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

Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting After Craniotomy: An Evidence-based Review of General Considerations, Risk Factors, and Management

One of the most common and distressing symptoms after craniotomy is postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). PONV could generate delayed postanesthesia care and hospitalization discharge, lower patient satisfaction, and an increase in overall hospitalization costs. The incidence of reported PONV after craniotomy is 22% to 70% without prophylaxis, and a multimodal regimen of medication has been recommended. We conducted a comprehensive literature review of the clinical evidence related to PONV prevention and management after craniotomy. All clinical trials in adult populations relevant to PONV after craniotomy available in English language and indexed in PubMed, Google Scholar and Cochrane Library databases from January 1997 up to September 2018 were retrieved using a combination of free-text words related to PONV in craniotomy. After screening manuscripts identified in the initial search, 23 clinical trials investigating systemic pharmacological intervention versus placebo or active control in patients undergoing craniotomy under general anesthesia met the criteria for inclusion in this comprehensive narrative review. The pathophysiology and mechanisms of PONV after craniotomy could be multifactorial in etiology. Therefore, based on current evidence, PONV management after craniotomy should focus on perioperative patient assessment, surgical, and anesthesia-related risk factors and the selection of systemic pharmacological considerations to reduce its incidence and complications. A multimodal regimen of medication targeting different chemoreceptors in the vomiting center is recommended. Ondansetron and dexamethasone, or their combination, are the most frequently used and effective agents. Further randomized clinical trials comparing different regimens that significantly reduce the incidence of PONV in craniotomy would provide relevant evidence-based data for PONV management in this patient population.

Improving recovery after microvascular decompression surgery for hemifacial spasm: experience from 530 cases with enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy of microvascular decompression (MVD) for hemifacial spasm with an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol.

METHODS

984 hemifacial spasm patients who underwent MVD from Jan 2017 to Dec 2017 were analyzed. They were divided into the conventional treatment group (control; n = 453) and the later ERAS group (n = 531). The multimodal ERAS protocol consists of 23 perioperative elements. Time to feeding, mobilization, and urinary catheter removal, wound pain, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), and total, preoperative, and perioperative hospital length of stay (LOS), along with outcomes and complications, were analyzed.

RESULTS

The patients in both groups had similar clinical characteristics. Patients in the ERAS group had significantly higher rates of early feeding (469 [88.5%], ERAS, vs. 183 [40.6%], control; p < 0.05), early mobilization (497 [93.7%], ERAS, vs. 215 [47.7%], control; p < 0.05), and early removal of urinary catheter (458 [86.4%], ERAS, vs. 175 [38.8%], control; p < 0.05). The ERAS group also had a significantly lower incidence of wound pain (135 [25.5%], ERAS, vs. 348 [77.2%], control) and PONV (173 [32.6%], ERAS, vs. 251 (55.7%), control) (p < 0.05) and significantly shorter preoperative (0.9 ± 0.3 d, ERAS, vs. 2.3 ± 0.6 d, control), postoperative (4.1 ± 0.4 d, ERAS, vs. 5.8 ± 0.7 d, control), and total LOS (5.2 ± 0.3 d, ERAS, vs. 8.8 ± 0.6 d, control) (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in outcomes or surgical complication rates between two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of the ERAS protocol for patients undergoing MVD procedures for the treatment of HFS improved the quality of perioperative care without an increase in adverse events.

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).

Anti-emetic Drugs for Prophylaxis of Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting After Craniotomy: An Updated Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Background: There is uncertainty about the effect of antiemetic drugs (AED) for the prophylaxis of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) after craniotomy. In this study, we assessed the effectiveness and safety of AED for PONV.

Methods and Findings: We searched online databases including the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Wiley, Elsevier Science Direct, Ovid LWW, and Springer for publications from 1985 to June 2018. Adults undergoing craniotomy with the prophylactic use of at least one AED were included. The primary outcomes were the incidence of postoperative nausea (PON) and postoperative vomiting (POV) during the first and second day. A total of 1,433 participants from 17 clinical trials were enrolled in this Network Meta-Analysis (NMA). Compared to placebo, ramosetron was the most effective treatment for PON 24 h after surgery (OR = 0.063, 95% Crl: 0.006–0.45), with a 69.2% probability. On the other hand, for POV, droperidol was the best treatment during the first 2 h with a 71.1% probability (OR = 0.029, 95% Crl: 0.003–0.25); while fosaprepitant was the most effective treatment at 0–24 h (OR = 0.027, 95% Crl: 0.007–0.094; 66.9% probability) and 0–48 h (OR = 0.036, 95% Crl: 0.006–0.18; 56.6% probability). Besides, ramosetron showed a significantly higher incidence of complete response (OR = 29. 95% Crl: 1.4–6.5e + 02), as well as lower requirement for rescue AED (OR = 0.022, 95% Crl: 0.001–0.2). Granisetron was associated with the lowest incidence of headache and excessive sedation.

Conclusions: Compared with placebo, ramosetron appears to be the best prophylactic treatment for PON 24 h after craniotomy, with higher complete responses. Fosaprepitant appears to be the most effective prophylaxis option for POV on the first 0–24 and 0–48 h. Both may be better applied in combination with perioperative dexamethasone. These findings may guide clinicians to provide improved pharmacological prophylaxis for PONV after craniotomy with fewer adverse effects.

[Postoperative nausea and vomiting in neurosurgery: the approaches are varied but the problem remains unsolved]

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) can induce brain displacement and herniation, especially in patients with cerebral edema.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the urgency of the problem associated with postoperative nausea and vomiting in current clinical practice (with modern approaches being used for its prevention) and to reveal the risk factors of PONV that are typically encountered in neurosurgical patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A prospective observational study involved 240 patients who had undergone elective surgeries at the N.N. Burdenko National Scientific and Practical Center for Neurosurgery between July and November 2017. The data were collected from the questionnaires filled out by the patients during the first 48 h after the surgery and from patients' medical records.

RESULTS

The overall rate of PONV was 39.6%. Thirty-six out of 53 (68%) patients developed PONV after the posterior fossa surgeries. The risk of PONV in this group was significantly higher (p<0.05) compared to the rate of PONV after interventions at a different location. The rate of PONV after treatment of extracranial pathology was ~10.5%; for a different location, it was as high as 32-37%. Intraoperative dexamethasone was used in 156 (65%) patients; in this group, the rate of PONV was 39.9%. Patients received ondansetron at a dose of 8 mg for a preventive purpose at the end of the surgery. A total of 162 patients were given the drug; 59 (36.4%) of them developed POTV during 48 h post-administration. Seventy-eight patients did not receive ondansetron. Thirty-six of them (46.2%) (p>0.05) developed POTV. The rate of POTV assessed during the first 8 h after surgery was 22.8% in patients who had received ondansetron and 37.2% in those who had not received it (p<0.05). Patients who had not intraoperatively received a combination of these drugs developed POTV in 55 (45%) cases (p>0.05).

CONCLUSION

The problem associated in POTV remains topical in neurosurgery. The current approaches are not absolutely effective for prevention of POTV, whose rate ranges between 10.5 and 68% depending on surgery location. Further studies focused on administration of NK-1 receptor antagonists and electrical stimulation of the median nerve are needed to enhance the effectiveness of POTV prevention.

Effects of Intraoperative Dexamethasone and Ondansetron on Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting in Microvascular Decompression Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Study

Background

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a common problem and may lead to catastrophic complications, especially in neurosurgical cases. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of dexamethasone and ondansetron for preventing PONV in patients who underwent microvascular decompression (MVD) surgery.

Methods

A prospective, double-blinded, randomized control trial was conducted with 54 patients who underwent MVD. Patients were allocated into two groups. The study group (Gr. D) received intraoperative dexamethasone 4 mg iv and ondansetron 4 mg iv, whereas the control group (Gr. N) received placebo (0.9% normal saline 1 ml iv and 0.9% normal saline 2 ml iv). The incidence and severity of PONV were observed at 1, 2, 4, and 24 hr postsurgery.

Results

At 1, 2, 4, and 24 hr postsurgery, Gr. D had a lower incidence (7.4%, 11.1%, 29.6%, and 66.7%) and lower severity of PONV than Gr. N (18.5%, 29.6%, 37.0%, and 81.5% at 1, 2, 4, and 24 hr; p > 0.05). The requirement for antiemetic drugs was not significantly different between the groups (p > 0.05).

Conclusion

Administration of dexamethasone and ondansetron 4 mg seemed to decrease the incidence of PONV in the first 24 hours but not significantly. Therefore, further studies are to be carried out by escalating either dexamethasone dose or the dose of ondansetron or both.

Effect of prophylactic palonosetron and sugammadex on postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing microvascular decompression under propofol-maintained anesthesia: A retrospective observational study

Microvascular decompression (MVD) is associated with a particularly high risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) among craniotomy patients. However, there is no information regarding the effect of prophylactic palonosetron and sugammadex on PONV in patients undergoing MVD under propofol-maintained anesthesia.Medical records of 274 adults who had undergone MVD under propofol-maintained anesthesia were reviewed. Patients were classified into 4 groups, based on the reversal agent used (sugammadex/pyridostigmine) and whether or not prophylactic palonosetron was used. The PONV incidence and risk factors were analyzed according to the use of these agents.The overall incidence of PONV was 30.7% during the first 24 hours postoperatively. The incidence of PONV was lower in the group using combination of prophylactic palonosetron and sugammadex (19.3%) compared with the group not using both agents (37.2%). The combined use of the prophylactic palonosetron and sugammadex was identified as a factor affecting the occurrence of PONV in both univariable (OR = 0.40, 95% CI: 0.21-0.77, P = .006) and multivariable (OR = 0.38, 95% CI: 0.20-0.75, P = .005) logistic regression analyses. In multivariable logistic regression analysis, female sex was also significant independent risk factor in PONV (OR = 2.62, 95% CI: 1.35-5.08, P = .004).In this retrospective observational study, the combined use of prophylactic palonosetron before anesthetic induction and sugammadex as a reversal of neuromuscular blockade are associated with a reduction in the incidence of PONV in patients undergoing MVD under propofol-maintained anesthesia.

The role of "Integrated Pulmonary Index" monitoring during morphine-based intravenous patient-controlled analgesia administration following supratentorial craniotomies: a prospective, randomized, double-blind controlled study

OBJECTIVE

Morphine is commonly used in post-operative analgesia, but opioid-related respiratory depression causes a general reluctance for its use. The "Integrated Pulmonary Index" is a tool calculated from non-invasively obtained respiratory and hemodynamic parameters. The aim of this prospective, randomized, double blind, and placebo-controlled study is to determine a more safe and effective dose for morphine in patient-controlled analgesia following supratentorial craniotomy using the "Integrated Pulmonary Index".

METHODS

This study included 60 patients (ASA I, II, and III). All patients used iv PCA for 24 h following supratentorial craniotomy. The PCA was set to administer a bolus dose of 1 mg morphine in Group 1 and 0.5 mg morphine in Group 2. The PCA contained placebo in Group 3 and patients received dexketoprofen 50 mg iv after awakening, repeated every 8 h. The IPI and NRS scores, total morphine consumption, and morphine related side-effects were recorded at 10 min, 1, 2, 6, 12, and 24 h post-operatively. The lowest IPI score, count of apnea, and desaturation events were recorded during the study period.

RESULTS

The IPI scores were similar among the groups. Although a statistically significant difference was not observed among the groups the lowest IPI scores were observed in Group 1; apnea and desaturation counts were also higher in Group 1. Statistically significant differences were not observed among the groups in terms of pain scores, but were lower in Groups 1 and 2 compared to Group 3.

CONCLUSION

Patient controlled analgesia with 0.5 mg morphine may be safe and effective for pain management following supratentorial craniotomies. Integrated pulmonary index can be used for detecting opioid-induced respiratory depression. Clinical Trials registration number: NCT02929147.

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.

Gabapentin for Postoperative Vomiting in Children Requiring Posterior Fossa Tumor Resection

Gabapentin is well known for its pain control and antiepileptic effect, but its antiemetic effect is poorly investigated. Here we report on effective gabapentin use for refractory vomiting after craniotomy in two children with medulloblastoma in the fourth ventricle. The two pediatric patients (an 11-year-old girl and a 4-year-old boy) underwent near-total excision of the tumor via craniotomy. Both patients suffered from refractory postoperative nausea and vomiting, treated with multiple traditional antiemetic drugs but without relief. After gabapentin intake, their nausea and vomiting improved from one to two episodes per day to complete resolution of symptoms. This report suggests that gabapentin may be a novel antiemetic therapeutic intervention for patients with refractory nausea and vomiting after craniotomy.

Comparative safety of serotonin (5-HT3) receptor antagonists in patients undergoing surgery: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Serotonin (5-HT3) receptor antagonists are commonly used to decrease nausea and vomiting for surgery patients, but these agents may be harmful. We conducted a systematic review on the comparative safety of 5-HT3 receptor antagonists.

METHODS

Searches were done in MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials to identify studies comparing 5-HT3 receptor antagonists with each other, placebo, and/or other antiemetic agents for patients undergoing surgical procedures. Screening search results, data abstraction, and risk of bias assessment were conducted by two reviewers independently. Random-effects pairwise meta-analysis and network meta-analysis (NMA) were conducted. PROSPERO registry number: CRD42013003564.

RESULTS

Overall, 120 studies and 27,787 patients were included after screening of 7,608 citations and 1,014 full-text articles. Significantly more patients receiving granisetron plus dexamethasone experienced an arrhythmia relative to placebo (odds ratio (OR) 2.96, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.11-7.94), ondansetron (OR 3.23, 95 % CI 1.17-8.95), dolasetron (OR 4.37, 95 % CI 1.51-12.62), tropisetron (OR 3.27, 95 % CI 1.02-10.43), and ondansetron plus dexamethasone (OR 5.75, 95 % CI 1.71-19.34) in a NMA including 31 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and 6,623 patients of all ages. No statistically significant differences in delirium frequency were observed across all treatment comparisons in a NMA including 18 RCTs and 3,652 patients.

CONCLUSION

Granisetron plus dexamethasone increases the risk of arrhythmia.

Granisetron versus ondansetron for post-operative nausea and vomiting prophylaxis in elective craniotomies for brain tumors: A randomized controlled double-blind study

Context:

Post-operative nausea and vomiting (PONV) pose unique challenges in neurosurgical patients that warrant its study separate from other surgical groups.

Setting and Design:

This prospective, randomized, double-blind study was carried out to compare and to evaluate the efficacy and safety of three antiemetic combinations for PONV prophylaxis following craniotomy.

Materials and Methods:

A total of 75 anesthesiologist status I/II patients undergoing elective craniotomy for brain tumors were randomized into three groups, G, O and D, to receive single doses of dexamethasone 8 mg at induction with either granisetron 1 mg, ondansetron 4 mg or normal saline 2 ml at the time of dural closure respectively. Episodes of nausea, retching, vomiting and number of rescue antiemetic (RAE) were noted for 48 h post-operatively.

Statistical Analysis:

Analysis of variance with post-hoc significance and Chi-square test with fisher exact correction were used for statistical analysis. P <0.05 was considered to be significant and P < 0.001 as highly significant.

Results:

We found that the incidence and number of vomiting episodes and RAE required were significantly low in Group G and O compared with Group D; P < 0.05. However, incidence of nausea and retching were comparable among all groups. The anti-nausea and anti-retching efficacy of all the three groups was comparable.

Conclusions:

Single dose administration of granisetron 1 mg or ondansetron 4 mg at the time of dural closure with dexamethasone 8 mg provide an effective and superior prophylaxis against vomiting compared with dexamethasone alone without interfering with post-operative recovery and neurocognitive monitoring and hence important in post-operative neurosurgical care.

Immediate postoperative complications in transsphenoidal pituitary surgery: A prospective study

BACKGROUND

Considering the important role of pituitary gland in regulating various endocrine axes and its unique anatomical location, various postoperative complications can be anticipated resulting from surgery on pituitary tumors. We examined and categorized the immediate postoperative complications according to various tumor pathologies.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We carried out a prospective study in 152 consecutive patients and noted various postoperative complications during neurosurgical intensive care unit stay (within 48 hrs of hospital stay) in patients undergoing transsphenoidal removal of pituitary tumors.

RESULTS

In our series, various groups showed different postoperative complications out of which, cerebrospinal fluid leak was the commonest followed by diabetes insipidus, postoperative nausea and vomiting, and hematoma at operation site.

CONCLUSION

Various immediate postoperative complications can be anticipated in transsphenoidal pituitary surgery even though, it is considered to be relatively safe.

A prospective, randomized, double-blind, and multicenter trial of prophylactic effects of ramosetronon postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) after craniotomy: comparison with ondansetron

Background

Craniotomy patients have a high incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). This prospective, randomized, double-blind, multi-center study was performed to evaluate the efficacy of prophylactic ramosetron in preventing PONV compared with ondansetron after elective craniotomy in adult patients.

Methods

A total of 160 American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I–II patients aged 19–65 years who were scheduled to undergo elective craniotomy for various intracranial lesions were enrolled in this study. All patients received total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) with propofol and remifentanil. Patients were randomly allocated into three groups to receive ondansetron (4 mg; group A, n  =  55), ondansetron (8 mg; group B, n  =  54), or ramosetron (0.3 mg; group C, n  =  51) intravenously at the time of dural closure. The incidence of PONV, the need for rescue antiemetics, pain score, patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) consumption, and adverse events were recorded 48 h postoperatively.

Results

Among the initial 160 patients, 127 completed the study and were included in the final analysis. The incidences of PONV were lower (nausea, 14% vs. 59% and 41%, respectively; P  <  0.001; vomiting, P  =  0.048) and the incidence of complete response was higher (83% vs. 37% and 59%, respectively; P  <  0.001) in group C than in groups A and B at 48 h postoperatively. There were no significant differences in the incidence of PONV or need for rescue antiemetics 0–2 h postoperatively, but significant differences were observed in the incidence of PONV and complete response among the three groups 2–48 h postoperatively. No statistically significant intergroup differences were observed in postoperative pain, PCA consumption, or adverse events.

Conclusion

Intravenous administration of ramosetron at 0.3 mg reduced the incidence of PONV and rescue antiemetic requirement in craniotomy patients. Ramosetron at 0.3 mg was more effective than ondansetron at 4 or 8 mg for preventing PONV in adult craniotomy patients.

Trial registration

Clinical Research Information Service (CRiS) Identifier: KCT0000320. Registered 9 January 2012.

Is microvascular decompression surgery a high risk for postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing craniotomy?

PURPOSE

Patients undergoing microvascular decompression surgery often experience postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). However, there is little information about the incidence of PONV after microvascular decompression. We hypothesized that microvascular decompression is an especially high-risk procedure for PONV in patients undergoing neurosurgery, and investigated risk factors related to PONV after neurosurgery.

METHODS

All patients who underwent craniotomy in our institution during a period of 2 years were investigated retrospectively. Medical charts were reviewed to identify PONV during the 24-h postoperative period and related risk factors. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was conducted to elucidate the impact of microvascular decompression on PONV after craniotomy.

RESULTS

Among 556 craniotomy cases, 350 patients met the inclusion criteria. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that microvascular decompression was an independent risk factor for PONV after craniotomy (odds ratio 5.38, 3.02-9.60), in addition to female gender, non-smoker status, amount of intraoperative fentanyl administered, and cerebrovascular surgery.

CONCLUSION

In this retrospective study, microvascular decompression surgery was an especially high-risk factor for PONV in patients undergoing craniotomy. It may be necessary to adopt a combination of prophylactic methods to reduce the incidence of PONV after microvascular decompression.

Practice guidelines for postanesthetic care: an updated report by the American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Postanesthetic Care

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Indication for surgery and the risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting after craniotomy: a case-control study

BACKGROUND

The primary hypothesis of the study is that acoustic neuroma (AN) surgery and microvascular decompression (MVD) of cranial nerves increase the risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV).

METHODS

We designed a retrospective case-control study matched on age, sex, and year of surgery (≤2005 and >2005). Year of surgery was noted as a potential confounder, because routine antiemetic prophylaxis was strongly encouraged at the study site in 2005. Cases of PONV in the recovery room were matched to controls in a 1:2 manner using a perioperative database. Charts were then reviewed for the following data: American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, smoking status, craniotomy location, craniotomy indication, and type of anesthetic administered.

RESULTS

The final analysis included 117 cases that were matched with 185 controls. Patients had a mean age of 50 years (SD=13), and 65% were female. Overall, the majority of craniotomies were supratentorial (70%) and performed for tumor resection (41%). On multivariable analysis, MVD [odds ratio (OR)=6.7; 95% confidence interval (CI), 2.0-22.7; P=0.002], AN (OR=3.3; 95% CI, 1.0-11.0; P=0.05), and epilepsy surgery (OR=2.8; 95% CI, 1.1-7.5; P=0.04) were associated with an increased likelihood of PONV when compared with tumor surgery. There was effect modification of total intravenous anesthesia by location of surgery (P-interaction=0.02). The benefit of total intravenous anesthesia on PONV was observed in supratentorial (OR=0.41; 95% CI, 0.17-0.96; P=0.04) but not infratentorial location (OR=2.6; 95% CI, 0.78-8.7; P=0.11).

CONCLUSIONS

MVD and AN resection were associated with an increased likelihood of PONV compared with craniotomies performed for other tumor resection.

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.

A network meta-analysis on the efficacy of serotonin type 3 receptor antagonists used in adults during the first 24 hours for postoperative nausea and vomiting prophylaxis

BACKGROUND

The serotonin type 3 receptor antagonists (5-HT(3) antagonists) ondansetron, granisetron, tropisetron, and dolasetron are potential prophylactic agents for patients with mild to moderate risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). A few trials have been conducted to compare the efficacy among 2 to 3 of these 4 agents. However, the comparative efficacy of all four 5-HT(3) antagonists has not yet been quantitatively investigated.

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this study was to investigate whether the 5-HT(3) antagonists--ondansetron, granisetron, tropisetron, and dolasetron-differ in efficacy when used for the prevention of PONV.

METHODS

PubMed and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled, double-blind studies measuring efficacy in terms of PONV prophylaxis. A Bayesian meta-analysis was conducted using published studies of 5-HT(3) antagonists for PONV prophylaxis. The odds of patients with no PONV and postoperative vomiting (POV) within each study arm 24 hours after surgery were the primary indices of drug efficacy. Data were extracted and analyzed via indirect comparisons using random effects Bayesian models in WinBUGS version 1.4.3.

RESULTS

A total of 85 studies were identified, representing 15,269 patients. The results indicate that granisetron was significantly better than ondansetron (odds ratio [OR] = 1.53 [95% credible interval (CI), 1.15-2.00]) and dolasetron (OR = 1.67 [95% CI, 1.12-2.38]) in preventing PONV. Four antiemetic drugs had comparable efficacy in terms of preventing POV: granisetron showed similar efficacy compared with ondansetron (OR = 1.49 [95% CI, 0.90-2.43]), tropisetron (OR = 1.69 [95% CI, 0.92-3.13]), and dolasetron (OR = 1.32 [95% CI, 0.71-2.38]). Ondansetron exhibited comparable efficacy compared with tropisetron (OR = 1.14 [95% CI, 0.66-1.96]) and dolasetron (OR = 0.88 [95% CI, 0.51-1.47]). Tropisetron and dolasetron were also similar in efficacy (OR = 0.78 [95% CI, 0.40-1.45]). All 5-HT(3) antagonists were statistically significantly better at preventing PONV or POV than placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

With respect to PONV prophylaxis, granisetron was significantly better than ondansetron and dolasetron; ondansetron, tropisetron, and dolasetron exhibited similar efficacy. With respect to POV prophylaxis, ondansetron, granisetron, tropisetron, and dolasetron seemed to have comparable efficacy.

Postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients after craniotomy: incidence and risk factors

OBJECT

The purpose of this study was to assess the incidence and risk factors of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) after craniotomy because most available data about PONV in neurosurgical patients are retrospective in nature or derive from small prospective studies.

METHODS

Postoperative nausea and vomiting was prospectively assessed within 24 hours after surgery in 229 patients requiring supratentorial or infratentorial craniotomy. To rule out the relevance of the neurosurgical procedure itself to the development of PONV, the observed incidence of vomiting was compared with the rate of vomiting predicted with a surgery-independent risk score (Apfel postoperative vomiting score).

RESULTS

The overall incidence of PONV after craniotomy was 47%. Logistic regression identified female sex as a risk factor for postoperative nausea (OR 4.25, 95% CI 2.3-7.8) and vomiting (OR 2.62, 95% CI 1.4-4.9). Both the incidence of nausea (OR 3.76, 95% CI 2.06-6.88) and vomiting (OR 4.48, 95% CI 2.4-8.37) were increased in patients not receiving steroids. Postoperative nausea and vomiting occurred after infratentorial as well as after supratentorial procedures. The observed incidence of vomiting within 24 hours after surgery was higher (49%) than would be predicted with the Apfel surgery-independent risk score (31%; p = 0.0004).

CONCLUSIONS

The overall incidence of PONV within 24 hours after craniotomy was approximately 50%. One possible reason is that intracranial surgeries pose an additional and independent risk factor for vomiting, especially in female patients. Patients undergoing craniotomy should be identified as high-risk patients for PONV.

Electroacupoint stimulation for postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing supratentorial craniotomy

OBJECTS

We evaluated the effectiveness of transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulation (TEAS) at the P6 acupoint for prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing supratentorial craniotomy.

METHODS

The study population was patients aged 20 to 60 years who underwent supratentorial craniotomy under general anesthesia. Exclusion criteria were obesity, diabetes mellitus, and a history of motion sickness, postoperative nausea and vomiting, or smoking. Patients were randomized into 2 groups: stimulation and control. In the former, transcutaneous stimulation electrodes were placed at the right P6 acupoint. In controls, electrodes were positioned at a nonacupoint site. Patients received a standard general anesthesia. Ondansetron was given as a routine antiemetic treatment for each patient before skin closure. Postoperatively, metoclopramide (10 mg, i.v.) was administered as a rescue antiemetic.

RESULT

Forty patients received TEAS and 40 were controls. In the TEAS group, 18% of patients had nausea compared with 37% of the controls. The cumulative prevalence of vomiting was 12.5% with acustimulation and 32.5% in controls (P<0.05). The prevalence of nausea, vomiting was significantly lower with TEAS at the P6 acupoint.

CONCLUSIONS

TEAS at the P6 meridian points is an effective adjunct to standard antiemetic drug therapy for prevention of nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing supratentorial craniotomy.

Dexamethasone for intracranial neurosurgery and anaesthesia

Dexamethasone is frequently administered to patients with brain tumours having neurosurgery, and is often given for other purposes by anaesthetists. This review outlines the rationale for its use by both specialities, and discusses its potential adverse effects.

Prevention and control of postoperative nausea and vomiting in post-craniotomy patients

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) are the most frequent side-effects in the postoperative period, impairing subjective well-being and having economic impact due to delayed discharge. However, emetic symptoms can also cause major medical complications, and post-craniotomy patients may be at an increased risk. A review and critical appraisal of the existing literature on PONV in post-craniotomy patients, and a comparison of these findings with the current knowledge on PONV in the general surgical population, leads to the following conclusions: (1) Despite the lack of a documented case of harm caused by retching or vomiting in a post-craniotomy patient, the potential risk caused by arterial hypertension and high intra-abdominal/intra-thoracic pressure leading to high intracranial pressure, forces to avoid PONV in these patients. (2) There is unclarity about a specifically increased (or decreased) risk for PONV in post-craniotomy patients compared with other surgical procedures. (3) The decision whether or not to administer an antiemetic should not be based primarily on risk scores for PONV but on the likelihood for potential catastrophic consequences of PONV. If such a risk cannot be ruled out, a multimodal antiemetic approach should be considered regardless of the individual risk. (4) Randomized controlled trials with antiemetics in post-craniotomy patients are limited with respect to sample size and methodological quality. This also impacts upon the meaning of meta-analyses performed with trials that showed marked heterogeneity and inconclusive results. (5) No studies on the treatment of established PONV are available. This highlights the need to transfer knowledge about PONV treatment from other surgical procedures. (6) Despite the possibility that PONV in post-craniotomy patients can be triggered by specific conditions (e.g. surgery near the area postrema at the floor of the fourth ventricle with the vomiting centre located nearby), recommendations based on trials in post-craniotomy patients may be flawed. Thus, general knowledge on prevention and treatment of PONV must adopted for craniotomy settings.

Early postoperative complications after intracranial surgery: comparison between total intravenous and balanced anesthesia

This prospective study was performed to compare the incidence of complications occurring after neurosurgical procedures in patients anesthetized with either sevoflurane-fentanyl or propofol-remifentanil anesthesia. We enrolled 162 American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) I to III patients (82 females and 80 males, Glasgow 15) undergoing elective neurosurgical procedures. Anesthesia was conducted using either propofol-remifentanil (T group; n=80 patients) or sevoflurane-fentanyl (S group; n=82 patients). All patients were monitored in the postanesthesia care unit for 6 hours after extubation. We analyzed and compared in both groups the incidence of high severity complications such as respiratory events (PaO2 <90 mm Hg; PaCO2 >45 mm Hg) and neurologic events (seizures, new motor or sensory deficit, unexpected delay of awakening) and the incidence of low severity complications such as hypertension (mean arterial pressure increase above 30% of baseline), hypotension (mean arterial pressure decrease below 30% of baseline), pain, shivering, nausea, and vomiting. A total of 162 complications occurred in 92 patients (57%) with 50 patients (31%) having had 1, 26 patients (16%) having had 2, and 16 patients (10%) having had 3 or more events. The most frequent complication was respiratory impairment (28%) which was frequently reported only in the first postoperative hour. Out of the total number of complicating events, 77 (48 %) were found in group S, and 85 (52%) in group T (P=ns). Severe complications were rarely reported and evenly distributed in the 2 anesthetic groups. Similarly, no difference could be demonstrated in the composite incidence of less serious complications between the 2 anesthetic regimens tested in this study. This study confirms that the recovery period after neurosurgical procedures remains a time of great potential danger to patients given the high incidence of postoperative complicating events independently from the anesthetic strategy.

Effect of Prophylactic Ondansetron on Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting in Patients on Preoperative Steroids Undergoing Craniotomy for Supratentorial Tumors

The exact incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in patients on steroids undergoing neurosurgical procedures is not known. This prospective randomized double-blind study was planned to know the efficacy of prophylactic ondansetron in the prevention of PONV in patients on steroids as compared with placebo. Seventy adult patients of either sex who had received preoperative steroids (dexamethasone) for at least 24 hours and were scheduled to undergo craniotomy for supratentorial tumors were included. Patients were randomly allocated using a randomization chart to 1 of the 2 groups to receive either ondansetron 4 mg (group O) or 0.9% saline (group S) intravenously at the time of dural closure. Numeric Rating Scale score for nausea and pain intensity was recorded preoperatively and till 24 hours postoperatively. The 6-hour postoperative nausea score was significantly lower in group O [median, 0; interquartile range (IQR), 0 to 20] than in group S (median, 20; IQR, 0 to 20) (P<0.05). The incidence of vomiting was lower in group O (23%) than in group S (46%) (P<0.05). The total number of emetic episodes, the number of doses of rescue antiemetics given in the first 6 postoperative hours, and the total number of rescue antiemetics given were significantly lower in group O than in group S (P<0.05). Intravenous administration of 4 mg of ondansetron at the time of dural closure was effective in reducing the incidence of PONV and the rescue antiemetics requirement in patients on preoperative steroids undergoing craniotomy for supratentorial tumors.

Awakening management after neurosurgery for intracranial tumours

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Major complications after intracranial surgery occur in 13-27% of patients. These complications may have multiple causes, but a body of arguments suggests that the haemodynamic and metabolic changes of anaesthesia recovery may be responsible for intracranial complications. The aim of this review is to explain the rationale of this hypothesis and analyse the recent studies relevant to neuroanaesthesia recovery.

RECENT FINDINGS

Rapid recovery and extubation after intracranial tumour surgery is desirable in order to make an early diagnosis of intracranial complications. Since light pharmacological sedation may worsen a neurological deficit, short-acting anaesthetics are preferable intraoperatively. Extubation in the operating room, however, may be associated with agitation, increased oxygen consumption, catecholamine secretion, hypercapnia and systemic hypertension. This may exacerbate cerebral hyperaemia observed even during an uneventful recovery, leading to cerebral oedema or haemorrhage.

SUMMARY

Pain, hypothermia, hypercapnia, hypoxia, hypoosmolality, hypertension, and anaemia should be avoided during emergence. Early emergence is associated with minimal haemodynamic and metabolic changes. If there is any doubt as to whether the patient should be extubated in the operating room, a gradual emergence in the intensive care unit makes it possible to decide whether or not extubation can be performed safely.

The Efficacy of 5-HT3 Receptor Antagonists for the Prevention of Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting After Craniotomy: A Meta-Analysis

The purpose of this meta-analysis was to assess the efficacy of prophylactic administration of 5-HT3 receptor antagonists for postoperative nausea and vomiting in neurosurgical patients at 24 and 48+ hours. After a systematic search, 7 published randomized placebo controlled trials involving 448 craniotomy patients (222 treatment, 226 control) were included in the meta-analysis. Study drugs included ondansetron, granisetron, and tropisetron. The cumulative incidence of emesis was significantly reduced in the treatment group at 24 hours [relative risk (RR)=0.50, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.38-0.66] and 48+ hours (RR=0.52, 95% CI: 0.36-0.75). There were no differences between the treatment and control groups in the cumulative incidence of nausea at 24 hours (RR=0.76, 95% CI: 0.54-1.06) and 48+ hours (RR=0.81, 95% CI: 0.62-1.06). The cumulative incidence of both nausea and vomiting continued to increase after 24 hours in both groups. Despite the ability of 5-HT3 receptor antagonists to reduce emetic episodes, future investigations should seek to address the control of postoperative nausea and to reduce further postoperative emesis in this population.

Assessing risk factors for postoperative nausea and vomiting: a retrospective study in patients undergoing retromastoid craniectomy with microvascular decompression of cranial nerves

We have observed that patients, after retromastoid craniectomy (RMC) with microvascular decompression (MVD) of cranial nerves, frequently experienced postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). The authors conducted this study to track the incidence of PONV and to identify potential factors for PONV after RMC with MVD. Medical records from 185 adults, who underwent elective RMC with MVD, were identified and reviewed from January 2000 to December 2004. Extracted data included patient, anesthesia, and surgery related variables that were considered to have a possible effect on the patients experiencing PONV after RMC with MVD. Despite the use of intraoperative prophylactic ondansetron in 99% of patients, the overall incidence of PONV (nausea or emesis or both) was 60% during the first 24 hours postoperatively. It was higher for the patients after RMC with MVD of cranial nerve V [69%, 82/119, P=0.005, odds ratio (OR)=2.8]. Regression modeling demonstrated that female sex (OR=3.0, P=0.005) and use of desflurane (OR=2.8, P=0.003) were significant independent predictors of PONV. Prophylactic transdermal scopolamine patch administered preoperatively was associated with less PONV (OR=0.3, P=0.001). We concluded that PONV occurs frequently in adults recovering from RMC with MVD. The results of this study suggest that it may be necessary to administer a combination of antiemetics to decrease the incidence of PONV after RMC.

Postoperative nausea and vomiting and pain after transsphenoidal surgery: a review of 877 patients

Although postoperative nausea and vomiting and pain after supra- and infratentorial craniotomy have been evaluated in multiple studies, there are few data regarding pain or postoperative nausea and vomiting after transsphenoidal procedures. Therefore, we reviewed the perioperative records of 877 patients undergoing transsphenoidal surgery by the same surgeon. The overall incidence of postoperative emesis was 7.5%, significantly less than most studies of neurosurgical patients. An intraoperative cerebrospinal fluid leak and subsequent fat grafting, the use of lumbar intrathecal catheter, and patients presenting for the resection of a craniopharyngiomas all had a significantly increased incidence of postoperative emesis (11.4%, 17.1%, and 18%, respectively). Interestingly, antiemetic prophylaxis did not decrease the risk of vomiting overall or in any cohort of patients; however, both droperidol and ondansetron decreased the incidence of nausea in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU). Regarding pain and morphine consumption, patients who later developed diabetes insipidus had a significant increase in morphine requirements in the PACU. No other disease state was associated with increased pain or morphine consumption in the PACU.

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.

Postoperative pain, nausea and vomiting in neurosurgical patients

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Postoperative pain and postoperative nausea and vomiting are significant problems for neurosurgical patients and their carers. The treatment of these problems is widely perceived to be inadequate, however, especially in patients undergoing craniotomy, and there are few large, randomized controlled trials. The main issue has been fear of side effects, especially those masking neurological signs. A review of the recent literature therefore is justified.

RECENT FINDINGS

Very little new information has been added to the literature about pain management in craniotomy patients, and postoperative nausea and vomiting management in neurosurgery patients as a whole. The main themes in the literature have been the introduction of multimodal analgesia for craniotomy patients, using simple analgesics as adjuvants to opioids, and innovative neuroaxial analgesia techniques in spinal surgery patients.

SUMMARY

There is still a lot of scope to research and refine pain and postoperative nausea and vomiting management in cranial and spinal neurosurgical patients. Large-scale studies are required to define the current state of practice, determine effective treatments and define the incidence of side-effects.

Meta-analysis of the use of rescue antiemetics following PONV prophylactic failure with 5-HT3 antagonist/dexamethasone versus single-agent therapies

OBJECTIVE

To assess the use of rescue antiemetic medication following 5-HT3 receptor antagonist (5-HT3RA) plus dexamethasone therapy versus monotherapy with a 5-HT3RA for prophylaxis of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV).

DATA SOURCES

Reports of randomized, controlled trials were identified via a MEDLINE search (1966-September 2005) using the key terms ondansetron, dolasetron, tropisetron, granisetron, 5-HT3, PONV, vomiting, emesis, and nausea.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

Randomized, controlled trials of adult populations that had treatment arms comparing 5-HT3RA/dexamethasone combination therapy with 5-HT3RA or dexamethasone monotherapies versus placebo or 5-HT3RA versus dexamethasone or placebo were selected for analysis. Another criterion was that a proportion of patients required rescue medication 48 hours or less following surgery.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence interval were calculated to determine incidence rates for use of rescue medications within early (0-6 h), late (6-24 h), and overall (0-24 or 48 h) postoperative periods. Overall effect sizes were calculated by pooling ORs within fixed and random effects models.

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylaxis with 5-HT3RA/dexamethasone was associated with lower use of rescue antiemetics than 5-HT3RA (OR(pooled) = 0.48; 95% CI 0.29 to 0.77) or dexamethasone (OR(pooled) = 0.26; 95% CI 0.12-0.57) monotherapy during the overall postoperative period. Insufficient data were available to assess rescue use during early or late postoperative periods. It appears that patients at high risk of PONV who are treated prophylactically with combination 5-HT3RA/dexamethasone therapy are overall less likely to require rescue medication than if treated with 5-HT3RAs or dexamethasone alone. Additional large prospective studies are needed to determine the optimal regimen and timing of administration of prophylactic antiemetic therapy for different surgical populations.

Post-craniotomy analgesia

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

An evaluation of post-craniotomy analgesia within the University Hospital of Wales Neurosurgical Unit, Cardiff, found that many patients were experiencing moderate to severe pain post-craniotomy. It was therefore decided to undertake a nationwide survey of analgesic practices in order to establish best practice guidelines and benchmark with other units.

METHOD

A postal questionnaire was sent to the senior nurse of every Neurosurgical Directorate within the UK inquiring about the current, standard analgesic practices for post-craniotomy patients in their unit.

RESULTS

Completed replies were received from 23 of the 33 centres (70%). Intramuscular (i.m.) codeine phosphate was found to be the principal first-line analgesic used post-craniotomy. Only three centres used morphine as the first-line analgesic and only one centre used patient controlled analgesia routinely. The majority of centres (82%) used balanced analgesia. Pain assessments were only carried out in 57% of centres and no centre used a validated pain assessment tool specifically for dysphasic patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Codeine phosphate continues to be the mainstay of post-craniotomy analgesia, however, it is proposed that patient controlled analgesia with morphine is an efficacious and safe alternative.

Responsiveness of life-threatening refractory emesis to gabapentin-scopolamine therapy following posterior fossa surgery. Case report

Craniotomy-associated chronic emesis can be refractory to currently approved antiemetic therapy. The authors describe a man who suffered 4 weeks of severe refractory emesis, failure to thrive, and a 40-lb weight loss after he underwent resection of a posterior fossa cholesteatoma. The patient experienced complete resolution of emesis and anorexia in response to combined gabapentin-scopolamine therapy. This case provides anecdotal evidence for the use of gabapentin-scopolamine therapy in patients with chronic, refractory nausea and emesis, particularly following posterior fossa surgery, during which medullary nausea and emesis centers may be affected.

A review of the efficacy and safety of opioid analgesics post-craniotomy*

--Codeine phosphate is the most commonly used analgesic post-craniotomy. --It is argued, in this paper, that codeine phosphate is an unpredictable pro-drug that does not equate to a safe and effective method of providing analgesia post-craniotomy. --Lack of evidence supporting tramadol's usage and concerns over its interactions and side effects mean its use cannot be advocated. --The traditional justification for withholding morphine in post-craniotomy pain appears to be largely based on anecdotal evidence. --Raising awareness among critical care nurses of the pharmacological properties of the analgesics used is imperative, if post-craniotomy pain is to be adequately treated. --There is an explicit challenge to the neurosurgical community to re-evaluate their pain-management strategies in the post-craniotomy patient.

[Postoperative nausea and vomiting after neurosurgery (infratentorial and supratentorial surgery)]

OBJECTIVE

To perform a synthesis regarding postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) after neurosurgery.

DATA EXTRACTION

A Medline search was performed to identify publications about frequency, risk factors, prevention and treatment of PONV in adults and children, after neurosurgery.

DATA SYNTHESIS

After neurosurgery, the estimated frequency of nausea is around 50% and around 39% for vomiting. After neurosurgery; PONV risk factors are female sex and infratentorial surgery. Children older than two years are at higher risk for PONV. To reduce baseline risk factors, it is recommended to use propofol for induction and maintenance of anaesthesia, to avoid nitrous oxide and to use hydration (20 ml/kg of crystalloids before induction). For PONV prophylaxis, ondansetron and droperidol may be given, using one drug for a moderate risk patient and both drugs for a high-risk patient. Droperidol should not be used in children as a first choice therapy because of an increased risk of extrapyramidal symptoms. Dexamethasone has not been evaluated after neurosurgery. Metoclopramide has no clinically relevant effect for PONV. Especially in neurosurgery, after occurrence of PONV, it is recommended to rule out a possible triggering factor that should need specific treatment. A global management of PONV is proposed, based on the administration of the same drugs given at half the doses used for prophylaxis.

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

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