Comparative efficacy of ramosetron and ondansetron in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis

Efficacy and safety of ondansetron for morning sickness in pregnancy: a systematic review of clinical trials

Background: Ondansetron is a selective antagonist of the serotonin 5-HT3 receptor that is commonly used to treat morning sickness. It is estimated that 70%-80% of pregnant women suffer from morning sickness, a condition characterized by nausea and vomiting. However, it is still controversial regarding its safety during pregnancy, and continued research will be necessary to fully understand the risks and benefits associated with its use. Therefore, we aimed to identify and provide details of the efficacy and safety of ondansetron in clinical trials. Methods: A search was conducted of the ClinicalTrials.gov database on 13 April 2023, using the search term "ondansetron and pregnancy." Inclusion and exclusion criteria were defined to identify relevant clinical trials. The inclusion criteria encompassed clinical trials related to pregnancy that utilized ondansetron as a treatment, while other clinical trials were excluded from consideration. All data extractions such as study title, study status, study type, intervention details, and outcome were collected. Results: A total of 18 clinical trials were identified, of which only 6 focused on studying the effects of ondansetron. Their respective study titles, statuses, conditions, interventions, outcome measures, and enrollment sizes have been written in detail. The information collected from these trials will contribute to our understanding of the potential benefits and risks of ondansetron in the context of pregnancy and its complications. Conclusion: Ondansetron has been shown to be an effective treatment for nausea and vomiting, including pregnancy-related morning sickness. Further research is needed to better understand the potential risks and benefits associated with its use in pregnant women. Systematic Review Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier.

Comparison of the Effectiveness of Palonosetron and Ramosetron in Preventing Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting: Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis with Trial Sequential Analysis

This updated systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis aimed to compare the efficacy of the perioperative administration of palonosetron with that of ramosetron in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). A total of 17 randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy of the perioperative administration of palonosetron to that of ramosetron for preventing PONV were included. The primary outcomes were the incidences of postoperative nausea (PON), postoperative vomiting (POV), and PONV, which were measured in early, late, and overall phases. Subgroup analysis was performed on the basis of the administration time of the 5-HT3 receptor antagonist and divided into two phases: early phase and the end of surgery. A total of 17 studies with 1823 patients were included in the final analysis. The incidence of retching (relative risk [RR] = 0.525; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.390 to 0.707) and late POV (RR = 0.604; 95% CI = 0.404 to 0.903) was significantly lower in the palonosetron group than in the ramosetron group. No significant differences were demonstrated in the incidence of PON, PONV, complete response, use of antiemetics, and adverse effects. Subgroup analysis showed that palonosetron was superior to ramosetron in terms of early PON, late PON, overall POV, and use of rescue antiemetics when they were administered early; in terms of retching, regardless of the timing of administration. Ramosetron was superior to palonosetron in terms of early PON when they were administered late. The prophylactic administration of palonosetron was more effective than that of ramosetron in preventing the development of retching and late POV. In this meta-analysis, no significant differences in PONV prevention between the two drugs were demonstrated. Further studies are required to validate the outcomes of our study.

Physical compatibility and chemical stability of dezocine and ramosetron in 0.9% sodium chloride injection for patient-controlled analgesia administration

As an antiemetic, 5-hydroxytryptamine type 3 (5-HT3) receptor antagonist (ramosetron) is generally administered to prevent and treat postoperative nausea and vomiting induced by intravenous dezocine for patient-controlled analgesia. To date, the physicochemical stability of dezocine-ramosetron admixtures has not been assessed. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the physicochemical stability of a combination of dezocine and ramosetron in 0.9% sodium chloride (normal saline [NS]) injections. Dezocine-ramosetron admixtures were prepared and stored in glass bottles and polyvinyl chloride (PVC) bags refrigerated at 4°C or stored at ambient temperatures (25°C) for up to 14 days. Initial concentrations were 5.0 mg/100 mL for dezocine and 0.3 mg/100 mL for ramosetron used as the diluents. Stability parameters (drug concentrations and pH values) were determined using high-performance liquid chromatography and pH measurements, respectively. Compatibility (cloudiness, discoloration, and precipitation) was assessed visually. After 14 days at 4 °C or 25 °C, the concentration losses of dezocine and ramosetron were both < 4%. Furthermore, there were no significant changes in color, turbidity, or pH values were observed in any of the batches. The results indicated that mixtures of dezocine and ramosetron in NS injections were continuously physically and chemically stable for 14 days in glass bottles or PVC bags stored at 4 °C or 25 °C.

Effect of ondansetron for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting after breast cancer surgery

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the preventive effect of preoperative administration of ondansetron on postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in patients receiving breast cancer surgery.

METHODS

Data from 225 patients who received modified radical mastectomy from January 2019 to December 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. The patients were divided into an ondansetron group and a control group according to whether they received preoperative ondansetron or not. The incidence of PONV, visual analog scale (VAS) score, the rescue analgesics use and rescue antiemetic use, as well as the patient satisfaction degree about their PONV were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

The ondansetron group showed lower total incidence of PONV, lower VAS score at 6 h post-operation as well as less rescue antiemetic use than the control group (P<0.05). Patients in the ondansetron group were more satisfied with their PONV condition than those in the control group (P<0.05).

CONCLUSION

Preoperative administration of ondansetron can prevent PONV and relieve pain 2-24 hours after breast cancer surgery.

The Effect of Ramosetron on Remifentanil in Preventing Emergence Cough from Sevoflurane Anesthesia in Female Patients

BACKGROUND

Remifentanil reduces cough during extubation. Ramosetron, a 5-HT3 receptor antagonist, is a potent antiemetic. Regarding the antitussive property of 5-HT receptor agonists, ramosetron can mediate the cough reflex, as increasing the remifentanil requirement. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of ramosetron on the optimal effect-site concentration (Ce) of remifentanil for preventing emergence cough from sevoflurane anesthesia in female patients.

METHODS

Forty-seven female patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy randomly received either ramosetron 0.3 mg (n = 23) or the same volume of normal saline (n = 24) intravenously at the end of surgery. The remifentanil Ce using target controlled infusion in 50% of patients (EC50) and 95% of patients (EC95) were assessed using Dixon's up-and-down or isotonic regression method with a boot¬strapping approach.

RESULTS

Using Dixon's up-and-down method, the EC50 of remifentanil in the control group (1.33 ± 0.38 ng/mL) was comparable to that of ramosetron group (1.50 ± 0.69 ng/mL) (P = 0.615). Using isotonic regression analysis, the EC50 (83% confidence interval) did not differ between the two groups (1.17 [0.86-1.43] ng/mL and 1.13 [0.68-1.56] ng/mL in control and ramosetron groups). However, the EC95 (95% confidence interval) was significantly lower in the control group than in the ramosetron group (1.90 [1.45-1.96] ng/mL and 2.92 [2.35-2.97] ng/mL).

CONCLUSION

Remifentanil Ce for preventing emergence cough was higher in the ramosetron group than the control group. It may indicate the lowering effect of ramosetron on antitussive activity of remifentanil.

Effects of Ramosetron on Nausea and Vomiting Following Spinal Surgery: A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Spinal surgery is associated with severe pain within the first few days after surgery. Opioids are commonly used to control postoperative pain, but these can lead to postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). Therefore, use of more effective and better-tolerated agents would be beneficial for these patients. Serotonin receptor antagonists, such as ramosetron, have been used to reduce PONV in patients receiving anesthesia.

OBJECTIVE

We conducted a meta-analysis of published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare the efficacy and tolerance of ramosetron to prevent PONV after spinal surgery.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Science Citation Index databases were systematically searched for relevant RCT articles published between January 1979 and November 2020. Full text articles restricted to English language that described RCTs comparing the use of ramosetron with other serotonin antagonists to treat PONV following spinal surgery in adult patients were considered for meta-analysis. Two reviewers independently performed study selection, quality assessment, and data extraction of all articles. Differences were resolved by a third reviewer.

RESULTS

The search identified 88 potentially relevant articles, of which only 3 met our selection criteria. Study drugs were administered at the end of spinal surgery in all 3 included articles. The meta-analysis revealed that ramosetron (0.3 mg) reduced the pain score (mean difference = -0.66; 95% CI -1.02 to -0.30), lowered the risk of PONV (risk ratio = 0.86; 95% CI, 0.76-0.97), and postoperative vomiting (risk ratio = 0.32; 95% CI, 0.17-0.60), and limited the use of rescue antiemetics (risk ratio = 0.66; 95% CI, 0.45-0.96) after spinal surgery. However, there were no significant differences in the incidence of postoperative nausea, the use of rescue pain medications, the number of rescue analgesics required, and the risk of discontinuation of patient-controlled analgesia between ramosetron and palonosetron (0.075 mg) or ondansetron (4 mg). There were no statistically significant differences in the risk of adverse events among the 3 medications.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis of 3 RCTs showed that ramosetron reduced the risk of PONV and POV, limited the use of rescue antiemetics, reduced the postoperative pain score, and did not increase the risk of discontinuing patient-controlled analgesia compared with palonosetron or ondansetron after spinal surgery in 3 RCTs. Therefore, this meta-analysis indicates that ramosetron is an effective and well tolerated antiemetic that can be used to prevent PONV following spinal surgery in adult patients. PROSPERO identifier: CRD42020223596 (Curr Ther Res Clin Exp. 2022; 83:XXX-XXX)© 2022 Elsevier HS Journals, Inc.

Prevalence study for postoperative nausea vomiting: A training hospital example

Background

Simplified risk models, such as the Apfel score, have been developed to calculate the risk of postoperative nausea-vomiting (PONV) for adult patients. In the absence of any risk factors, PONV risk is assumed to be 10%. While the presence of one of the four risk factors determined as female gender, non-smoking, PONV/car sickness history, and postoperative opioid use is associated with 20% risk for PONV, the risk increases by 20% with the addition of each risk factor, and reaches to 80% if four factors are present.

Aim

: Our aim in this study is to investigate the prevalence of PONV, and whether the scoring systems used for nausea-vomiting in the literature are still valid.

Patients and Methods

Five groups of patients were included in the study with an Apfel score of 0, 1, 2, 3, 4. Each case was taken to the recovery room at the end of the operation. They were observed whether had nausea-vomiting was recorded according to the Abramowitz emesis score.

Results

While the PONV risk for women is 24.637 times higher than men, the PONV risk of those who had gynecological surgery is 6.27 times higher than that of the other type of surgery. Those who had urological surgery are 0.345 times less than the other type of surgery. Those who had lower abdominal surgery had a risk of PONV of 4.56 times higher than the others. As the duration of the case increases, the risk of PONV increases 1.01 times (P values P < 0.001, P < 0.001, P < 0.001, P = 0.048, P < 0.001, respectively).

Conclusion

As a result, our PONV prevalence is considerably lower than the frequency rates mentioned in the literature. PONV scoring systems need long-term studies with larger populations to be updated.

A Fast and Validated HPLC Method for the Simultaneous Analysis of Five 5-HT3 Receptor Antagonists via the Quantitative Analysis of Multicomponents by a Single Marker

In this study, a new strategy for the simultaneous quantization of five serotonin 5-hydroxytryptamine receptor antagonists—ondansetron, azasetron, ramosetron, granisetron, and tropisetron—either in infusion samples or in injection dosage form was first established based on high-performance liquid chromatography combined with a quantitative analysis of multiple components by a single marker. The quantitative analysis of multicomponents by a single marker method was conducted with ondansetron as an internal reference substance and performed using relative retention time and ultraviolet spectral similarity as the double indicator. The quantitative analysis of the 5-HT₃ receptor antagonists was calculated and investigated based on the relative correction factors. Chromatographic separation was achieved using a C₁₈ column (150 mm × 4.6 mm, 5.0 μm), and the mobile phase was composed of acetonitrile-0.05 mol·L⁻¹ potassium dihydrogen phosphate (pH 4.0) (25 : 75) at a flow rate of 1.0 mL·min⁻¹ and detection wavelengths of 307 nm (ondansetron, azasetron, ramosetron), 302 nm (granisetron), and 285 nm (tropisetron). In addition, the accuracy of the quantitative analysis of multicomponents by a single marker method was compared with an external standard method, and no significant difference was observed between the two methods. The established method is rapid, is easy, and does not require many reference substances, and it can been successfully applied as part of the quality control of the five 5-HT₃ receptor antagonists in their injection dosage form and infusion sample drugs in hospitals.

In Vitro Inhibition of Renal OCT2 and MATE1 Secretion by Antiemetic Drugs

The organic cation transporter 2 (OCT2) and multidrug and toxin extrusion protein 1 (MATE1) mediate the renal secretion of drugs. Recent studies suggest that ondansetron, a 5-HT₃ antagonist drug used to prevent nausea and vomiting, can inhibit OCT2- and MATE1-mediated transport. The purpose of this study was to test the ability of five 5-HT₃ antagonist drugs to inhibit the OCT2 and MATE1 transporters. The transport of the OCT2/MATE1 probe substrate ASP⁺ was assessed using two models: (1) HEK293 kidney cells overexpressing human OCT2 or MATE1, and (2) MDCK cells transfected with human OCT2 and MATE1. In HEK293 cells, the inhibition of ASP⁺ uptake by OCT2 listed in order of potency was palonosetron (IC₅₀: 2.6 μM) > ondansetron > granisetron > tropisetron > dolasetron (IC₅₀: 85.4 μM) and the inhibition of ASP⁺ uptake by MATE1 in order of potency was ondansetron (IC₅₀: 0.1 μM) > palonosetron = tropisetron > granisetron > dolasetron (IC₅₀: 27.4 μM). Ondansetron (0.5–20 μM) inhibited the basolateral-to-apical transcellular transport of ASP⁺ up to 64%. Higher concentrations (10 and 20 μM) of palonosetron, tropisetron, and dolasetron similarly reduced the transcellular transport of ASP⁺. In double-transfected OCT2-MATE1 MDCK cells, ondansetron at concentrations of 0.5 and 2.5 μM caused significant intracellular accumulation of ASP⁺. Taken together, these data suggest that 5-HT₃ antagonist drugs may inhibit the renal secretion of cationic drugs by interfering with OCT2 and/or MATE1 function.

Penehyclidine mitigates postoperative nausea and vomiting and intraoperative oculocardiac reflex in patients undergoing strabismus surgery: a prospective, randomized, double-blind comparison

Background

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is one of the most frequent complications following strabismus surgery. Penehyclidine, an anticholinergic agent, is widely used as premedication. This study investigated the effect of preoperative penehyclidine on PONV in patients undergoing strabismus surgery.

Methods

In this prospective, randomized, double-blind study, patients scheduled for strabismus surgery under general anesthesia were randomly assigned to either penehyclidine (n = 114) or normal saline (n = 104) group. Penehyclidine was administrated immediately after anesthesia induction, and normal saline was substituted as control. PONV was investigated from 0 to 48 h after surgery. Intraoperative oculocardiac reflex (OCR) was also recorded.

Results

Compared with normal saline, penehyclidine significantly reduced PONV incidence (30.7% vs. 54.8%, P < 0.01) and mitigated PONV severity as indicated by severity scoring (P < 0.01). Compared with normal saline, penehyclidine also significantly reduced OCR incidence (57.9% vs. 77.9%, P < 0.01) and mitigated OCR severity, as indicated by the requirement for atropine rescue (77.3% vs. 90.1%, P < 0.05) and the maximum decrease of heart rate during OCR (23.1 ± 9.4 bpm vs. 27.3 ± 12.4 bpm, P < 0.05). The recovery course did not differ between groups.

Conclusions

Penehyclidine administrated after anesthesia induction significantly reduced the incidence of PONV and alleviated intraoperative OCR in patients undergoing strabismus surgery.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04054479). Retrospectively registered August 13, 2019.

Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting in Pediatric Patients

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), postoperative vomiting (POV), post-discharge nausea and vomiting (PDNV), and opioid-induced nausea and vomiting (OINV) continue to be causes of pediatric morbidity, delay in discharge, and unplanned hospital admission. Research on the pathophysiology, risk assessment, and therapy for PDNV, OINV and pain therapy options in children has received increased attention. Multimodal pain management with the use of perioperative regional and opioid-sparing analgesia has helped decrease nausea and vomiting. Two common emetogenic surgical procedures in children are adenotonsillectomy and strabismus repair. Although PONV risk factors differ between adults and children, the approach to decrease baseline risk is similar. As PONV and POV are frequent in children, antiemetic prophylaxis should be considered for those at risk. A multimodal approach for antiemetic and pain therapy involves preoperative risk evaluation and stratification, antiemetic prophylaxis, and pain management with opioid-sparing medications and regional anesthesia. Useful antiemetics include dexamethasone and serotonin 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 (5-HT3) receptor antagonists such as ondansetron. Multimodal combination prophylactic therapy using two or three antiemetics from different drug classes and propofol total intravenous anesthesia should be considered for children at high PONV risk. "Enhanced recovery after surgery" protocols include a multimodal approach with preoperative preparation, adequate intravenous fluid hydration, opioid-sparing analgesia, and prophylactic antiemetics. PONV guidelines and management algorithms help provide effective postoperative care for pediatric patients.

A history of severe nausea and vomiting during pregnancy predicts a higher incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting after breast cancer surgery without breast reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) occur in up to 30 percent of patients after breast cancer surgery despite routine administration of antiemetic prophylaxis. A history of nausea and vomiting during pregnancy (NVP) has been reported as a risk factor of intraoperative nausea and vomiting in caesarean delivery. Nevertheless, whether a history of severe nausea and vomiting during pregnancy (SNVP) is associated with a higher occurrence of PONV remains unclear.

METHODS

In this study, 121 sequential female patients who were scheduled to undergo breast cancer surgery were assigned to study group (30 cases, with SNVP) or control group (91 cases, with mild NVP (MNVP)). The incidence of PONV and the need for rescue antiemetic were recorded in post-anesthesia care unit (PACU), at 6 h, 12 h, 24 h, and 36 h after operation. Moreover, postoperative pain, level of satisfaction, and the relationship of ER/PR status in breast cancer tissue with SNVP and PONV were also investigated.

RESULTS

Data from 115 patients were analyzed. The incidence of PONV in the SNVP group was significantly higher than that in the MNVP group at 6 h (P < 0.005), 12 h (P < 0.05), and 24 h after the operation (P < 0.05). The incidence of PONV in the MNVP group was approximately 30% lower than in the SNVP group. Besides, more severe PONV, a larger number of demands for rescue antiemetic, fewer patient satisfaction scores, and more dizziness were observed in the SNVP group. Yet, no relationship was found between ER/PR status of breast cancer tissue and SNVP or PONV.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to patients with MNVP, those with a history of SNVP experienced a higher incidence of PONV and severe PONV, presented with a larger number of requirements for postoperative antiemetic and a lower level of satisfaction.

The next generation of antiemetics for the management of postoperative nausea and vomiting

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) afflict approximately 30% of patients overall and up to 80% of high-risk patients after surgery. Optimal pharmacological prophylaxis of PONV is challenging as it necessitates the consideration of PONV risk, drug efficacy, and potential adverse effects. Despite significant advances in our understanding of the pathophysiology and risk factors of PONV, its incidence has remained largely unchanged. Newer antiemetics have been introduced that may have improved safety profiles, longer duration of action, and better efficacy. This review aims to summarize the recent developments pertaining to these new agents and their potential application toward the management of PONV.

The effectiveness of ramosetron and ondansetron for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: a randomized controlled trial

Background

Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair is a painful procedure, and treatment of emetic events associated with drugs used in the current multimodal pain management remains challenging. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of ramosetron or ondansetron to relieve postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) and pain after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair.

Methods

In total, 122 consecutive patients undergoing arthroscopic rotator cuff repair were randomly allocated into three groups: ramosetron group (n = 39), ondansetron group (n = 43), and control group (n = 40). Then, 0.3 mg of ramosetron or 8 mg of ondansetron was administered intravenously at the end of surgery according to group. All patients received general anesthesia and multimodal pain management protocol including preemptive analgesic medication, fentanyl-based intravenous patient-controlled analgesia, and postoperative analgesic medication. Incidence of emetic events, rescue antiemetic requirements (10 mg of metoclopramide, IV), complete response, pain level, and side effects were recorded in three periods: 0–6, 6–24, and 24–48 h postoperatively. The severity of nausea and pain was evaluated using a visual analog scale.

Results

The ramosetron group tended to have a lower incidence and severity of nausea during the 6- to 24-h postoperative period and fewer rescue antiemetic drug requirements during the 0- to 48-h period than the control group, showing statistical significance. Additionally, the frequency of complete response of the ramosetron and ondansetron groups was significantly higher than that of the control group. No difference was found among the groups in the pain level except during the 0- to 6-h period. The two groups have a higher complete response during the 6- to 24-h period than the control group.

Conclusions

Ramosetron use led to a lower incidence, mild severity of nausea, and reduced use of rescue antiemetic drug after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair during the 6- to 24-h postoperative period than the control.

Level of evidence

Level I, randomized controlled trials, treatment study

A Single Prophylactic Dose of Ondansetron Given at Cessation of Postoperative Propofol Sedation Decreases Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting in Cardiac Surgery Patients: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a common occurrence after cardiac surgery. However, in contrast to other surgical populations, routine PONV prophylaxis is not a standard of care in cardiac surgery. We hypothesized that routine administration of a single prophylactic dose of ondansetron (4 mg) at the time of stopping postoperative propofol sedation before extubation in the cardiac surgery intensive care unit would decrease the incidence of PONV.

METHODS

With institutional human ethics board approval and written informed consent, we conducted a randomized controlled trial in patients ≥19 years of age with no history of PONV undergoing elective or urgent cardiac surgery procedures requiring cardiopulmonary bypass. The primary outcome was the incidence of PONV in the first 24 hours postextubation, compared by the χ test. Secondary outcomes included the incidence and times to first dose of rescue antiemetic treatment administration, the incidence of headaches, and the incidence of ventricular arrhythmias.

RESULTS

PONV within the first 24 hours postextubation occurred in 33 of 77 patients (43%) in the ondansetron group versus 50 of 82 patients (61%) in the placebo group (relative risk, 0.70 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.51-0.95]; absolute risk difference, -18% [95% CI, -33 to -2]; number needed to treat, 5.5 [95% CI, 3.0-58.4]; χ test, P = .022). Kaplan-Meier "survival" analysis of the times to first rescue antiemetic treatment administration over 24 hours indicated that patients in the ondansetron group fared better than those in the placebo group (log-rank [Mantel-Cox] test; P = .028). Overall, 32 of 77 patients (42%) in the ondansetron group received rescue antiemetic treatment over the first 24 hours postextubation versus 47 of 82 patients (57%) in the placebo group (relative risk, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.52-1.00]; absolute risk difference, -16% [95% CI, -31 to 1]); P = .047. There were no significant differences between the groups in the incidence of postoperative headache (ondansetron group, 5 of 77 patients [6%] versus placebo group, 4 of 82 patients [5%]; Fisher exact test; P = .740) or ventricular arrhythmias (ondansetron group, 2 of 77 patients [3%] versus placebo group, 4 of 82 patients [5%]; P = .68).

CONCLUSIONS

These findings support the routine administration of ondansetron prophylaxis at the time of discontinuation of postoperative propofol sedation before extubation in patients following cardiac surgery. Further research is warranted to optimize PONV prophylaxis in cardiac surgery patients.

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

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

Effects of intravenous dextrose on preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting: A systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis

BACKGROUND

It is reported that postoperative nausea and vomiting, common general anesthesia complications, may be prevented by perioperative intravenous dextrose administration, but with controversial clinical effectiveness.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate perioperative intravenous dextrose for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting through a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials with trial sequential analysis.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, Web of Science, clinicaltrials.gov, and the University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry were searched from inception until 22 June 2019.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Trials investigating intravenous dextrose effects vs. placebos on postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients who underwent general anesthesia.

RESULTS

Eleven trials (1,250 patients) were included. All participants were ASA1-2. The nine trials included laparoscopic surgeries, and 92.2% of the participants were women. The timing of dextrose infusion was before, during, and after surgery in three, five, and three trials, respectively. Our results revealed intravenous dextrose administration significantly reduced postoperative nausea, but not vomiting, during early and late postoperative periods (risk ratio [95% confidence interval], early nausea: 0.76 [0.59-0.99], late nausea: 0.65 [0.48-0.89]; early vomiting: 1.00 [0.81-1.25], late vomiting: 0.96 [0.43-2.16]). Evidence quality was downgraded to low because the trial sequential analysis indicated more trials are needed for firm conclusions.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with placebos, perioperative intravenous dextrose administration may decrease postoperative nausea but not vomiting.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry (registration number: UMIN000030901).

Comparison of ramosetron and ondansetron for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Objective

We conducted a systematic literature search and meta-analysis to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy and safety of ramosetron versus ondansetron for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV; PON and POV, respectively) in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery.

Methods

The electronic databases PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were searched up to March 2019 to identify relevant studies.

Results

The final pooled analysis included 6 RCTs and revealed that postoperative treatment with ramosetron at 24 to 48 hours after surgery significantly reduced the incidence of PON and POV relative to treatment with ondansetron. In a subgroup analysis, ramosetron 0.3 mg tended to reduce PON (0–2 hours) and POV (24–48 hours) more effectively than ondansetron 4 mg. However, no statistical difference was observed between ramosetron 0.3 mg and ondansetron 8 mg in terms of the reduction of PON or POV during any time interval within the first 48 hours after surgery.

Conclusions

Our results indicate that ramosetron 0.3 mg is superior to ondansetron 4 mg and comparable to ondansetron 8 mg for PONV prophylaxis after laparoscopic surgery.