Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 70
Filter
2.
Article in Chinese | WPRIM | ID: wpr-921897

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE@#To explore clinical effect of acupoint application of Chinese herbal medicine in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting after orthopaedic surgery under general anesthesia.@*METHODS@#From January 2018 to December 2019, 168 patients who met inclusion criteria and were underwent selective spine surgery, were double-blind divided into two groups according to central random system, 84 patients in each group. In control group, there were 39 males and 45 females aged from 30 to 65 years old with an average of (53.83±9.17) years old, 37 patients were classified to typeⅠand 47 patients were typeⅡ according to American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grading. In experiment group, there were 39 males and 45 females aged from 30 to 65 years old with an average of (54.08±9.00) years old; 32 patients were classified to typeⅠand 52 patients were typeⅡ according to ASA grading. Both of two groups were obtained acupoint application before anesthesia induction, and acupoint application were put on @*RESULTS@#There were no statistical differences in incidence of nausea vomiting, VAS of narusea degree at 24 h after operation (@*CONCLUSION@#The curative effect of acupoint application of traditional Chinese medicine on the prevention and treatment of postoperative nausea and vomiting is not obvious.


Subject(s)
Acupuncture Points , Adult , Aged , Anesthesia, General , Drugs, Chinese Herbal/therapeutic use , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Orthopedic Procedures , Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting/prevention & control , Quality of Life
3.
Rev. cuba. anestesiol. reanim ; 19(3): e629, sept.-dic. 2020. tab
Article in Spanish | LILACS, CUMED | ID: biblio-1138880

ABSTRACT

Introducción: Las náuseas y vómitos posoperatorios son una secuela no deseada durante la etapa de recuperación anestésica. Objetivo: Evaluar la utilidad de la dexametasona en comparación con el ondansetrón para la prevención de las náuseas y vómitos posoperatorios después de procedimientos quirúrgicos ginecológicos mayores, bajo anestesia general orotraqueal. Método: Se realizó un estudio observacional analítico, prospectivo, en 84 pacientes mayores de 19 años, en el Hospital Clínico Quirúrgico Miguel Enríquez desde octubre de 2018 hasta septiembre de 2019, divididas de forma secuencial, en orden de llegada a la unidad quirúrgica, en dos grupos. Al grupo 1 se le administró dexametasona (4 mg endovenosa); al grupo 2 (4 mg de ondansetrón), 30 min antes de finalizar la cirugía. Resultados: Predominó de forma significativa el riesgo medio de náuseas y vómitos posoperatorios en los pacientes con edades comprendidas entre 41 y 50 años. Predominó la condición de excelente y buena (pgt;0,05) en cuanto a la efectividad del tratamiento profiláctico. La cefalea prevaleció de forma significativa en el grupo 2. La mayor parte de las pacientes no presentó eventos adversos. Conclusiones: El ondansetrón y la dexametasona son útiles para la profilaxis de las náuseas y vómitos posoperatorios en pacientes intervenidas de cirugía mayor ginecológica, bajo anestesia general orotraqueal por lo que se considera un tratamiento seguro, con eventos adversos leves y de fácil control(AU)


Introduction: Postoperative nausea and vomiting are an unwanted sequel during the anesthetic recovery stage. Objective: To evaluate the usefulness of dexamethasone compared with ondansetron for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting after major gynecological surgical procedures, under general orotracheal anesthesia. Method: A prospective, analytical and observational study was carried out with 84 patients older than 19 years of age, at Miguel Enríquez Hospital Clinical-Surgical Hospital, from October 2018 to September 2019, divided sequentially, in order of arrival at the surgical unit, into two groups. The group 1 was administered dexamethasone (4 mg intravenously), and the group 2 was administered ondansetron (4 mg), 30 min before the end of the surgery. Results: The average risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting prevailed significantly among patients aged 41-50 years. Excellent and good conditions predominated (pgt;0.05) in terms of effectiveness of prophylactic treatment. Headache prevailed significantly in the group 2. Most of the patients did not present adverse events. Conclusions: Ondansetron and dexamethasone are useful for postoperative nausea and vomiting prophylaxis among patients who received major gynecological surgery, under general orotracheal anesthesia, a reason why it is considered a safe treatment, with mild adverse events and easy control(AU)


Subject(s)
Humans , Female , Ondansetron/therapeutic use , Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting/drug therapy , Anesthesia, General , Gynecologic Surgical Procedures , Dexamethasone/therapeutic use , Prospective Studies , Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting/prevention & control
4.
Rev. bras. anestesiol ; 70(5): 508-519, Sept.-Oct. 2020. tab, graf
Article in English, Portuguese | LILACS | ID: biblio-1143968

ABSTRACT

Abstract Background: Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting (PONV) is a common complication of general anesthesia. Several kinds of antiemetics, including 5-Hydroxytryptamine3 (5-HT3) receptor antagonists, and Neurokinin-1 (NK-1) receptor antagonists have been used to treat PONV. Objectives: To compare the antiemetic effect of NK-1 receptor antagonists, including fosaprepitant. Data sources: Online databases (PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, The Cochrane Library databases) were used. Study eligibility criteria, participants, and interventions: Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) performed in patients over 18 years with ASA-PS of I‒III, aimed to assess the efficacy of antiemetics including NK-1 receptor antagonists and 5-HT3 receptor antagonists, and compared the incidence of PONV were included. Study appraisal and synthesis methods: All statistical assessments were conducted by a random effect approach, and odds ratios and 95% Confidence Intervals were calculated. Results: Aprepitant 40 mg and 80 mg significantly reduced the incidence of vomiting 0‒24 hours postoperatively (Odds Ratio [OR = 0.40]; 95% Confidence Interval [95% CI 0.30‒0.54]; p < 0.001, and OR = 0.32; 95% CI 0.19‒0.56; p < 0.001). Fosaprepitant could also reduce the incidence of vomiting significantly both 0‒24 and 0‒48 hours postoperatively (OR = 0.07; 95% CI 0.02‒0.24; p < 0.001 and OR = 0.07; 95% CI 0.02‒0.23; p < 0.001). Limitations: Risk factors for PONV are not considered, RCTs using multiple antiemetics are included, RCTs for fosaprepitant is small, and some bias may be present. Conclusions and implications of key findings: Aprepitant and fosaprepitant can be effective prophylactic antiemetics for postoperative vomiting. However, more studies are required for higher-quality meta-analyses. Systematic review registration number: CRD42019120188.


Resumo Histórico: Náusea e Vômito no Pós-Operatório (NVPO) é um evento adverso frequente da anestesia geral. Várias classes de antieméticos, incluindo antagonistas do receptor 5-Hidroxitriptamina3 (5-HT3) e antagonistas do receptor da Neurocinina-1 (NK-1), têm sido utilizados para tratar a NVPO. Objetivo: Comparar o efeito antiemético dos antagonistas do receptor NK-1, incluindo o fosaprepitanto. Fontes de dados: Foram utilizadas bases de dados on-line (PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, The Cochrane Library). Critérios de elegibilidade do estudo, participantes e intervenções: Foram incluídos Estudos Clínicos Randomizados (ECR) realizados em pacientes acima de 18 anos classificação ASA I a III, com o objetivo de avaliar a eficácia de antieméticos que incluíssem antagonistas do receptor NK-1 e antagonistas do receptor 5-HT3, e que comparassem a incidência de NVPO. Métodos de avaliação e síntese do estudo: Todas as avaliações estatísticas foram realizadas por abordagem de efeito aleatório e foram calculadas razões de chances e Intervalos de Confiança de 95%. Resultados: As doses de 40 mg e 80 mg de aprepitanto reduziram significantemente a incidência de vômito no período de 0 a 24 horas pós-operatórias (razão de chances [OR = 0,40]; Intervalo de Confiança de 95% [95% IC] 0,30-0,54; p < 0,001 e OR = 0,32; 95% IC 0,19-0,56; p < 0,001). O fosaprepitanto pode também reduzir significantemente a incidência de vômito tanto de 0-24 horas como no período de 0-48 horas pós-operatórias (OR = 0,07; 95% IC 0,02-0,24; p < 0,001 e OR = 0,07; 95% IC 0,02-0,23; p < 0,001). Limitações: Os fatores de risco para NVPO não foram analisados, ECRs usando múltiplos antieméticos foram incluídos, ECRs para fosaprepitanto tinham amostras pequenas, podendo haver algum viés. Conclusões e implicações dos principais achados: Aprepitanto e fosaprepitanto podem ser drogas antieméticas profiláticas efetivas para vômito no pós-operatório. No entanto, são necessários mais estudos para elaboração de meta-análises de melhor qualidade. Número de registro da revisão sistemática: CRD42019120188.


Subject(s)
Humans , Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting/prevention & control , Neurokinin-1 Receptor Antagonists/administration & dosage , Antiemetics/administration & dosage , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Morpholines/administration & dosage , Morpholines/pharmacology , Incidence , Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting/epidemiology , Serotonin 5-HT3 Receptor Antagonists/administration & dosage , Serotonin 5-HT3 Receptor Antagonists/pharmacology , Neurokinin-1 Receptor Antagonists/pharmacology , Anesthesia, General/adverse effects , Anesthesia, General/methods , Antiemetics/pharmacology
5.
Rev. bras. anestesiol ; 70(5): 520-526, Sept.-Oct. 2020. tab, graf
Article in English, Portuguese | LILACS | ID: biblio-1143964

ABSTRACT

Abstract Background and objectives: Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a common and undesirable complication observed after laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). We investigated the effects of auriculoacupuncture (AA) on the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in the immediate postoperative period of uncomplicated laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Methods: Sixty-eight patients were randomly divided into two groups, auriculoacupuncture (n = 35) and control (n = 33), and then they were evaluated prospectively. The needle was placed before anaesthesia induction and remained for 20 minutes. Nausea intensity was evaluated using an analogic visual scale and PONV events were registered immediately after anaesthesia care unit admission and in the second, fourth and sixth hours after the surgery. Results: The auriculoacupuncture group had a significantly smaller incidence of nausea and vomiting than the control group throughout the whole postoperative period (16/35 vs. 27/33, p= 0.03 and 4/35 vs. 15/33, p= 0.005, respectively); the AA group had fewer nausea events 2 h (p= 0.03) and 6 h (p= 0.001) after surgery and fewer vomiting events 2 h (p= 0.01) and 6 h (p= 0.02) after surgery. Conclusions: Auriculoacupuncture can partially prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting when compared to metoclopramide alone after uncomplicated laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Auriculoacupuncture can be recommended as an adjuvant therapy for postoperative nausea and vomiting prevention in selected patients.


Resumo Justificativa e objetivos: Náuseas e vômitos são complicações comuns e indesejáveis no pós-operatório de colecistectomia laparoscópica (CL). Nós investigamos os efeitos da auriculoacupuntura (AA) para a prevenção de náuseas e vômitos no período pós-operatório (NVPO) imediato da CL não complicada. Métodos: 68 pacientes foram aleatoriamente divididos em dois grupos, auriculoacupuntura (n = 35) e controle (n = 33), e foram avaliados prospectivamente. A agulha foi aplicada antes da indução anestésica e permaneceu no lugar por 20 minutos. A intensidade da náusea foi avaliada mediante escala visual analógica e episódios de NVPO foram registrados imediatamente após a admissão na unidade de recuperação anestésica e duas, quatro e seis horas após a cirurgia. Resultados: O grupo AA apresentou significativamente menos episódios de NVPO do que o grupo controle durante todo o período pós-operatório (16/35 vs. 27/33, p = 0,03 e 4/35 vs. 15/33, p = 0,005, respectivamente). O grupo auriculoacupuntura apresentou episódios de náuseas menos intensos às 2 horas (p = 0,03) e 6 horas (p = 0,001) após a cirurgia e menos episódios de vômitos 2 horas (p = 0,01) e 6 horas (p = 0,02) após a cirurgia. Conclusão: A auriculoacupuntura aliviou náuseas e vômitos no pós-operatório em número significante de pacientes, mas não foi capaz de prevenir náuseas e vômitos no pós-operatório em todos os pacientes. Ela pode ser recomendada como terapia adjuvante para prevenção de náuseas e vômitos no pós-operatório no pós-operatório de colecistectomia laparoscópica em pacientes selecionados.


Subject(s)
Humans , Female , Adult , Acupuncture Therapy/methods , Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic/adverse effects , Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting/prevention & control , Antiemetics/administration & dosage , Time Factors , Double-Blind Method , Incidence , Prospective Studies , Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic/methods , Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting/epidemiology , Metoclopramide/administration & dosage
7.
Rev. bras. anestesiol ; 70(5): 477-483, Sept.-Oct. 2020. tab, graf
Article in English, Portuguese | LILACS | ID: biblio-1143958

ABSTRACT

Abstract Background: Postoperative nausea and vomiting is the second most common complaint in the postoperative period after pain. The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting was 60-80% in middle ear surgeries in the absence of antiemetic prophylaxis. Because of this high incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting, we aimed to assess the effect of palonosetron-dexamethasone and ondansetron-dexamethasone combination for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients of middle ear surgery. Methods: Sixty-four patients, scheduled for middle ear surgery, were randomized into two groups to receive the palonosetron-dexamethasone and ondansetron-dexamethasone combination intravenously before induction of anesthesia. Anesthesia technique was standardized in all patients. Postoperatively, the incidences and severity of nausea and vomiting, the requirement of rescue antiemetic, side effects and patient satisfaction score were recorded. Results: Demographics were similar in the study groups. The incidence difference of nausea was statistically significant between groups O and P at a time interval of 2-6 hours only (p = 0.026). The incidence and severity of vomiting were not statistically significant between groups O and P during the whole study period. The overall incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (0-24 hours postoperatively) was 37.5% in group O and 9.4% in group P (p = 0.016). Absolute risk reduction with palonosetron-dexamethasone was 28%, the relative risk reduction was 75%, and the number-needed-to-treat was 4. The patient's satisfaction score was higher in group P than group O (p = 0.016). The frequency of rescue medication was more common in group O than in group P patients (p = 0.026). Conclusion: The combination of palonosetron-dexamethasone is superior to ondansetron-dexamethasone for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting after middle ear surgeries.


Resumo Justificativa: Náusea e vômito no pós-operatório é a segunda queixa pós-operatória mais frequente após a dor. Sem profilaxia antiemética, a incidência de náusea e vômito no pós-operatório foi de 60−80% após cirurgia do ouvido médio. Dada a alta incidência relatada de náusea e vômito no pós-operatório, nosso objetivo foi avaliar o efeito da combinação de palonosetrona-dexametasona e ondansetrona-dexametasona na prevenção de náusea e vômito no pós-operatório em pacientes submetidos a cirurgia do ouvido médio. Método: Sessenta e quatro pacientes programados para cirurgia de ouvido médio foram aleatoriamente divididos em dois grupos. Um recebeu a combinação de palonosetrona-dexametasona (grupo P) e o outro ondansetrona-dexametasona (grupo O) por via intravenosa antes da indução anestésica. A técnica anestésica foi padronizada em todos os pacientes. No pós-operatório, foram registradas incidência e gravidade das náuseas e vômitos, necessidade de antiemético de resgate, efeitos colaterais e índice de satisfação dos pacientes. Resultados: As características demográficas foram semelhantes nos grupos estudados. A diferença na incidência de náusea foi estatisticamente significante entre os grupos O e P apenas no intervalo de tempo entre 2 e 6 horas (p = 0,026). A incidência e gravidade de vômito não foram estatisticamente significantes entre os grupos O e P durante todo o período do estudo. A incidência geral de náusea e vômito no pós-operatório (0−24 horas de pós-operatório) foi de 37,5% no grupo O e de 9,4% no grupo P (p = 0,016). A combinação palonosetrona-dexametasona associou-se com redução do risco absoluto de 28%, redução do risco relativo de 75%, e o número necessário para tratar foi 4. O escore de satisfação do paciente foi maior no grupo P (p = 0,016). A frequência da medicação de resgate foi mais comum no grupo O (p = 0,026). Conclusão: A combinação de palonosetrona-dexametasona é superior à ondansetrona-dexametasona na prevenção da náusea e vômito no pós-operatório após cirurgia de ouvido médio.


Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Adult , Young Adult , Dexamethasone/administration & dosage , Ondansetron/administration & dosage , Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting/prevention & control , Palonosetron/administration & dosage , Double-Blind Method , Incidence , Prospective Studies , Patient Satisfaction , Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting/epidemiology , Drug Therapy, Combination , Ear, Middle/surgery , Middle Aged , Antiemetics/administration & dosage
8.
Rev. bras. anestesiol ; 70(5): 464-470, Sept.-Oct. 2020. tab, graf
Article in English, Portuguese | LILACS | ID: biblio-1143954

ABSTRACT

Abstract Introduction and objectives: The incidence of Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting (PONV) after video cholecystectomy is high. Progress in pharmacological PONV prophylaxis includes a new generation of 5-HT3 antagonists. This study aims to assess the effect of the 5-HT3 antagonist in postanesthetic antiemetic management of patients submitted to laparoscopic cholecystectomy with total intravenous anesthesia. Methods: Sixty individuals who underwent video cholecystectomy were randomized into three groups of 20 individuals according to the treatment administered: 0.125 mg of palonosetron (Group 1); 4 mg of ondansetron associated with 4 mg of dexamethasone (Group 2); 4 mg of dexamethasone (Group 3). General intravenous anesthesia was performed with propofol, remifentanil and rocuronium. The group to which the participant belonged was concealed from the investigator who assessed drug effect. PONV was assessed using the Rhodes Scale at 12 and 24 hours after surgery. Rescue medication was 0.655 to 1.5 mg of droperidol. Results: Group 1 presented a lower incidence of PONV and required less rescue medication in the first postoperative hour. There was no significant difference among the three groups regarding PONV incidence in the first 12 postoperative hours. Groups 1 and 2 were superior to Group 3 regarding the control of PONV from 12 to 24 hours, and after rescue medication from 12 to 24 hours. Group 1 showed significantly superior nausea control in the first 12 postoperative hours. Conclusions: The present study showed evidence that palonosetron is superior to the drugs compared regarding a protracted antiemetic effect and less requirement of rescue drugs, mainly related to its ability to completely inhibit the uncomfortable symptom of nausea.


Resumo Justificativa e objetivo: Náuseas e Vômitos no Pós-Operatório (NVPO) têm alta incidência após videocolecistectomia. Avanços na profilaxia farmacológica de NVPO incluem a nova geração de antagonista 5-HT3. O objetivo deste estudo foi avaliar o efeito do antagonista 5-HT3 no controle antiemético pós-anestésico em videocolecistectomia com anestesia venosa total. Método: Estudo realizado no HC-UFU (Hospital Terciário). Sessenta indivíduos submetidos a videocolecistectomia foram randomizados em três grupos de igual número, sendo administrados 0,125 mg de palonosetrona (Grupo 1); 4 mg de ondasetrona e 4 mg de dexametasona (Grupo 2); ou 4 mg de dexametasona (Grupo 3). A anestesia geral venosa foi realizada com propofol, remifentanil e rocurônio. O avaliador do efeito da droga desconhecia o grupo ao qual o indivíduo pertencia. NVPO foi avaliada aplicando a Escala de Rhodes após 12 e 24 horas do término da cirurgia. Para resgate terapêutico, foi estabelecido 0,655−1,5 mg de droperidol. Resultado: Observou-se no Grupo 1 menor incidência de NVPO e de resgate terapêutico na primeira hora de PO. Não foi observada diferença significativa entre os três grupos com relação a ocorrência de NVPO nas primeiras 12 horas de pós-operatório. Os grupos 1 e 2 foram superiores ao Grupo 3 no que se refere ao controle de NVPO de 12 a 24 horas e após o resgate de 12−24 horas. Observou-se que o controle de náuseas nas primeiras 12 horas de pós-operatório do Grupo 1 foi significantemente superior. Conclusão: O presente estudo mostrou evidências da superioridade da palonosetrona às demais drogas empregadas no que se refere ao efeito antiemético prolongado e menor necessidade de resgate, principalmente na capacidade de inibir completamente o desconfortável sintoma de náusea.


Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Adult , Young Adult , Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic/methods , Anesthetics, Intravenous/administration & dosage , Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting/prevention & control , Antiemetics/administration & dosage , Dexamethasone/administration & dosage , Propofol/administration & dosage , Double-Blind Method , Ondansetron/administration & dosage , Rocuronium/administration & dosage , Remifentanil/administration & dosage , Palonosetron/administration & dosage , Middle Aged
9.
Säo Paulo med. j ; 138(5): 414-421, Sept.-Oct. 2020. tab, graf
Article in English | SES-SP, LILACS, SES-SP | ID: biblio-1139713

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a common complication from general anesthesia that impacts on postoperative recovery. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate prophylactic rewarming following general anesthesia, so as to decrease the incidence of PONV among patients undergoing laparoscopic hysterectomy. DESIGN AND SETTING: Prospective randomized clinical study at a hospital in China. METHODS: Sixty-two patients were randomly assigned into two groups. The forced air warming (FAW) group received pre-warmed Ringer's solution with FAW until the end of surgery. The control group received Ringer's solution without FAW. The pre-warmed Ringer's solution was stored in a cabinet set at 40 °C. The FAW tube was placed beside the patient's shoulder with a temperature of 43 °C. RESULTS: Sixty patients completed the study. The FAW group showed significant differences versus the controls regarding temperature. At 6, 24 and 48 hours postoperatively, the incidences of PONV were 53.3%, 6.7% and 3.3% in the FAW group versus 63.3%, 30% and 3.3% in the controls. VAS scores were significantly lower in the FAW group than in the controls at 24 hours (P= 0.035). Forty-item questionnaire total scores in the FAW group were significantly higher than in the controls. The physical independence and pain scores at 24 hours and emotional support and pain scores at 48 hours in the FAW group were higher than in the controls (P < 0.05). There was no difference in hemodynamics or demographics between the two groups (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic rewarming relieved PONV and improved the quality of postoperative recovery. CHINESE CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTER (ChiCTR): ChiCTR-IOR-17012901.


Subject(s)
Humans , Female , Laparoscopy/adverse effects , Rewarming , Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting/prevention & control , Hysterectomy/adverse effects , Hysterectomy/methods , China , Prospective Studies , Treatment Outcome
10.
Clinics ; 75: e1688, 2020. tab, graf
Article in English | LILACS | ID: biblio-1133355

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the addition of a fourth antiemetic intervention in patients at high risk for postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). METHODS: High-risk patients (Apfel score 3 or 4) scheduled for unilateral mastectomy were randomly allocated in one of two groups, oral aprepitant (oral aprepitant 80 mg, intravenous dexamethasone 8 mg, and palonosetron 0.075 mg) and oral placebo (oral placebo, intravenous dexamethasone 4 mg, and palonosetron 0.075 mg). Patients and caregivers were blinded to the group assignments. The primary efficacy endpoints included the incidence of nausea and vomiting, and the secondary endpoints included use of rescue antiemetics during a 48-hour postoperative period. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02431286. RESULTS: One hundred patients were enrolled in this study and 91 were analyzed, 48 in group A and 43 in group P. No patient presented with nausea or vomiting in the first 2 hours after surgery. From the 2nd to the 6th hour, the incidence of PONV was 8.33% in group A and 9.30% in group P. In the first 24 hours, the incidence of PONV was 27.08% in the group A and 20.93% in group P. From the 24th to the 48th hour, the incidence of PONV was 8.33% in group A and 13.95% in group P. There were no statistically significant differences in PONV between groups. CONCLUSION: The addition of aprepitant as a third antiemetic resulted in no significant reduction in the incidence of PONV in this population. However, the incidence of PONV was reduced in relation to the general population.


Subject(s)
Humans , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Palonosetron , Double-Blind Method , Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting/prevention & control , Aprepitant , Mastectomy
11.
Rev. chil. cir ; 69(5): 421-428, oct. 2017. tab
Article in Spanish | LILACS | ID: biblio-899628

ABSTRACT

Resumen Las náuseas y vómitos postoperatorios (NVPO) son un problema frecuente en los pacientes quirúrgicos. Cuando no son prevenidos adecuadamente pueden provocar mayor morbilidad, estadía prolongada en la unidad de recuperación postoperatoria y hospitalización no planificada. El objetivo del equipo quirúrgico debe ser la profilaxis de las NVPO más que su tratamiento, con el fin de disminuir significativamente su incidencia y complicaciones asociadas. Los principales factores de riesgo para NVPO son: sexo femenino, historia de NVPO en cirugías previas y/o cinetosis, no fumar, uso de opioides sistémicos en el postoperatorio, someterse a ciertos tipos de cirugía (como colecistectomía, cirugía laparoscópica y cirugía ginecológica), utilizar anestésicos volátiles y/u óxido nitroso intraoperatorios, y duración de la cirugía. Sugerimos objetivar el riesgo de NVPO utilizando las escalas de riesgo de NVPO de Apfel o Koivuranta. Los principales fármacos antieméticos usados como profilaxis y tratamiento en el período perioperatorio son dexametasona, ondansetrón y droperidol. Existen estrategias generales que se pueden utilizar para reducir el riesgo quirúrgico basal de NVPO como evitar la anestesia general, privilegiando la anestesia regional, utilizar propofol para la inducción y mantención de la anestesia, evitar el uso de óxido nitroso y/o anestésicos inhalatorios, minimizar el uso postoperatorio de opioides sistémicos y recibir una hidratación intravenosa abundante durante la cirugía. La etiología de las NVPO es multifactorial, por lo que la prevención y tratamiento deben incluir diferentes clases de antieméticos, que actúen sobre los diferentes receptores de náuseas y/o vómitos hasta el momento conocidos, junto con las estrategias generales antes mencionadas.


Abstract Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) are a common problem in surgical patients. When not properly prevented, they can lead to increased morbidity, prolonged stay in the postoperative recovery unit and unplanned hospitalization. The objective of the surgical team should be the prophylaxis of PONV rather than its treatment, in order to significantly reduce its incidence and associated complications. The main risk factors for PONV are: female sex, history of PONV in prior surgeries and/or motion sickness, non-smoking, use of systemic opioids postoperatively, undergo certain types of surgery (such as cholecystectomy, laparoscopic surgery and gynecological surgery), use volatile anesthetics and/or intraoperative nitrous oxide, and duration of surgery. We suggest to objectify the risk of PONV using the Apfel or Koivuranta PONV risk scales. The main anti-emetic drugs used as prophylaxis and treatment in the perioperative period are dexamethasone, ondansetron and droperidol. There are general strategies that can be used to reduce the baseline surgical risk of PONV such as avoiding general anesthesia, favoring regional anesthesia, using propofol for induction and maintenance of general anesthesia, avoiding the use of nitrous oxide and/or inhalational anesthetics, minimizing the postoperative use of systemic opioids and to receive an abundant intravenous hydration during surgery. The etiology of PONV is multifactorial, so prevention and treatment should include different classes of antiemetics, acting on the different receptors of nausea and/or vomiting so far known, together with the general strategies mentioned above.


Subject(s)
Humans , Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting/prevention & control , Antiemetics/therapeutic use , Midazolam/therapeutic use , Butyrophenones/therapeutic use , Propofol/therapeutic use , Risk Factors , Adrenal Cortex Hormones/therapeutic use , Risk Assessment , Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting/therapy , Dihydroxytryptamines/antagonists & inhibitors , Antiemetics/administration & dosage
12.
Rev. bras. anestesiol ; 67(2): 193-198, Mar.-Apr. 2017. tab, graf
Article in English | LILACS | ID: biblio-843384

ABSTRACT

Abstract Background and objectives: Sevoflurane is often used in pediatric anesthesia and is associated with high incidence of psychomotor agitation. In such cases, dexmedetomidine (DEX) has been used, but its benefit and implications remain uncertain. We assessed the effects of DEX on agitation in children undergoing general anesthesia with sevoflurane. Method: Meta-analysis of randomized clinical and double-blind studies, with children undergoing elective procedures under general anesthesia with sevoflurane, using DEX or placebo. We sought articles in English in PubMed database using the following terms: Dexmedetomidine, sevoflurane (Methyl Ethers/sevoflurante), and agitation (Psychomotor Agitation). Duplicate articles with children who received premedication and used active control were excluded. It was adopted random effects model with DerSimonian-Laird testing and odds ratio (OR) calculation for dichotomous variables, and standardized mean difference for continuous variables, with their respective 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: Of 146 studies identified, 10 were selected totaling 558 patients (282 in DEX group and 276 controls). The use of DEX was considered a protective factor for psychomotor agitation (OR = 0.17; 95% CI 0.13-0.23; p < 0.0001) and nausea and vomiting in PACU (OR = 0.49; 95% CI 0.35-0.68; p < 0.0001). Wake-up time and PACU discharge time were higher in the dexmedetomidine group. There was no difference between groups for extubation time and duration of anesthesia. Conclusion: Dexmedetomidine reduces psychomotor agitation during wake-up time of children undergoing general anesthesia with sevoflurane.


Resumo Justificativa e objetivos: Sevoflurano é frequentemente usado em anestesia pediátrica e está associado à alta incidência de agitação psicomotora ao despertar. Nesses casos a dexmedetomidina (dex) tem sido usada, porém permanecem incertos seus benefícios e suas implicações. Foram avaliados os efeitos da dex sobre a agitação no despertar de crianças submetidas à anestesia geral com sevoflurano. Método: Metanálise de ensaios clínicos randomizados e duplamente encobertos, com crianças submetidas a procedimentos eletivos sob anestesia geral com sevoflurano, que usaram dex ou placebo. Buscaram-se artigos em língua inglesa na base de dados Pubmed com termos como Dexmedetomidine, sevoflurane (Methyl Ethers/sevoflurane) e agitation (Psychomotor Agitation). Artigos duplicados, com crianças que receberam medicação pré-anestésica e que usaram controle ativo foram excluídos. Adotou-se modelo de efeitos aleatórios com testes de DerSimonian-Laird e cálculo de odds ratio (OR) para variáveis dicotômicas e diferença de média padronizada para variáveis contínuas, com seus respectivos intervalos de confiança de 95% (IC). Resultados: Dos 146 estudos identificados, 10 foram selecionados, com 558 pacientes (282 no grupo dex e 276 controles). O uso da dex foi considerado fator de proteção para agitação psicomotora (OR = 0,17; 95% IC 0,13-0,23; p < 0,0001) e para náuseas e vômitos na SRPA (OR = 0,49; 95% IC 0,35-0,68; p < 0,0001). Tempo para despertar e para alta da SRPA foram maiores no grupo dexmedetomidina. Não houve diferença entre os grupos para tempo de extubação e duração da anestesia. Conclusão: A dexmedetomidina reduz a agitação psicomotora no despertar de crianças submetidas à anestesia geral com sevoflurano.


Subject(s)
Humans , Child , Psychomotor Agitation/prevention & control , Dexmedetomidine/administration & dosage , Methyl Ethers/adverse effects , Psychomotor Agitation/etiology , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Anesthetics, Inhalation/administration & dosage , Anesthetics, Inhalation/adverse effects , Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting/prevention & control , Dexmedetomidine/pharmacology , Sevoflurane , Hypnotics and Sedatives/administration & dosage , Hypnotics and Sedatives/pharmacology , Anesthesia, General/adverse effects , Anesthesia, General/methods , Methyl Ethers/administration & dosage
13.
Rev. bras. anestesiol ; 67(2): 147-152, Mar.-Apr. 2017. tab
Article in English | LILACS | ID: biblio-843369

ABSTRACT

Abstract Background and objectives: The aim of our study is to compare the effects of sugammadex and neostigmine, used for neuromuscular blockage antagonism, on postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). Methods: Our study was completed with 98 ASA I-II risk patients undergoing endotracheal intubation under general anesthesia. At the end of the surgery patients were randomly divided into two groups given 2 mg kg-1 sugammadex (Group S) or 50 µg kg-1 neostigmine plus 0.2 mg kg-1 atropine (Group N). Monitoring and recording times were set as 1 hour postoperative and from 1-6, 6-12, and 12-24 hours. The anti-emetic amounts administered were recorded. Results: In the first hour postoperative 13 patients in Group N (27%) and 4 in Group S (8%) were observed to have nausea and/or vomiting and the difference was statistically significant (p = 0.0016). During the 24 hours of monitoring there was no significant difference in the incidence and severity of PONV (p > 0.05), however the number of patients given ondansetron for PONV treatment in Group N was statistically significantly higher than the number in Group S (16 in Group N, 6 in Group S, p < 0.011). Conclusions: At the end of our study comparing neostigmine with sugammadex for neuromuscular blockage antagonism, we found use of sugammadex had lower incidence of PONV in the postoperative 1st hour and less anti-emetic use in 24 hours of monitoring.


Resumo Justificativa e objetivos: O objetivo de nosso estudo foi comparar os efeitos de sugamadex e neostigmina, usados para o antagonismo do bloqueio neuromuscular em náusea e vômito no pós-operatório (NVPO). Métodos: O estudo foi concluído com 98 pacientes de risco ASA I-II, submetidos à intubação traqueal sob anestesia geral. Ao final da cirurgia, os pacientes foram aleatoriamente divididos em dois grupos que receberam 2 mg kg-1 de sugamadex (Grupo A) ou 50 µg kg-1 de neostigmina mais 0,2 mg kg-1 de atropina (Grupo N). Os tempos de monitoração e registro foram definidos como uma hora de pós-operatório e de 1-6, 6-12 e 12-24 horas. As quantidades administradas de antieméticos foram registradas. Resultados: Na primeira hora de pós-operatório, 13 pacientes do Grupo N (27%) e 4 do Grupo S (8%) apresentaram náusea e/ou vômito e a diferença foi estatisticamente significativa (p = 0,0016). Não houve diferença significativa na incidência e gravidade de NVPO (p > 0,05) durante as 24 horas de monitoração, porém o número de pacientes que receberam ondansetron para o tratamento de NVPO no Grupo N foi estatística e significativamente maior que o número de pacientes no Grupo S (16 e 6, respectivamente, p < 0,011). Conclusões: Ao final do estudo quando comparamos neostigmina com sugamadex para o antagonismo do bloqueio neuromuscular descobrimos que sugamadex apresentou menor incidência de NVPO na primeira hora de pós-operatório e consumo menor de antiemético em 24 horas de monitoração.


Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Young Adult , Cholinesterase Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting/prevention & control , Sugammadex/therapeutic use , Neostigmine/therapeutic use , Single-Blind Method , Prospective Studies , Middle Aged
14.
Rev. bras. anestesiol ; 65(5): 349-352, Sept.-Oct. 2015. tab, graf
Article in English | LILACS | ID: lil-763131

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACTBACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Strabismus surgery is a frequently performed pediatric ocular procedure. A frequently occurring major problem in patients receiving this treatment involves the oculocardiac reflex. This reflex is associated with an increased incidence of postoperative nausea, vomiting, and pain. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of a sub-Tenon's block on the oculocardiac reflex, pain, and postoperative nausea and vomiting.METHODS: 40 patients aged 5-16 years with American Society of Anesthesiologists status I-II undergoing elective strabismus surgery were included in this study. Patients included were randomly assigned into two groups by using a sealed envelope method. In group 1 (n = 20), patients did not receive sub-Tenon's anesthesia. In group 2 (n = 20), following intubation, sub-Tenon's anesthesia was performed with the eye undergoing surgery. Atropine use, pain scores, oculocardiac reflex, and postoperative nausea and vomiting incidences were compared between groups.RESULTS: There were no significant differences between groups with regard to oculocardiac reflex and atropine use (p > 0.05). Pain scores 30 min post-surgery were significantly lower in group 2 than in group 1 (p < 0.05). Additional analgesic needed during the postoperative period was significantly lower in group 2 compared to group 1 (p < 0.05).CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, we think that a sub-Tenon's block, combined with general anesthesia, is not effective and reliable in decreasing oculocardiac reflex and postoperative nausea and vomiting. However, this method is safe for reducing postoperative pain and decreasing additional analgesia required in pediatric strabismus surgery.


RESUMOJUSTIFICATIVA E OBJETIVO: A cirurgia de estrabismo é um procedimento oftalmológico comum em pediatria. Um grande problema que ocorre com frequência em pacientes submetidos a esse tratamento envolve o reflexo oculocardíaco. Esse reflexo está associado ao aumento da incidência de náusea, vômito e dor. O objetivo deste estudo foi investigar os efeitos do bloqueio subtenoniano sobre o reflexo oculocardíaco, a dor, a náusea e o vômito no período pós-operatório.MÉTODOS: Foram incluídos no estudo 40 pacientes entre 5-16 anos, estado físico ASA I-II, submetidos à cirurgia eletiva de estrabismo. Foram randomicamente alocados em dois grupos, com o método de envelope lacrado. No Grupo 1 (n = 20),pacientes não receberam bloqueio subtenoniano. No Grupo 2 (n = 20), após a intubação, o bloqueio subtenoniano foi feito no olho submetido à cirurgia. Uso de atropina, escores de dor, reflexo oculocardíaco e incidência de náusea e vômito foram comparados.RESULTADOS: Não houve diferença significativa entre os grupos em relação ao reflexo oculocardíaco e ao uso de atropina (p > 0,05). Os escores de dor em 30 minutos de pós-operatório foram significativamente menores no Grupo 2 do que no Grupo 1 (p < 0,05). A necessidade de analgésico adicional durante o período pós-operatório foi significativamente menor no Grupo 2 do que no Grupo 1 (p < 0,05).CONCLUSÕES: O bloqueio subtenoniano, em combinação com anestesia geral, não é eficaz e confiável para diminuir o reflexo oculocardíaco, bem como náusea e vômito pós-operatórios (NVPO). Porém, esse método é seguro para diminuir a dor no período pós-operatório e reduzir a analgesia adicional necessária em cirurgia de estrabismo pediátrico.


Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Child, Preschool , Child , Adolescent , Strabismus/surgery , Anesthesia, Local/methods , Pain, Postoperative/prevention & control , Reflex, Oculocardiac , Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting/prevention & control
15.
SJA-Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia. 2014; 8 (1): 59-63
in English | IMEMR | ID: emr-138059

ABSTRACT

Post-operative nausea and vomiting is one of the most common and distressing complications after anesthesia and surgery. It may lead to serious post-operative complications. Ramosetron is a newer 5-HT3 receptor antagonist and has more potent and longer duration of antiemetic effects compared to first generation 5HT3 receptor antagonists. The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of Ramosetron for the prevention of post-operative nausea and vomiting with that of Ondansetron in patients undergoing abdominal surgeries under general anesthesia. In this randomized, double-blind study, 60 patients, 18-60 years of both genders falling under ASA I-II category scheduled for abdominal surgery were included. Group I received I.V ramosetron 0.3 mg while group II received I.V Ondansetron 4 mg at the time of extubation. The standard general anesthetic technique was used throughout. Postoperatively the incidences of nausea, vomiting, and safety assessments were performed at 1, 2, 6, and 24 h during the first 24 h after surgery. There were no differences between groups with respect to patient demographics. The percentage of patients who had complete response [no PONV, and no need for another rescue antiemetic] from 0 to 24 h after anesthesia was 56% with ramosetron and 33% with ondansetron. The corresponding rates at 1, 2, 6, and 24 h after anesthesia were 76% and 63%, 76% and 50%, 100 and 83%, 100 and 93%, respectively. Safety profiles of the two drugs were comparable, as no clinically serious adverse effects caused by study drugs were observed in either of the groups. Our study concludes that prophylactic therapy with ramosetron is highly efficacious than ondansetron in preventing PONV in patients undergoing abdominal surgery under general anesthesia


Subject(s)
Humans , Female , Male , Ondansetron , Ondansetron/administration & dosage , Benzimidazoles , Benzimidazoles/administration & dosage , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Abdomen/surgery , Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting/prevention & control
16.
Rev. Assoc. Med. Bras. (1992) ; 59(4): 387-391, jul.-ago. 2013. ilus, tab
Article in Portuguese | LILACS | ID: lil-685532

ABSTRACT

OBJETIVO: Verificar a eficácia da dexametasona na profilaxia de náuseas e vômitos em pacientes submetidos à colecistectomia laparoscópica. MÉTODOS: Revisão sistemática da literatura através das bases de dados MEDLINE, EMBASE e LILACS. Foram incluídos apenas ensaios clínicos controlados e randomizados que compararam a dexametasona ao placebo na profilaxia de náusea e vômito em pacientes submetidos à colecistectomia laparoscópica. RESULTADOS: Os resultados desta revisão basearam-se em dados de 12 ensaios clínicos controlados e randomizados, totalizando 947 pacientes. O grupo de pacientes que recebeu dexametasona pré-operatória apresentou menor incidência de náusea (NNT = 7), de vômito (NNT = 7) e de necessidade de antieméticos de resgate (NNT = 6). CONCLUSÃO: A infusão pré-operatória de 8 mg de dexametasona diminui o risco de complicações no pós-operatório de pacientes submetidos à colecistectomia laparoscópica.


OBJECTIVE: To verify the efficacy of dexamethasone in the prophylaxis of nausea and vomiting Laparoscopic cholecystectomy in patients submitted to laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Cholelithiasis METHODS: This was a systematic review of the literature through the MEDLINE, Embase, and Dexamethasone LILACS databases. Only controlled and randomized clinical trials comparing dexamethasone Postoperative nausea and vomiting to placebo in the prophylaxis of nausea and vomiting in patients submitted to laparoscopic cholecystectomy were included. RESULTS: The results of this review were based on data from 12 controlled and randomized clinical trials, totaling 947 patients. The group of patients who received preoperative dexamethasone showed lower incidence of nausea (number needed to treat [NNT] = 7), vomiting (NNT = 7), and need for smaller doses of rescue antiemetics (NNT = 6). CONCLUSION: The preoperative infusion of 8 mg of dexamethasone decreases the risk of complications in the postoperative period for patients submitted to laparoscopic cholecystectomy.


Subject(s)
Humans , Antiemetics/therapeutic use , Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic/adverse effects , Dexamethasone/therapeutic use , Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting/prevention & control , Postoperative Period , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Treatment Outcome
17.
Lima; s.n; 2013. 70 p. tab, graf.
Thesis in Spanish | LIPECS, LILACS, LIPECS | ID: biblio-1113137

ABSTRACT

Objetivos: Evaluar la efectividad del uso de ondansetrón + dexametasona vs. metoclopramida + dexametasona en la prevención de náuseas y vómitos en el postoperatorio en pacientes sometidos a colecistectomía laparoscópica en el período comprendido de Octubre a Diciembre del 2012. Material y métodos: Se realizó un estudio descriptivo, comparativo, observacional, transversal. Se revisaron 277 historias clínicas de pacientes ingresados al servicio de Cirugía General del Hospital Nacional Arzobispo Loayza sometidos a Colecistectomía Laparoscópica y que tuvieran sus datos completos consignados en la historia clínica y libro de registro. Resultados: la media de la edad de los varones fue de 45+/-11.8 años y de las mujeres de 44.6+/-11.8 años, siendo la media global de 44.7+/-11.8 años, con una mínima a de 18 años y una máxima de 65 años. El 86 por ciento fueron pacientes mujeres. El 58.5 por ciento de los casos la duración de la cirugía fue de 30 a 59 minutos. Se presentaron náuseas postoperatorios en el 16.6 por ciento de los casos; náuseas y vómitos postoperatorios en el 14.4 por ciento de los casos. El opioide usado con mayor frecuencia fue el remifentanilo en el 51.3 por ciento de los casos. En el 54.2 por ciento de pacientes se usó la combinación dexametasona + ondansetron y en el 45.8 por ciento la combina nación dexametasona + metoclopramida. Conclusiones: La terapia más efectiva para prevenir las náuseas y vómitos postoperatorios en los pacientes de alto riesgo sometidos a colecistectomía laparoscópica fue ondansetrón + dexametasona en comparación de metoclopramida + dexametasona porque se obtuvo menos incidencia y probabilidad (OR) de náuseas.


Subject(s)
Male , Female , Humans , Adult , Middle Aged , Aged , Anesthetics, Combined , Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic , Dexamethasone/therapeutic use , Metoclopramide/therapeutic use , Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting/prevention & control , Ondansetron/therapeutic use , Observational Study , Case Reports
18.
IPMJ-Iraqi Postgraduate Medical Journal. 2013; 12 (3): 449-453
in English | IMEMR | ID: emr-142913

ABSTRACT

Postoperative nausea and vomiting [PONV] is a common distressing experience in patients following laparoscopic cholecystectomy. This study was aimed at comparing the better timing of Ondansetron administration in prevention of PONV in female patients underwent elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy done under general anesthesia. Fifty ASA physical status one and two female patients, aged 19 to 45 years, were enrolled in this prospective study to receive 4mg four Ondansetron preoperatively [Group A], or 4 mg four Ondansetron postoperatively [Group B], 25 patients each. A standardized general anesthetic technique was employed. Any episode of PONV was assessed at 8 hours postoperative period, every 2 hours, starting at time zone 0 [at post-anesthesia recovery unit], and ending at time zone 3 [hour 8 postoperatively]. Complete response is defined as no PONV during 8 hours postoperative period. Incomplete response is defined as developing of postoperative nausea only during 8 hours postoperative period. Failure of prevention is defined as developing of PONV during 8 hours postoperative period. Complete response occurred in 60 and 64% in Groups A and B respectively. Incomplete response occurred in 12 and 4% in Groups A and B respectively. Failure of prevention occurred in 28 and 32% in Groups A and B respectively. There is no significant clinical difference between preoperative or postoperative Ondansetron administration of the same dosage in both groups in prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting.


Subject(s)
Humans , Female , Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting/prevention & control , Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic/adverse effects , Antiemetics/administration & dosage , Postoperative Complications/prevention & control
19.
West Indian med. j ; 61(2): 128-133, Mar. 2012. tab
Article in English | LILACS | ID: lil-672869

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Prevention and treatment ofpostoperative pain and operation complications such as nausea and vomiting are most important concerns in postoperative care. There are several mechanisms involved in postoperative pain. Gabapentin is a gamma aminobutyric acid analogue that is known as an anticonvulsant drug. This drug is tolerated well and has known effects on pain and anxiety. This study has compared the effect of gabapentin on postoperative pain, operation complications and haemodynamics. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: This randomized double blinded placebo controlled clinical trial was conducted on 61 patients divided randomly into two groups (30 as cases and 31 as controls). All patients had total abdominal hysterectomy. In the first group, the patients got 100 mg gabapentin in the night and 300 mg gabapentin orally (one capsule) two hours before surgery. The second group got one capsule of multivitamin orally. Then all patients were subjected to the same anaesthesia protocol and total abdominal hysterectomy. During the 24 hours after operation, the patients were assessed according to pain, nausea, vomiting, dizziness, systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), pulse rate (PR) and morphine use at 1, 6, 12 and 24 hours. RESULTS: Mean age and weight of patients were 45.86 ± 4.06, 48.16 ± 4.48, 64.56 ± 13.29 and 68.8 ± 12.88 in the study population and control groups, respectively. Except in the first hour after operation (p = 0.02), there was no significant differences between the two groups in morphine use. There was no significant correlation between the groups according to postoperative complications and the haemo-dynamic parameters (PR, SBP and DBP). CONCLUSION: Results show that gabapentin can decrease the need for morphine use in the first hour after operation only and has no significant effect on operation complications. Thus, we suggest gabapentin for pain management, and not to decrease opium use.


OBJETIVO: La prevención y tratamiento de dolor postoperatorio y las complicaciones de la operación -tales como la náusea y el vómito - son problemas de suma importancia en el cuidado postoperatorio. Hay varios mecanismos implicados en el dolor postoperatorio. La gabapentina es un análogo del ácido gamma-aminobutírico, conocido como un medicamento anticonvulsivo. Este medicamento es bien tolerado, y tiene efectos conocidos sobre el dolor y la ansiedad. El presente estudio compara el efecto de la gabapentina sobre el dolor postoperatorio, las complicaciones de la operación, y la hemo-dinámica. SUJETOS Y MÉTODOS: Este ensayo clínico, aleatorio, doble ciego y controlado con placebo, se llevó a cabo con 61 pacientes divididos aleatoriamente en dos grupos (30 como casos y 31 como control). Todas las pacientes tuvieron histerectomia abdominal total. En el primer grupo, las pacientes recibieron via oral 100 mg de gabapentina por la noche y 300 mg de gabapentina (una cápsula) dos horas antes de la cirugía. El segundo grupo recibió una cápsula de multivitaminas por vía oral. Luego, todas las pacientes fueron sometidas al mismo protocolo de anestesia e histerectomía abdominal total. Durante las 24 horas después de la operación, las pacientes fueron evaluadas en relación con dolores, náusea, vómitos, vértigo, presión sanguínea sistólica (PSS), presión sanguínea diastólica (PSD), frecuencia de pulso (FP), y el uso de morfina a la 1, 6, 12 y 24 horas. RESULTADOS: La edad promedio y el peso de las pacientes fue 45.86 ± 4.06, 48.16 ± 4.48, 64.56 ± 13.29 y 68.8 ± 12.88 en la población de estudio y los grupos de control, respectivamente. Excepto en la primera hora tras la operación (p = 0.02), no hubo ninguna diferencia significativa entre los dos grupos en cuanto al uso de morfina. No hubo correlación significativa alguna entre los grupos sobre la base de las complicaciones postoperatorias y los parámetros hemodinámicos (FP, PSS, y PSD). CONCLUSIÓN: Los resultados muestran que la gabapentina sólo puede disminuir la necesidad del uso de morfina en la primera hora tras la operación, y no tiene efectos significativos en las complicaciones de la operación. Por lo tanto, se sugiere el uso de la gabapentina para el tratamiento del dolor, pero no para reducir el uso del opio.


Subject(s)
Female , Humans , Middle Aged , Amines/therapeutic use , Analgesics/therapeutic use , Cyclohexanecarboxylic Acids/therapeutic use , Pain, Postoperative/prevention & control , Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting/prevention & control , gamma-Aminobutyric Acid/therapeutic use , Double-Blind Method , Hysterectomy , Postoperative Complications/prevention & control
20.
Acta Medica Iranica. 2012; 50 (4): 239-243
in English | IMEMR | ID: emr-132334

ABSTRACT

To assess the effectiveness of ondansetron pretreatment in alleviating propofol injection pain, 135 patients were randomly assigned to one of following three groups. Group 1 who received up to 2 mL pretreatment 50 mg tramadol in the saline, group 2 cases who received up to 2 mL pretreatment 4 mg ondansetron in saline, and group 3 who received up to 2 mL solution saline. A 20 gauge cannula was placed into the largest vein on the dorsum of the hand. Tourniquet was closed to the arm above the cannula and inflates to 70 mmHg, and then drug was injected. After 20 seconds, the tourniquet deflated, and propofol 2mg/kg injected over 10 seconds and pain assessment was made. Tramadol and ondansetron significantly reduced the incidence and severity of propofol injection pain more than placebo [P=0.001]. The efficacy of ondansetron in alleviating the pain on injection of propofol was no different from tramadol [P=0.330]. Ondansetron pretreatment may be used to reduce the incidence of pain on injection of propofol, an advantage added to the useful prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting


Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Pain Management , Pain/drug effects , Pain/prevention & control , Preoperative Care , Propofol/adverse effects , Propofol , Tramadol , Double-Blind Method , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Treatment Outcome , Placebos , Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting/prevention & control
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL