoscopic cholecystectomy were included in the study. Patients were randomly divided into two groups of A and B. 15 minutes before anesthesia induction, in group a patient’s 3 mg Granisetron and in group B patients 8 mg Dexamethasone was intravenously injected. Then both groups underwent general anesthesia with similar medications. After operation the prevalence of nausea and vomiting was assessed at three time intervals (0-6 hours, 6-12 hours and 12-24 hours after consciousness). SPSS software version 16 was employed to analyze data. T test, chi-square test and Fischer exact test were performed level of significance was P < 0.05.

Results

There was no significant difference between age, gender proportion, weight, height, and body mass index (BMI) of patients in the two groups. In Dexamethasone group, seven patients experienced nausea and three patients had vomiting, and in Granisetron group, five patients experienced nausea and three patients had vomiting after consciousness. Statistical analysis indicated no significant difference between the two groups in this regard.

Conclusions

Intravenous injection of 8 mg Dexamethasone or 3 mg Granisetron before anesthesia induction had similar effects in prophylaxis of nausea and vomiting after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Efficacy comparison of ramosetron with ondansetron on preventing nausea and vomiting in high-risk patients following spine surgery with a single bolus of dexamethasone as an adjunct

BACKGROUND

Despite the development of a new class of antiemetics, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) still remains a frequent and distressing complication. We compared the prophylactic antiemetic effect of administering dexamethasone 5 mg as an adjunct to ramosetron and ondansetron in patients at high-risk for PONV following lumbar spinal surgery.

METHODS

In this randomized, double-blind study, 120 female non-smoking patients with intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) received ramosetron 0.3 mg plus dexamethasone 5 mg (group R + D) or ondansetron 4 mg plus dexamethasone 5 mg (group O + D) intravenously. Fentanyl-based PCA was administered for 48 hr postoperatively; ramosetron 0.3 mg or ondansetron 12 mg was added to the PCA regimen according to the allocated group. The incidence of PONV and rescue antiemetic were assessed for 48 hr postoperatively at 0-6, 6-24, and 24-48 hr.

RESULTS

The overall incidence of PONV did not differ between the groups (50% vs. 60%, in groups R + D and O + D, respectively). The overall incidence of nausea was similar between groups (47% vs. 60%, in groups R + D and O + D, respectively). The overall frequency of vomiting was also similar between groups (8% vs. 12%, in groups R + D and O + D, respectively). The severity of nausea and the overall use of rescue antiemetic were not different between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The antiemetic efficacy of ramosetron plus dexamethasone was similar to that of ondansetron plus dexamethasone on preventing PONV in high-risk patients undergoing lumbar spinal 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.

Efficacy of dexamethasone added to ramosetron for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in highly susceptible patients following spine surgery

Background

Opioid-based patient controlled analgesia (PCA) provides adequate pain control following spinal surgeries at the expense of increased risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). We evaluated the efficacy of dexamethasone added to ramosetron, which is a newly developed five-hydroxytryptamine receptor 3 antagonist with a higher receptor affinity and longer action duration compared to its congeners, on preventing PONV in highly susceptible patients receiving opioid-based IV PCA after spinal surgery.

Methods

One hundred nonsmoking female patients undergoing spinal surgery were randomly allocated to either a ramosetron group (group R) or a ramosetron plus dexamethasone group (group RD)., Normal saline (1 ml) or 5 mg of dexamethasone was injected before anesthetic induction, while at the end of the surgery, ramosetron (0.3 mg) was administered to all patients and fentanyl-based IV PCA was continued for 48 hrs. The incidence and severity of PONV, pain score and the amount of rescue antiemetics were assessed for 48 hours after surgery.

Results

The number of patients with moderate to severe nausea (20 vs. 10, P = 0.029), and overall incidence of vomiting (13 vs. 5, P = 0.037) were significantly lower in the group RD than in the group R, respectively. Rescue antiemetic was used less in the RD group without significance.

Conclusions

Combination of ramosetron and dexamethasone significantly reduced the incidence of moderate to severe nausea and vomiting compared to ramosetron alone in highly susceptible patients receiving opioid-based IV PCA after surgery.

Current concepts in the management of postoperative nausea and vomiting

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) are still common following surgery. This is not only distressing to the patient, but increases costs. The thorough understanding of the mechanism of nausea and vomiting and a careful assessment of risk factors provide a rationale for appropriate management of PONV. Strategy to reduce baseline risk and the adoption of a multimodal approach will most likely ensure success in the management of PONV.

A systematic review of interventions to facilitate ambulatory laparoscopic cholecystectomy

OBJECTIVES

  We aimed to perform a systematic review of the literature to identify interventions that may facilitate ambulatory laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC).

METHODS

The PubMed and CENTRAL databases were interrogated for key MeSH headings. To be eligible for systematic review, trials were required to include outcome measures of postoperative pain, nausea or vomiting and time to discharge following LC. Interventions were subsequently assessed for the level of evidence and grade of recommendation given.

RESULTS

A total of 331 trials were identified, 68 of which met the predefined study inclusion criteria. Interventions which met Level I, Grade A recommendation included the administration of 8 mg i.v. dexamethasone, preoperative administration of analgesia including the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory or COX II inhibitors, intraoperative use of an anti-emetic, pre-incisional use of bupivacaine, administration of intraperitoneal bupivacaine on establishment of pneumoperitoneum, and avoidance of drains.

CONCLUSIONS

  High-quality evidence describing interventions that minimize barriers to ambulatory LC exists. Further studies will be required to determine the optimal combination of these interventions.

The impact of prophylactic dexamethasone on nausea and vomiting after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To determine the impact of prophylactic corticosteroid administration on postoperative nausea, vomiting, pain and complications in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

DATA SOURCES

We searched 4 bibliographic databases, conference proceedings, reference lists of articles and textbooks, and contacted experts in the field of anesthesia and hepatobiliary surgery.

REVIEW METHODS

We evaluated the methodologic quality of trials and extracted data regarding baseline characteristics, interventions, and outcomes. We pooled results from the studies using a random-effects model, evaluated the degree of heterogeneity, and explored potential explanations for heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Seventeen trials met eligibility criteria and provided high quality evidence regarding steroid effectiveness. Irrespective of the co-interventions (other antiemetic medications), dexamethasone reduced the incidence of nausea (RR 0.59, 95% CI, 0.48-0.72), vomiting (RR 0.41, 95% CI, 0.30-0.55), and postoperative nausea or vomiting (RR 0.55, 95% CI, 0.44-0.67) relative to placebo. Dexamethasone also seemed to reduce the severity of postoperative pain (Ratio of Means 0.87, 95% CI, 0.78-0.98), although substantial unexplained heterogeneity was present (I 90.4%). The incidence of headache and dizziness was similar between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic dexamethasone decreases the incidence of nausea and vomiting after LC relative to placebo and may decrease the severity of postoperative pain. Dexamethasone does not increase the incidence of headaches or dizziness. Surgeons should consider administering prophylactic corticosteroids to patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy, particularly those at high risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting.

Management of postoperative vomiting in pediatric patients

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Postoperative vomiting remains a common complication of general anesthesia and occurs more frequently in children than adults. Prophylactic antiemetics have limited efficacy and have a potential for side effects. The new 5 HT3 antagonists are effective but expensive, while the older less expensive drugs such as droperidol have come under disrepute because of the potential for serious, life-threatening, cardiac arrhythmias. This review examines the literature to aid practicing anesthesiologists in the choice of patient who will benefit from prophylactic antiemetics.

RECENT FINDINGS

In this review we discuss the factors associated with postoperative vomiting that are and are not under the control of the anesthesiologist. The Consensus Panel recommendations for reducing the risks of postoperative vomiting and for the rational use of prophylactic antiemetics in selected cases are reviewed. The controversy over the 'black box warning' on the use of droperidol is discussed. Finally, the evidence supports the importance of choosing a drug from another class for rescue therapy when prophylaxis with one drug has failed.

SUMMARY

Anesthesiologists should practice evidence-based medicine in reducing the common anesthetic complication of postoperative vomiting by an individualized approach that balances the choice of drugs with the expected risk of postoperative vomiting for cost-effective management.

Comparison of dexamethasone, metoclopramide, and their combination in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting after laparoscopic cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) are one of the most common complaints following anesthesia and surgery. This study was designed to evaluate the efficacy of dexamethasone, metoclopramide, and their combination to prevent PONV in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

METHODS

A total of 160 ASA physical status I and II patients were included in this randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled study. Patients were randomly assigned to 4 groups (n = 40 each): group 1 consisting of control patients administered 0.9% NaCl; group 2 patients received metoclopramide 10 mg just before the end of anesthesia; group 3 patients received dexamethasone 8 mg after the induction of anesthesia; and group 4 patients received dexamethasone 8 mg after the induction of anesthesia and metoclopramide 10 mg before the end of anesthesia. The incidence of PONV, mean visual analog pain scores at rest and on movement, time to the first request for analgesia, side effects, and well-being score were recorded during the first 24 h postoperatively.

RESULTS

Data were analyzed using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the chi2 test, with p < 0.05 considered statistically significant. The total incidence of PONV was 60% with placebo, 45% with metoclopramide, 23% with dexamethasone, and 13% with the combination of dexamethasone plus metoclopramide. None of the dexamethasone plus metoclopramide group patients (p < 0.05 versus groups 1 and 2) and one dexamethasone group patient (p < 0.05 versus group 1) required antiemetic rescue, as compared with four patients in the metoclopramide group and six patients in the placebo group. Pain scores, the time to the first request for analgesia, and side effects were similar across the study groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Dexamethasone and the combination of dexamethasone plus metoclopramide were more effective in preventing PONV than metoclopramide and placebo.

Drugs for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting

BACKGROUND

Drugs can prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting, but their relative efficacies and side effects have not been compared within one systematic review.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to assess the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting by drugs and the development of any side effects.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, Issue 2, 2004), MEDLINE (January 1966 to May 2004), EMBASE (January 1985 to May 2004), CINAHL (1982 to May 2004), AMED (1985 to May 2004), SIGLE (to May 2004), ISI WOS (to May 2004), LILAC (to May 2004) and INGENTA bibliographies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials that compared a drug with placebo or another drug, or compared doses or timing of administration, that reported postoperative nausea or vomiting as an outcome.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted outcome data.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 737 studies involving 103,237 people. Compared to placebo, eight drugs prevented postoperative nausea and vomiting: droperidol, metoclopramide, ondansetron, tropisetron, dolasetron, dexamethasone, cyclizine and granisetron. Publication bias makes evidence for differences among these drugs unreliable. The relative risks (RR) versus placebo varied between 0.60 and 0.80, depending upon the drug and outcome. Evidence for side effects was sparse: droperidol was sedative (RR 1.32) and headache was more common after ondansetron (RR 1.16).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Either nausea or vomiting is reported to affect, at most, 80 out of 100 people after surgery. If all 100 of these people are given one of the listed drugs, about 28 would benefit and 72 would not. Nausea and vomiting are usually less common and, therefore, drugs are less useful. For 100 people, of whom 30 would vomit or feel sick after surgery if given placebo, 10 people would benefit from a drug and 90 would not. Between one to five patients out of every 100 people may experience a mild side effect, such as sedation or headache, when given an antiemetic drug. Collaborative research should focus on determining whether antiemetic drugs cause more severe, probably rare, side effects. Further comparison of the antiemetic effect of one drug versus another is not a research priority.

Randomized clinical trial of the effect of preoperative dexamethasone on nausea and vomiting after laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Background

Preoperative dexamethasone may reduce disabling symptoms such as pain, nausea and vomiting after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Methods

This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Between March and December 2004, 101 patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomized to receive 8 mg dexamethasone (n = 49) or placebo (n = 52) intravenously before surgery. Six patients were excluded from the study. All patients received a standardized anaesthetic, surgical and multimodal analgesic treatment. The primary endpoints were: first, postoperative nausea, vomiting and pain; second, postoperative analgesic and antiemetic requirements. The pain scores (visual analogue and verbal response scales), the episodes of nausea (verbal response scale) and vomiting were recorded at 1, 3, 6 and 24 h, respectively, after the operation. Analgesic and antiemetic requirements were also recorded.

Results

No apparent drug side-effects were noted. Seven patients (14 per cent) in the treatment group reported nausea and vomiting compared with 24 (46 per cent) in the control group (P = 0·001). In the group of patients treated with dexamethasone, five (10 per cent) required antiemetics versus 23 (44 per cent) of those receiving placebo (P &lt; 0·001). No difference in postoperative pain scores and analgesic requirements was detected between groups.

Conclusion

Preoperative dexamethasone reduces postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy, with no side-effects, and may be recommended for routine use.

A Randomized, Double-Blind Study of Granisetron Plus Dexamethasone Versus Ondansetron Plus Dexamethasone to Prevent Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting in Patients Undergoing Abdominal Hysterectomy

In this randomized, double-blind study, we evaluated whether small-dose granisetron (0.1 mg) plus dexamethasone 8 mg (G+D) was as effective as ondansetron 4 mg plus dexamethasone 8 mg (O+D) for preventing vomiting during the 0 to 2 h after tracheal extubation in patients undergoing abdominal hysterectomy requiring general anesthesia. Dexamethasone (D) was administered at induction of anesthesia, and granisetron (G) or ondansetron (O) was given approximately 15 min before tracheal extubation. Data on postoperative nausea and vomiting were collected at 0, 2, 6, and 24 h. For the primary efficacy endpoint, most patients in each group had no vomiting in the 0- to 2-h interval (82/87 [94%] for G+D versus 86/89 [97%] for O+D). Effectiveness of G+D was demonstrated versus O+D. Treatment groups were similar with regard to moderate or severe nausea, complete response, rescue medication use, and total control over 24 h. A descriptive assessment of adverse events showed that both combinations were well tolerated with infrequent and similar incidences of adverse events. The combination of small-dose G administered just before tracheal extubation plus D given at induction of anesthesia is an effective alternative to O+D in preventing vomiting during the 0- to 2-h interval after tracheal extubation.

Betamethasone does not prevent nausea and vomiting induced by ipecacuanha

BACKGROUND

Corticosteroids reduce the incidence of PONV but the mode of action is not known. The purpose of this study was to evaluate if betamethasone has serotonin (5-HT) antagonistic effects. Ipecacuanha is known to release serotonin and therefore it was used to induce nausea and vomiting. The 5-HT3 antagonist ondansetron was used as a control substance.

METHODS

In a randomized, double-blind, cross-over, placebo-controlled study 10 healthy male and female volunteers (6 M/4F), mean age 19.5 (18-23) years, mean weight 69.7 (53-84) kg, were studied on three occasions separated by at least 1 week. They were randomly allocated to receive pretreatment with betamethasone 8 mg, ondansetron 8 mg, or normal saline 2 ml as placebo on each occasion, 15 min before oral ingestion of 30 ml of Ipecacuanha syrup. After ingestion of ipecacuanha, vomitings were recorded and the intensity of nausea was estimated with a visual analog scale during 2 h.

RESULTS

During the first 2 h after ingestion of ipecacuanha nine of the 10 volunteers vomited both after betamethasone and placebo. No volunteer vomited after ondansetron (P < 0.01 vs. betamethasone and placebo). The max VAS for nausea was significantly higher after betamethasone and placebo compared to ondansetron (P < 0.01). There were no statistically significant differences of the max VAS for nausea between betamethasone and placebo.

CONCLUSION

This study in volunteers has shown that betamethasone does not prevent nausea and vomiting induced by oral intake of ipecacuanha syrup. As ipecacuanha releases 5-hydroxytryptamin, it can be concluded that betamethasone does not have 5-HT3 antagonistic effects.

The efficacy of the 5-HT3 receptor antagonists combined with droperidol for PONV prophylaxis is similar to their combination with dexamethasone. A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

PURPOSE

The aim of this quantitative systematic review is to compare the efficacy and side effects of combining one of the 5-HT(3) receptor antagonists (5-HT) with droperidol or dexamethasone for postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) prophylaxis.

METHODS

We performed a systematic search (Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library) for randomized controlled trials that compared the antiemetic efficacy of combining one of the 5-HT with droperidol or dexamethasone vs 5-HT alone. Relevant endpoints were prevention of early (0 to 6 hr), and overall (0 to 24 hr) PONV, and side effects. The articles that could meet the inclusion criteria were scored for inclusion and methodological validity using the three-item, five-point, Oxford-scale. Relative risk and numbers needed-to-treat with 95% confidence intervals were calculated for each combination vs 5-HT alone. The two combinations were then indirectly compared. A random effects model was used.

RESULTS

We considered 41 trials for analysis but subsequently excluded eight. Thirty-three trials with data from 3,447 patients were analyzed. Except for early nausea with the 5-HT plus droperidol, both combinations were significantly more effective than 5-HT in preventing early and overall PONV. There was no difference in antiemetic efficacy between the two combinations. The incidence of commonly reported side effects was also similar in the two combination groups.

CONCLUSION

We conclude that there is no statistically significant difference in antiemetic efficacy or side effects profile when one of the 5-HT is combined with either droperidol or dexamethasone and that both combination regimens are significantly more effective than 5-HT alone.

Pharmacotherapy of postoperative nausea and vomiting

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) are two of the most common and unpleasant side effects following anaesthesia and surgery. Despite the development of new anti-emetics and a vast amount of published research, PONV continues to be a problem, especially in high-risk patients. Recent interest has focused on the use of a combination of agents, acting on different receptors and the adoption of a multimodal approach to tackle this problem. The search for the most cost-effective strategy has also been a major goal. This article will discuss the risk factors and physiology of PONV, currently available therapies, the use of a multimodal approach and the cost-effectiveness of PONV management. Finally, recommendations for the prophylaxis and treatment of PONV will be discussed.