Comparison of palonosetron with combined palonosetron and midazolam for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is an undesirable complication in patients undergoing general anesthesia. Combination therapy via different mechanisms of action for antiemetic prophylaxis has been warranted for effective treatment of PONV. This study was designed to compare the prophylactic antiemetic effect between midazolam combined with palonosetron (group MP) and palonosetron alone (group P) after laparoscopic cholecystectomy surgeries. METHODS: A prospective randomized controlled trial was investigated in non-smoking female. Eighty-eight patients were randomly divided into 2 groups with 44 patients each. Group MP received 0.05 mg/kg of midazolam intravenously before induction of anesthesia whereas group P received the same volume of normal saline. Immediately after anesthetic induction, 0.075 mg of palonosetron was administered to both the groups. The incidence and severity of PONV were assessed during 2 time intervals (0-2 hours, 2-24 hours), postoperatively. RESULTS: The incidence of PONV during 24 hours after surgery was lower in group MP as compared to group P. There was also a significant difference in the use of rescue antiemetics. The severity of nausea was significantly lower in group MP as compared to group P, in the initial 2 hours after surgery. The incidence of side effects was similar between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION: In the prevention of PONV, midazolam combined with palonosetron, administered during induction of anesthesia was more effective as compared to palonosetron alone.

The use of olanzapine as an antiemetic in palliative medicine: a systematic review of the literature.

BACKGROUND: Olanzapine is an atypical antipsychotic that has affinity for many central nervous system receptors. Its efficacy is supported by several studies in the prevention and treatment of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. No recommendations exist on the antiemetic use of olanzapine in the palliative care setting. The aim of this work is to complete the initial work of Fonte et al. published in 2015, to determine whether the literature supports the use of olanzapine as an antiemetic in palliative situations and, in practice, to propose a therapeutic schema adapted to the palliative setting. METHODS: Systematic review of the literature according to the PRISMA criteria. We searched the PubMed, Cochrane, RefDoc, EMBase databases and the gray literature databases. The bibliographic search was conducted between November 2016 and August 2017. RESULTS: Thirteen articles were included: 2 case studies, 3 case series, 3 retrospective studies, 2 prospective studies, 2 literature reviews. All studies concluded on the efficacy of olanzapine as an antiemetic in the palliative care setting. No serious adverse effects were reported. Based on the data from the literature review, we propose a therapeutic scheme adapted to the palliative care context. CONCLUSION: Action of olanzapine on many receptors and its tolerance profile make it an interesting antiemetic treatment in palliative medicine. But to date, studies are scarce and have a low statistical power. Further investigation is therefore needed to determine the benefit of this treatment in palliative care patients, compared to usual treatments.

Benefits of ginger in the control of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting.

OBJECTIVES: To identify and discuss scientific evidence of the effects of ginger use on the management of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. METHODS: This is an integrative reviewperformed by Ganong's reference. RESULTS: We included 24 studies, highlighting three thematic categories, namely 1) antiemetic action of ginger - nausea (13 articles; of these, nine significant) and emesis (10 studies; of these, six significant); 2) action in the control of nausea (11 articles; of these, six significant) and vomiting (8 articles; of these, three significant) in the acute phase; 3) action in the control of nausea (6 articles; of these, three significant) and vomiting (6 articles; of these, three significant) in the delayed phase. There were divergences of the methods used. FINAL CONSIDERATIONS: This complementary therapy has low cost and easy access, but no statistical confirmation of its effectiveness in the management of nausea and vomiting in cancer patients was found.

Benefits of ginger in the control of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting / Beneficios del jengibre en el control de náusea y vómito inducidos por la quimioterapia / Benefícios do gengibre no controle da náusea e vômito induzidos pela quimioterapia

ABSTRACT Objectives: To identify and discuss scientific evidence of the effects of ginger use on the management of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. Methods: This is an integrative reviewperformed by Ganong's reference. Results: We included 24 studies, highlighting three thematic categories, namely 1) antiemetic action of ginger - nausea (13 articles; of these, nine significant) and emesis (10 studies; of these, six significant); 2) action in the control of nausea (11 articles; of these, six significant) and vomiting (8 articles; of these, three significant) in the acute phase; 3) action in the control of nausea (6 articles; of these, three significant) and vomiting (6 articles; of these, three significant) in the delayed phase. There were divergences of the methods used. Final considerations: This complementary therapy has low cost and easy access, but no statistical confirmation of its effectiveness in the management of nausea and vomiting in cancer patients was found.

RESUMEN Objetivos: Identificar y discutir evidencias científicas de los efectos del uso del jengibre en el manejo de la náusea y vomito inducidos por la quimioterapia. Métodos: Se trata de revisión integranterealizada por el referencial Ganong. Resultados: Han sido incluidos 24 estudios, destacándose 3 categorías temáticas: 1) acción antiemética del jengibre - ha sido evaluada la náusea (13 artículos [9 significativos]) y emesis (10 estudios [6 significativos]); 2) acción en el control de la náusea (11 artículos [6 significativos]) y vomito (8 artículos [3 significativos]) en la fase aguda; 3) acción en el control de la náusea (6 artículos [3 significativos]) y vomito (6 artículos [3 significativos]) en la fase tardía. Hubo divergencias de los métodos utilizados. Consideraciones finales: Esa terapia complementar ha sido de bajo costo y fácil acceso, pero no ha sido encontrada confirmación estadística de su efectividad en el manejo de la náusea y vomito en pacientes oncológicos.

RESUMO Objetivos: Identificar e discutir evidências científicas dos efeitos do uso do gengibre no manejo da náusea e vômito induzidos pela quimioterapia. Métodos: Trata-se de revisão integrativabaseada no referencial de Ganong. Resultados: Foram incluídos 24 estudos, destacando-se 3 categorias temáticas, a saber, 1) ação antiemética do gengibre - foi avaliada a náusea (13 artigos; destes, 9 significativos) e êmese (10 estudos; destes, 6 significativos); 2) ação no controle da náusea (11 artigos; destes, 6 significativos) e vômito (8 artigos; destes, 3 significativos) na fase aguda; 3) ação no controle da náusea (6 artigos; destes, 3 significativos) e vômito (6 artigos; destes, 3 significativos) na fase tardia. Houve divergências dos métodos utilizados. Considerações finais: Essa terapia complementar é de baixo custo e fácil acesso, mas não foi encontrada confirmação estatística de sua efetividade no manejo da náusea e vômito em pacientes oncológicos.

A multicenter, randomized, double-blind study of ulimorelin and metoclopramide in the treatment of critically ill patients with enteral feeding intolerance: PROMOTE trial.

PURPOSE: Enteral feeding intolerance (EFI) is a frequent problem in the intensive care unit (ICU), but current prokinetic agents have uncertain efficacy and safety profiles. The current study compared the efficacy and safety of ulimorelin, a ghrelin agonist, with metoclopramide in the treatment of EFI. METHODS: One hundred twenty ICU patients were randomized 1:1 to ulimorelin or metoclopramide for 5 days. EFI was diagnosed by a gastric residual volume (GRV) ≥ 500 ml. A volume-based feeding protocol was employed, and enteral formulas were standardized. The primary end point was the percentage daily protein prescription (%DPP) received by patients over 5 days of treatment. Secondary end points included feeding success, defined as 80% DPP; gastric emptying, assessed by paracetamol absorption; incidences of recurrent intolerance (GRV ≥ 500 ml); vomiting or regurgitation; aspiration, defined by positive tracheal aspirates for pepsin; and pulmonary infection. RESULTS: One hundred twenty patients were randomized and received the study drug (ulimorelin 62, metoclopramide 58). Mean APACHE II and SOFA scores were 21.6 and 8.6, and 63.3% of patients had medical reasons for ICU admission. Ulimorelin and metoclopramide resulted in comparable %DPPs over 5 days of treatment (median [Q1, Q3]: 82.9% [38.4%, 100.2%] and 82.3% [65.6%, 100.2%], respectively, p = 0.49). Five-day rates of feeding success were 67.7% and 70.6% when terminations unrelated to feeding were excluded, and there were no differences in any secondary outcomes or adverse events between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Both prokinetic agents achieved similar rates of feeding success, and no safety differences between the two treatment groups were observed.

Mirtazapine for Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting: Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, and Trial Sequential Analysis.

PURPOSE: Patients rank postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) as the most undesirable outcome of anesthesia. Mirtazapine is hypothesized to be effective in PONV prophylaxis via 5HT3 receptor antagonism. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: We identified seven randomized controlled trials by systematically searching electronic databases that compare the efficacy of mirtazapine versus placebo or ondansetron in reducing PONV. FINDINGS: Mirtazapine reduced PONV overall versus placebo in three studies (risk ratio [RR] = 0.44; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.32 to 0.62) both on conventional meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis. One study comparing mirtazapine with ondansetron found similar rates of PONV (RR = 0.96; 95% CI 0.48 to 1.94). Mirtazapine reduced preoperative anxiety versus placebo or ondansetron (standardized mean difference -1.4; 95% CI -2.56 to -0.23) but increased sedation (RR = 22.47; 95% CI 5.61 to 89.93). The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) quality of evidence was moderate to low. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis suggests that mirtazapine reduces PONV overall versus placebo. We found evidence of reduction in preoperative anxiety, although mirtazapine increased the risk of sedation.

Antiemetic Guidelines: Using Education to Improve Adherence and Reduce Incidence of CINV in Patients Receiving Highly Emetogenic Chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: With the development of increasingly effective antiemetic regimens, guideline adherence can prevent 70%-80% of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in patients with cancer. OBJECTIVES: This quality improvement project aims to increase rates of adherence to national guidelines and, ultimately, decrease rates of CINV experienced by patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy. METHODS: A retrospective chart analysis was performed. In-person education was provided to staff nurses and advanced practice providers on guidelines, followed by a survey immediately postintervention and again at three months. FINDINGS: Prior to the intervention, 49% of patients were found to experience CINV, with only 7% receiving guideline-appropriate prophylaxis. At three months, 37% of patients experienced CINV, with 22% receiving appropriate prophylaxis.

Fixed Combination Antiemetic: A Literature Review on Prevention of Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting Using Netupitant/Palonosetron

BACKGROUND: Prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) can be improved with guideline-consistent use of antiemetics. However, adherence to antiemetic guidelines remains often insufficient. Therefore, new strategies that improve adherence are needed. OBJECTIVES: To review the latest antiemetic guideline recommendations and provide an update on the use of NEPA, a fixed combination antiemetic composed of the neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist (RA) netupitant and the 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 RA palonosetron (Akynzeo®). METHODS: Analysis of the literature was performed, including guidelines, published literature, congress data on NEPA, and relevant articles on CINV. FINDINGS: Nurses are in a unique position to promote guideline-consistent antiemetic prophylaxis and are central in the education of patients and caregivers. Thus, nurses' continuous education on antiemetic treatments is key for the prevention and management of CINV. NEPA offers a simplified antiemetic therapy with the potential to increase guideline adherence.

Using a community advisory board to develop a serious game for older adults undergoing treatment for cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Older adults undergoing treatment for cancer are at risk for serious complications such as chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). Older adults are often overwhelmed by information and under-manage cancer treatment-related side effects. New educational strategies such as serious gaming may help teach or reinforce key symptom self-management strategies. This paper describes how a community advisory board of older adults, their caregivers, and oncology nurses were consulted to develop a serious game for CINV. METHODS: A formative evaluation process using a community advisory board (CAB) and a series of three focus groups were used to develop this serious game about managing CINV at home. RESULTS: The formative evaluation process and involvement of the CAB allowed researchers to learn about the experience of having CINV from an older adult perspective. Common themes related to CINV onset, severity and self-management formed the basis for the serious games' script and scenarios. Themes were validated and CAB members provided feedback on a game prototype. Feedback from CAB members indicated that the serious game was realistic and reflective of their CINV experience. CONCLUSION: Including older adults in the development of a serious game was instrumental in creating a relevant educational opportunity. Serious gaming should be considered as a way to add to the educational experiences of older adults as generic teaching methods may not address the needs of all age groups. Exploring for new ways to emphasize key points related to symptom management and prioritize learning may impact outcomes for older adults.

Total intravenous anaesthesia versus single-drug pharmacological antiemetic prophylaxis in adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) are among the most unfavourable anaesthetic outcomes attributed to the administration of inhaled anaesthetics. Accordingly, inhaled anaesthetics are frequently substituted by propofol when patients are at risk of PONV. As, on some occasions, inhalational anaesthesia may be favourable, the relative impact of propofol anaesthesia needs to be established based on robust data. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of a single-drug pharmacological prophylaxis with total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) for prevention of PONV. DESIGN: Systematic review of randomised controlled trials with meta-analyses. DATA SOURCES: All available studies until 29 April 2015 were retrieved from MEDLINE, CENTRAL and EMBASE. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials on adult patients undergoing general anaesthesia with at least one group receiving propofol-based intravenous anaesthesia without further antiemetic prophylaxis, and one group receiving inhalational anaesthesia with single-drug antiemetic prophylaxis. RESULTS: Fourteen studies involving 2051 patients were included. Compared with TIVA, after inhalational anaesthesia and single-drug antiemetic prophylaxis, there was no difference in the overall risk of PONV [relative risk (RR) 1.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.85; 1.32, GRADE rating moderate], nor was there any difference in the risk of postoperative vomiting (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.78; 1.76), need for rescue medication (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.68; 1.99) or early PONV (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.88; 1.27). However, TIVA was associated with an increased risk of late PONV (RR 1.41, 95% CI 1.10; 1.79, P = 0.006). Six studies investigated other side-effects associated with anaesthesia and found no differences between the two groups. Finally, there was evidence of a publication bias that included smaller studies favouring TIVA. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis confirms the results from indirect comparisons in individual studies: instead of substituting inhalational anaesthesia with propofol-based TIVA, a similar antiemetic effect can be achieved by adding single-drug pharmacological prophylaxis to the inhalational anaesthetic. STUDY REGISTRATION: This systematic review with meta-analysis was registered at PROSPERO (www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO), study number CRD42015019571.

Compliance with National Comprehensive Cancer Network anti-emesis guidelines in a Community Hospital Cancer Center.

OBJECTIVE: Nausea and vomiting are common adverse events exhibited by patients receiving chemotherapy. Prophylactic use of anti-emetic agents has been shown to reduce chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. Compliance with the National Comprehensive Cancer Network anti-emesis guidelines (Version 1.2013) by practitioners in a community out-patient hospital (Blount Memorial Hospital) has been reviewed and the results are presented herein. DESIGN: Retrospective study of patients receiving their first cycle of chemotherapy. PATIENTS: A total of 487 patients were reviewed from January 2005 to July 2012. In total, 70 patients were categorized in the high-risk category, 292 patients were categorized in the moderate-risk category, 60 patients were categorized in the low-risk category, and 65 patients were categorized in the minimal-risk category as per the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. Included patients were being administered the first cycle of their first treatment at Blount Memorial Hospital. DATA: Data were collected retrospectively from patient chemotherapy dispensing folders. RESULTS: In all, 63% of the patients received appropriate anti-emetic prophylaxis medications as per the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. Post-comparison between outcomes based on the risk category showed that patients in the moderate-risk category were most likely (91%) and patients in the low-risk category were least likely (6.67%) to receive appropriate anti-emetic prophylaxis as per the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. CONCLUSION: Overall compliance with guidelines is acceptable. Patients in the moderate risk category are most likely to receive appropriate anti-emetic prophylaxis.

Practical selection of antiemetics in the ambulatory setting.

Nausea and vomiting are mediated primarily by three neurotransmitter pathways: visceral stimulation releases dopamine and serotonin; vestibular and central nervous system activation release histamine and acetylcholine; and chemoreceptor trigger zone activation releases dopamine and serotonin. Clinicians can improve the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of treatments by targeting the appropriate pathways. Antihistamines and anticholinergics are most effective in patients with vestibular-mediated nausea secondary to vertigo. Serotonin antagonists block serotonin in the intestines and chemoreceptor trigger zone, and are most effective for treating gastroenteritis. Dopamine antagonists block dopamine in the intestines and chemoreceptor trigger zone; indications for these agents are similar to those for serotonin antagonists. For treatment of mild pregnancy-induced nausea, pyridoxine with or without doxylamine is recommended, and ginger may also be effective. In patients with migraine headache-associated nausea, metoclopramide improves response to oral anti-migraine agents. Ondansetron reduces nausea and vomiting in children with acute gastroenteritis and in women with hyperemesis gravidarum.

[Aprepitant successful for controlling nausea and vomiting in a case having difficulty with control treatment in a standard antienemic therapy involving chemotherapy for gallbladder cancer postoperative recurrence].

This case was a 62-year-old female. She underwent radical surgery for advanced gallbladder cancer 2 years ago after preoperative chemotherapy consisting of GEM/5-FU and CDDP (GFP). Two years after surgical treatment, multiple lung metastases and lymph node metastases appeared, and therefore, GFP chemotherapy was introduced. Rapid emesis occurred at two-cycle medication the first day, and was continued for several days. It was difficult to control the emesis by standard antienemic therapy. We therefore used aprepitant, a new medicine for antiemetic therapy. It had an excellent effect, and chemotherapy for this patient is still being continued.

[An antiemetic guideline for patients with malignancies in Japan].

Recent developments in chemotherapeutic regimens have improved overall and progression-free survival in patients with various malignancies. Supportive care accompanied by antiemetic treatment is crucial for successful chemotherapy. Hence, high-level evidence with regard to antiemetic therapy is essential to create awareness among oncologists. This study reviewed evidence from clinical trials involving antiemetic therapy in Japanese patients with malignancies, and established an antiemetic guideline for oncologists in Japan. Here, we introduce the outline of this antiemetic guideline.

[Survey on antiemetic therapy in ambulatory cancer chemotherapy and medical economics for standardization].

A cancer chemotherapy unit was established to support therapy for outpatients with cancer in Hirosaki University Hospital. It is essential to standardize antiemetic therapy, since a wide variety of the therapy provided to the unit from the diagnosis and treatment departments were conventional and empirical. We surveyed the use conditions and compatibility of the therapy based on reliable guidelines, and then considered the medical economics for standardization. In moderate-grade emetogenic chemotherapy, 5-HT(3) receptor antagonists tended to be used frequently instead of the recommended steroids. From this survey, the standardization of the cost of 5-HT(3) receptor antagonists and the relatively inexpensive steroids used in cancer chemotherapy might reduce either the nausea or vomiting suffered by patients with cancer and their economic burden as well.

Prophylactic antiemetic effect of midazolam after middle ear surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the prophylactic antiemetic effect of midazolam after middle ear surgery. STUDY DESIGN: A prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Ninety women patients undergoing middle ear surgery with general anesthesia received intravenously either midazolam 0.075 mg/kg or normal saline (n = 45 each) after induction of anesthesia. The incidence and severity of postoperative nausea and vomiting, rescue antiemetics, pain intensity, and side effects such as headache, dizziness, and drowsiness were assessed during the first 24 hours after anesthesia. RESULTS: Midazolam groups showed total incidence and severity of nausea and vomiting. Patients who required rescue antiemetics were significantly lower than in saline group (P < 0.05), but there were no significant differences in pain intensity and side effects such as headache, dizziness, and drowsiness between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Midazolam 0.075 mg/kg is effective for reducing nausea and vomiting after middle ear surgery.

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: current and new standards in the antiemetic prophylaxis and treatment.

Nausea and vomiting are considered as two of the most distressing side-effects of chemotherapy. Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting have been classified into acute, delayed and anticipatory based on the time of onset. The frequency of nausea and vomiting depends primarily on the emetogenic potential of the chemotherapeutic agents used. With the introduction of the 5-HT3 receptor-antagonists in combination with dexamethasone in the early 1990s approximately 70% of patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy were protected from acute emesis. However, 40% of patients have symptoms in the delayed phase. Another group of antiemetics, the neurokinin-1-receptor-antagonists, have recently been introduced. The addition of neurokinin receptor (NK1 receptor)-antagonists to standard therapy significantly improves emesis protection in the acute and in particular in the delayed phase by approximately 20%. Due to these new developments, revised antiemetic guidelines have been set. Here, the most recent developments in antiemetic therapy, including these guidelines, are reviewed.

Acute emesis: moderately emetogenic chemotherapy.

This paper is a review of the recommendations for the prophylaxis of acute emesis induced by moderately emetogenic chemotherapy as concluded at the Perugia Consensus Conference, which took place at the end of March 2004. The review focuses on new studies appearing since the last consensus conference in 1997. The following issues are addressed: dose and schedule of antiemetics, different groups of antiemetics such as corticosteroids, serotonin (5-HT(3))-receptor antagonists, dopamine D(2) receptor antagonists, and neurokinin (NK(1)) receptor antagonists. Antiemetic prophylaxis in patients receiving multiple cycles of moderately emetogenic chemotherapy is also reviewed. Consensus statements are given, including optimal dose and schedule of 5-HT(3)-receptor antagonists and of dexamethasone. The new 5-HT(3)-receptor antagonist, palonosetron, is a reasonable alternative to the well-established agents of this class--ondansetron, granisetron, tropisetron and dolasetron. It is concluded that the best prophylaxis in patients receiving moderately emetogenic chemotherapy is still the combination of one of the 5-HT(3)-receptor antagonists and dexamethasone. The results of studies adding a NK(1)-receptor antagonist to this combination are awaited and might change future recommendations.