ABSTRACT
Background: Chemotherapy induced Nausea and Vomiting (CINV) is one the most common adverse effects associated with chemotherapeutic management of carcinoma breast. Preventing CINV becomes a vital part in treatment of these cancer patients for better compliance. The conventional regimen of newer 5-HT3 receptor antagonist and dexamethasone along with newer agents - Aprepitant, a NK-1 receptor antagonist and a recently approved atypical antipsychotic, Olanzapine have shown better control of CINV. These newer agents are effective but also very expensive.Methods: The study included carcinoma breast patients scheduled for chemotherapy (n = 55 in each group) who either received aprepitant or olanzapine or a combination of both as the anti-emetic regimen. Considering Cost-Effectiveness Analysis (CEA), the cost included was the cost of anti-emetic agents (sponsor’s perspective) and outcome measured as control of nausea and vomiting - as Complete Protection (CP), Complete Response to Best (CRB) and Incomplete Response (IR) for acute (0-24 hours) and delayed (24-120 hours) phases. The cost effectiveness(CE) ratio for emesis and CINV free days were calculated.Results: CP was seen better during the acute period than the delayed period. With Aprepitant, delayed CRB and IR was seen with 13 (23.6%) and 10 (18.2%) subjects. 16 (29.1%) showed IR with Olanzapine during the delayed period.The average number of Emesis and CINV free days were 4.65, 4.51, 4.89 and 3.38, 3.96, 4.15 for the three groups respectively. The cost required to achieve 1 emesis and 1 CINV free day per subject in the 3 groups was INR 351.19, INR 27.20, INR 339.54 and INR 483.36, INR 30.94, INR 400.60 respectively.Conclusions: The newer anti-emetic even though being expensive at cost, pharmacoeconomically provide better outcomes and seem to have better control rates than the conventional regimen.
ABSTRACT
[Objective]Acupuncture has been described to be effective for acute vomiting induced by anti-cancer drugs of chemotherapy. However, the effect of acupuncture for the prolonged acute nausea that continues more than 24 hours from its onset after chemotherapy has not been satisfactorily investigated. In the present study, we report two cases of prolonged acute nausea induced by chemotherapy and effectively treated with acupuncture and moxibustion.<BR>[Case 1] 79-year-old male who had diagnosed as early adenocarcinoma of the lung had chemotherapy by anticancer drug under hospitalization after right lower lung lobectomy. In spite of administration of anti-emetic agents, he complained of mild but persistent nausea that developed within 24 hours after chemotherapy and continued more than 24 hours from onset. Acupuncture at PC6 (Neiguwan) and ST25 (Tianshu) with moxibustion at CV12 (Zhongwan) and ST25 (Tianshu) were performed in addition to anti-emetics. <BR>[Case 2] 64-year-old female who had undergone radiation therapy by gamma knife for metastatic brain tumors of adenocarcinoma of the lung had chemotherapy by anti-cancer drug under hospitalization. Since administration of anti-emetics during the first period of chemotherapy was less effective, moxibustion at ST25 and CV12 in addition to anti-emetics was performed during the second period of chemotherapy. <BR>[Results]In both cases, the prolonged acute nausea was improved showing significant decrease in the VAS immediately after the treatment of acupuncture. <BR>[Discussion]Severe nausea and vomiting might have been suppressed by anti-emetic agents, but mild acute nausea was prolonged and persisted. Prolonged acute nausea caused poor appetite and deterioration of Quality of Life (QOL) of patients in two cases.<BR>Acupuncture with moxibustion and moxibustion could improve prolonged acute nausea and its related symptoms. These results of acupuncture with moxibustion and moxibustion suggest that acupuncture and moxibustion are useful treatment for prolonged acute nausea induced by chemotherapy and can be applied as complementary medicine to patients receiving anti-cancer chemotherapy.
ABSTRACT
JUSTIFICATIVA E OBJETIVOS: A profilaxia de náuseas e vômitos pós-operatórios foi objeto de muitos estudos. O objetivo desta pesquisa foi comparar antieméticos e associações na prevenção de náuseas e vômitos pós-operatórios. MÉTODO: Setenta pacientes, ASA I e II, foram submetidas a procedimentos cirúrgicos ginecológicos, sob bloqueio peridural associado à anestesia geral. No Grupo Metoclopramida (GM), administrou-se 20 mg; no Grupo Dexametasona (GDe), injetou-se 8 mg; no Grupo Droperidol (GDr) administrou-se 1,25 mg; no Grupo Ondansetron (GO) injetou-se 8 mg; no Grupo Dexametasona-Ondansetron (GDeO) administrou-se, respectivamente, 8 mg e 4 mg; no Grupo Droperidol-Ondansetron (GDrO) injetou-se 1,25 mg e 4 mg; no Grupo Dexametasona-Droperidol-Ondansetron (GDeDrO) administrou-se 8 mg, 0,625 mg e 4 mg. A presença de náuseas e vômitos foi observada nos momentos de 6, 12, 24 e 36 horas após o término do ato operatório. RESULTADOS: A incidência total de episódios de náuseas foi de quatro no GDeDrO, seis no GO, seis no GDrO, 11 no GDe, 11 no GDeO, 18 no GM e 22 no GDr. Aplicando-se o teste do Qui-quadrado ou o teste de Fisher, ocorreu diferença estatística significativa entre o GDr e os grupos GDe, GDO, GDrO, GDeO, GDeDrO; entre o GM e os grupos GO, GDrO e GDeDrO; entre o GDeO e o grupo GDeDrO. A incidência total de episódios de vômitos foi de três no GO, três no GDeDrO, seis no GDrO, sete no GDe, sete no GDeO, desz no GDr e 13 no G. Verificou-se diferença estatística significativa entre o GDr e os grupos GO e GDeDrO; entre o GM e os grupos GO e GDeDrO. CONCLUSÕES: A associação dexametasona-droperidol-ondansetron e o ondansetron foram mais eficazes na profilaxia de náuseas e vômitos.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Prophylaxis of postoperative nausea and vomiting has been the subject of several studies. The objective of the present study was to compare anti-emetics, and their association, in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting. METHODS: Seventy patients, ASA I and II, underwent epidural block associated with general anesthesia for gynecologic surgeries. Patients in the Metochlopramide Group (MG) received 20 mg of the drug; the Dexamethasone Group (DeG) received 8 mg; the Droperidol Group (DrG) received 1.25 mg; the Ondansetron Group (OG) received 8 mg; the Dexamethasone-Ondansetron Group (DeOG) received 8 mg and 4 mg, respectively; the Droperidol-Ondansetron Group (DrOG) received 1.25 mg and 4 mg, respectively; the Dexamethasone-Droperidol-Ondansetron Group (DeDrOG) received 8 mg, 0.625 mg, and 4 mg. The presence of nausea and vomiting was evaluated at 6, 12, 24, and 36 hours after the end of the surgery. RESULTS: The total incidence of episodes of nausea per group is as follows: 4 in DeDrOG, 6 in OG, 6 in DrOG, 11 in DeG, 11 in DeOG, 18 in MG, and 22 in DrG. The Chi-square and Fisher exact tests indicated statistically significant differences between DrG and DeG, DOG, DrOG, DeOG, and DeDrOG; between MG and OG, DrOG, and DeDrOG; and between DeOG and DeDrOG. And the incidence of vomiting was: 3 in OG, 3 in DeDrOG, 6 in DrOG, 7 in DeG, 7 in DeOG, and 10 in DrG, and 13 in G. There was a statistically significant difference between DrG and OG and DeDrOG; and between MG and OG and DeDrOG. CONCLUSIONS: The association dexamethasone-droperidol-ondansetron and ondansetron alone were more effective in the prophylaxis of nausea and vomiting.
JUSTIFICATIVA Y OBJETIVOS: La profilaxis de náusea y vómito postoperatorios fue objeto de muchos estudios. El objetivo de esta investigación fue comparar antieméticos y asociaciones en la prevención de náusea y vómito postoperatorios. MÉTODO: Setenta pacientes, ASA I y II, fueron sometidas a procedimientos quirúrgicos ginecológicos, bajo bloqueo epidural asociado a la anestesia general. En el Grupo Metoclopramida (GM), se administró 20 mg; en el Grupo Dexametasona (GDe), se inyectó 8 mg; en el Grupo Droperidol (GDr) se administró 1,25 mg; en el Grupo Ondansetron (GO) se inyectó 8mg; en el Grupo Dexametasona-Ondansetron (GDeO) se administró respectivamente 8 mg y 4mg; en el Grupo Droperidol-Ondansetron (GDrO) se inyectó 1,25 mg y 4 mg; en el Grupo Dexametasona-Droperidol-Ondansetron (GDeDrO) se administró 8mg, 0,625 mg y 4mg. La presencia de náuseas y vómitos fue observada en los momentos de 6, 12, 24 y 36 horas después del término de la operación. RESULTADOS: La incidencia total de episodios de náuseas fue de 4 en el GDeDrO, 6 en el GO, 6 en el GDrO, 11 en el GDe, 11 en el GDeO, 18 en el GM y 22 en el GDr. Al aplicar el test del Chi-cuadrado o el test de Fisher, se comprobó la diferencia estadística significativa entre el GDr y los grupos GDe, GDO, GDrO, GDeO, GDeDrO; entre el GM y los grupos GO, GDrO y GDeDrO; entre el GDeO y el grupo GDeDrO. La incidencia total de episodios de vómitos fue de 3 en el GO, 3 en el GDeDrO, 6 en el GDrO, 7 en el GDe, 7 en el GDeO, 10 en el GDr y 13 en el G. Se comprobó así mismo, la diferencia estadística significativa entre el GDr y los grupos GO y GDeDrO; entre el GM y los grupos GO y GDeDrO. CONCLUSIONES: La asociación dexametasona-droperidol-ondansetron y el ondansetron fueron más eficaces en la profilaxis de náuseas y vómitos.
Subject(s)
Humans , Female , Dexamethasone/therapeutic use , Droperidol/therapeutic use , Gagging/prevention & control , Gynecologic Surgical Procedures , Metoclopramide/therapeutic use , Ondansetron/therapeutic useABSTRACT
Objective To observe the efficacy of a rotating magnetic field and granisetron hydrochloride in preventing nausea and vomiting caused by a eisplatin regimen, and any side effects. Methods Sixty-eight patients receiving cisplatin regimen chemotherapy were randomly assigned to two groups: a magnetic treatment group and a drug treatment group. The patients in the two groups were exposed to a rotating magnetic field or received granisetron hydrochloride, respectively. The effects of the treatments were observed. Results Both treatments could effectively prevent and treat the vomiting caused by chemotherapy. The rate of response to the rotating magnetic field was 88.2% and to the drug 91.2%. However, tardive vomiting was significantly better controlled in the rotating magnetic field group. The incidence of side effects in the magnetic field group was 20.6% , and in the drug treatment group it was 45.6%. Conclusion The efficacy of a rotating magnetic field and granisetron in treating acute vomiting were simi- lar. The rotating magnetic field was more effective in preventing tardive vomiting and had fewer side effects. Magnetic therapy should be more generally applied in clinical practice.