Anaphylactic reaction to ondansetron in a pediatric patient: a rare case report / Anafilaxia a ondasetron em idade pediátrica: um caso clínico raro

Although ondansetron is a widely used antiemetic medication, hypersensitivity to ondansetron is rare. We report a clinical case of a child who had an anaphylactic reaction after a single oral dose of ondansetron. An immunoglobulin E-mediated mechanism was determined by positive intradermal tests.

Ondansetron é um medicamento antiemético amplamente utilizado, mas a hipersensibilidade ao mesmo é rara. Apresentamos um caso clínico de uma criança com anafilaxia após tomar dose única de ondansetron, via oral, onde se demonstra um mecanismo mediado por IgE através de testes intradérmicos positivos.

Palonosetron versus ondansetron for prophylaxis of postoperative nausea and vomiting in laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a non-inferiority randomized controlled trial

Abstract Background: We tested the hypothesis that, within the margin of 15% of risk difference, palonosetron is not inferior to ondansetron in reducing the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Methods: We conducted a double-blind, non-inferiority, randomized, controlled trial of 212 patients aged 18 to 65 years undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy under general anesthesia in two secondary care hospitals. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either palonosetron (0.075 mg) or ondansetron (8 mg) intravenously at induction of anesthesia. Ondansetron (8 mg) was also administered 8 and 16 hours postoperatively. All anesthetic and surgical procedures were standardized. Patients were evaluated for 24 hours postoperatively for the occurrence of PONV. Results: A high incidence of PONV was observed at 2-6 hours postoperatively, with a rate of 36.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 28.2-46.3) in the palonosetron group, as compared to 43.4% (95% CI 34.4-52.9) in the ondansetron group. The risk difference (95% CI) between palonosetron and ondansetron for PONV was 0 (-10.9 to 10.9) at 0-2 hours, -6.6 (-19.4 to 6.5) at 2-6 hours, -0.9 (-11.0 to 9.2) at 6-12 hours, and -2.8 (-9.6 to 3.6) at 12-24 hours. There was no statistically significant difference between the palonosetron and ondansetron groups in the use of rescue medication (dimenhydrinate). There were no adverse events associated with the medications under study. Conclusion: Palonosetron is not inferior to ondansetron in patients at risk of PONV undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy, providing a good option for PONV prophylaxis, as it can be administered in a single dose.

CYP2D6 isoenzyme and ABCB1 gene polymorphisms associated with postoperative nausea and vomiting in women undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized trial

Abstract Introduction: Postoperative nausea and vomiting is still a common complication. Serotonin receptor antagonists are commonly used in clinical practice for antiemetic prophylaxis. Interin-dividual variations in drug response, including single nucleotide polymorphisms, are related to pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic changes in these drugs and may lead to a poor therapeutic response. This study aimed to evaluate the influence of CYP2D6 isoenzyme and ABCB1 gene polymorphisms on the frequency of postoperative nausea and vomiting with the use of ondansetron or palonosetron. Methods: A randomized, double-blind clinical trial including 82 women aged 60 years or over undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy was conducted. Patients were randomized to receive either ondansetron or palonosetron for postoperative nausea and vomiting prophylaxis. DNA was extracted from saliva. Genetic polymorphisms were analyzed by real-time polymerase chain reaction. The following polymorphisms were analyzed: rs3892097 C/T, rs1128503 A/G, rs16947A/G, rs1065852 A/G, rs1045642 A/G, rs2032582 C/A, and rs20325821 C/A. Results: Overall, vomiting, and severe nausea occurred in 22.5% and 57.5% of patients, respectively. In the palonosetron group, patients with the GG genotype (rs16947 A/G) experienced more severe nausea (p = 0.043). In the ondansetron group, patients with the M genotype (rs16947 A/G) presented mild nausea (p = 0.034), and those with the AA genotype (rs1065852 A/G) experienced more vomiting (p = 0.034). Conclusion: A low antiemetic response was observed with ondansetron in the presence of the AA genotype (rs16947 A/G) and the AA genotype (rs1065852 A/G), and a low therapeutic response was found with palonosetron in the presence of the GG genotype (rs16947 A/G) in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Register: ClinicalTrials.gov.

Estudo de fase II de pregabalina para prevenção de náuseas e vômitos induzidos por quimioterapia / Phase II study of pregabalin for the prevention of chemotherapy induced nausea and vomiting

Para avaliar o papel da pregabalina na proteção das náuseas e vômitos induzidos pela quimioterapia, foi realizado um ensaio clínico de fase II, aleatorizado, duplamente cego, controlado por placebo, para investigar se a pregabalina poderia melhorar o controle completo das náuseas e vômitos (desfecho primário). Inscrevemos 82 pacientes virgens de quimioterapia, programados para receber quimioterapia moderadamente e altamente emetogênica. Todos os doentes receberam ondansetron 8mg por via intravenosa, dexametasona 10mg antes da quimioterapia no primeiro dia e, dexametasona 4 mg por via oral, b.d., nos dias dois e três. Os doentes foram distribuídos aleatoriamente para tomar pregabalina 75 mg ou placebo, bd, desde a noite anterior à quimioterapia até ao quinto dia. A resposta completa global não foi estatisticamente significativa entre os grupos (53,7 versus 48,8%, respetivamente, no grupo da pregabalina e no grupo de controlo (P=0,65)). Também não houve diferença estatística significativa durante a fase aguda (primeiras 24 horas) e a fase tardia (24-120h): 80,5% versus 82,9% (P=0,77), 53,7 versus 51,2% (P=0,82), respectivamente. Neste estudo não foi identificada ação da pregabalina na prevenção de náuseas e vômitos induzidos por quimioterapia. Número de registo no Clinicaltrial.gov: NCT04181346.

To evaluate the role of pregabalin in the protection of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, we performed a phase II randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to investigate whether pregabalin could improve the complete control of nausea and vomiting (primary end point). We enrolled 82 chemotherapy-naive patients, scheduled to receive moderately and highly emetogenic chemotherapy. All patients received IV ondansetron 8mg, dexamethasone 10mg before chemotherapy on day one and oral dexamethasone 4mg, b.d., on days two and three. Patients were randomly assigned to take pregabalin 75mg or placebo, bd, from the night before chemotherapy to day five. The overall complete response was not statistically significant between the groups (53.7 versus 48.8%, respectively, in the pregabalin group and the control group (P=0.65)). There was also no significant difference during the acute phase (first 24 hours) and delayed phase (24-120h): 80.5% versus 82.9% (P=0.77), 53.7 versus 51.2% (P=0.82), respectively. There is no role for pregabalin preventing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. Clinicaltrial.gov registration number: NCT04181346.

Post-operative nausea and vomiting prophylaxis: A meta-review on systematic reviews and meta-analyses

Introduction: Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) are common complications in surgical patients undergoing general anesthesia, and multiple strategies have been suggested to prevent them. Objective: To describe the available evidence on the effectiveness of pharmacological and non-pharmacological strategies for preventing PONV in adults undergoing surgery under general anesthesia, as reported in previous meta-analyses and systematic reviews. Methodology: An overview of systematic reviews and meta-analyses was conducted. Searches were performed in PubMed, EBSCO, EMBASE, Cochrane Database, Science Direct, and Scopus, without restrictions as to gender, clinical condition, or date of publication, including articles in Spanish, French, and English only. Two reviewers independently and in duplicate did the screening, data extraction, quality evaluation, and risk of bias assessment according to AMSTAR-2. The PRISMA and PRIOR statements were followed for reporting. PROSPERO registration number CRD42021251999. Results: Out of 80 candidate articles, three were viable for meta-analysis. 1.5 mg to 18 mg doses of Dexamethasone showed a significant reduction in the risk of PONV, with a RR of 0.48 (95 % CI 0.41-0.57; p<0.001), I2=63 % (p=0.07), and a NNTc of 5 and 7. Other effective strategies included the use of acoustic stimulation/acupuncture/acupressure, 5HT3 antagonists, NK1 antagonists, gabapentinoids, haloperidol, droperidol, metoclopramide, midazolam, mirtazapine, among others. The risk of publication bias was low. Conclusion: Different strategies are effective for PONV prophylaxis in surgeries under general anesthesia. Dexamethasone shows the best available evidence at the moment. The documented methodological quality suggests the need for better studies to establish the effectiveness of the strategies.

Introducción: Las náuseas y el vómito posoperatorios (NVPO) son comunes en pacientes quirúrgicos bajo anestesia general y se han planteado múltiples estrategias para prevenirlos. Objetivo: Describir la evidencia disponible sobre la efectividad de las estrategias farmacológicas y no farmacológicas para prevenir las NVPO en adultos sometidos a cirugía bajo anestesia general, según lo descrito en metaanálisis y revisiones sistemáticas previas. Metodología: Se realizó una metarrevisión de revisiones sistemáticas y metaanálisis. Se ejecutaron búsquedas en PubMed, EBSCO, Embase, Cochrane Database, ScienceDirect y Scopus, sin restricción por sexo, condición clínica ni fecha de publicación, solo de artículos en español, francés e inglés. Dos revisores llevaron a cabo tamizaje, extracción de datos, evaluación de calidad y riesgo de sesgo según AMSTAR-2, de manera independiente y en duplicado. Se siguieron las declaraciones PRISMA y PRIOR para el reporte, previo registro en Prospero CRD42021251999. Resultados: De 80 artículos candidatos, se seleccionaron tres viables para realización de metaanálisis. La dexametasona entre 1,5 mg y 18 mg mostró un RR=0,48 (IC95 % [0,41-0,57]; p<0,001), I2=63 % (p=0,07) y un NNTc 5 y 7. Otras estrategias efectivas incluyen el uso de acuestimulación/acupuntura/acupresión, antagonistas 5HT3, antagonistas NK1, gabapentinoides, haloperidol, droperidol, metoclopramida, midazolam, mirtazapina, entre otras. El riesgo de sesgo de las publicaciones fue bajo. Conclusión: Diferentes estrategias son efectivas para profilaxis NVPO en cirugías con anestesia general. Dexametasona presenta la mejor evidencia disponible al momento. La calidad metodológica documentada sugiere la necesidad de realizar mejores trabajos para determinar la efectividad de las estrategias.

What are the effects of drugs for nausea and vomiting prevention following general anesthesia? Summary and comments regarding a Cochrane Collaboration network meta-analysis

The aim of this special article is to summarize and discuss, from an anesthesia perspective, the network meta-analysis on drugs used for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting after general anesthesia, in agreement with the Cochrane Colombia collaboration and within the framework of the Cochrane Corners strategy. Through the combination of indirect comparisons and based on the evidence, the use of aprepitant, ramosetron, granisetron, dexamethasone and ondansetron is recommended with a high degree of certainty for the reduction of postoperative nausea and vomiting.

Este artículo especial tiene el objetivo de resumir y discutir desde la perspectiva de la anestesiología, el metaanálisis en red sobre fármacos para prevenir náuseas y vómito posoperatorio luego de anestesia general, en acuerdo con la colaboración Cochrane Colombia y en el marco de la estrategia Cochrane Corners. Mediante la combinación de la evidencia y el uso de comparaciones indirectas, se ha recomendado con alto grado de certeza el uso de aprepitant, ramosetrón, granisetrón, dexametasona y ondansetrón para la reducción de náuseas y vómito posoperatorio.

Olanzapine as an add-on, pre-operative anti-emetic drug for postoperative nausea or vomiting: a randomised controlled trial.

Postoperative nausea or vomiting occurs in up to 40% in patients with multiple risk factors, despite prophylaxis. Olanzapine is an antipsychotic drug that is used to prevent nausea and vomiting in palliative care and to treat chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. This study aimed to examine whether pre-operative olanzapine, as a prophylactic anti-emetic added to intra-operative dexamethasone, ondansetron and total intravenous anaesthesia, reduced the incidence of postoperative nausea or vomiting. We performed a multiply-blinded randomised controlled trial in patients aged 18-60 years with cancer at high risk of postoperative nausea or vomiting (three or four risk factors according to the Apfel criteria) plus a previous history of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. Patients were allocated at random to receive 10 mg olanzapine or placebo orally 1 h before surgery in addition to a two-drug regimen (dexamethasone and ondansetron) and propofol anaesthesia to prevent postoperative nausea or vomiting. The primary outcome was the incidence of postoperative nausea or vomiting in the first 24 h after surgery. In total, 100 patients were enrolled; 47 in the olanzapine group and 49 in the control group completed the study. The baseline characteristics of the groups were similar. The incidence of postoperative nausea or vomiting in the first 24 h after surgery was lower in the olanzapine group (12/47, 26%) than in the control group (31/49, 63%) (p = 0.008, RR 0.40 (95%CI 0.21-0.79)). Adding pre-operative oral olanzapine to intra-operative dexamethasone and ondansetron was highly effective in reducing the risk of postoperative nausea or vomiting in the first 24 hours after surgery in patients with a previous history of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting and at least three Apfel risk factors for postoperative nausea or vomiting.

CYP2D6 isoenzyme and ABCB1 gene polymorphisms associated with postoperative nausea and vomiting in women undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized trial.

INTRODUCTION: Postoperative nausea and vomiting is still a common complication. Serotonin receptor antagonists are commonly used in clinical practice for antiemetic prophylaxis. Interindividual variations in drug response, including single nucleotide polymorphisms, are related to pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic changes in these drugs and may lead to a poor therapeutic response. This study aimed to evaluate the influence of CYP2D6 isoenzyme and ABCB1 gene polymorphisms on the frequency of postoperative nausea and vomiting with the use of ondansetron or palonosetron. METHODS: A randomized, double-blind clinical trial including 82 women aged 60 years or over undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy was conducted. Patients were randomized to receive either ondansetron or palonosetron for postoperative nausea and vomiting prophylaxis. DNA was extracted from saliva. Genetic polymorphisms were analyzed by real-time polymerase chain reaction. The following polymorphisms were analyzed: rs3892097 C/T, rs1128503 A/G, rs16947 A/G, rs1065852 A/G, rs1045642 A/G, rs2032582 C/A, and rs20325821 C/A. RESULTS: Overall, vomiting, and severe nausea occurred in 22.5% and 57.5% of patients, respectively. In the palonosetron group, patients with the GG genotype (rs16947 A/G) experienced more severe nausea (p = 0.043). In the ondansetron group, patients with the AA genotype (rs16947 A/G) presented mild nausea (p = 0.034), and those with the AA genotype (rs1065852 A/G) experienced more vomiting (p = 0.034). CONCLUSION: A low antiemetic response was observed with ondansetron in the presence of the AA genotype (rs16947 A/G) and the AA genotype (rs1065852 A/G), and a low therapeutic response was found with palonosetron in the presence of the GG genotype (rs16947 A/G) in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. REGISTER: ClinicalTrials.gov.

Palonosetron versus ondansetron for prophylaxis of postoperative nausea and vomiting in laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a non-inferiority randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: We tested the hypothesis that, within the margin of 15% of risk difference, palonosetron is not inferior to ondansetron in reducing the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. METHODS: We conducted a double-blind, non-inferiority, randomized, controlled trial of 212 patients aged 18 to 65 years undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy under general anesthesia in two secondary care hospitals. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either palonosetron (0.075 mg) or ondansetron (8 mg) intravenously at induction of anesthesia. Ondansetron (8 mg) was also administered 8 and 16 hours postoperatively. All anesthetic and surgical procedures were standardized. Patients were evaluated for 24 hours postoperatively for the occurrence of PONV. RESULTS: A high incidence of PONV was observed at 2-6 hours postoperatively, with a rate of 36.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 28.2-46.3) in the palonosetron group, as compared to 43.4% (95% CI 34.4-52.9) in the ondansetron group. The risk difference (95% CI) between palonosetron and ondansetron for PONV was 0 (-10.9 to 10.9) at 0-2 hours, -6.6 (-19.4 to 6.5) at 2-6 hours, -0.9 (-11.0 to 9.2) at 6-12 hours, and -2.8 (-9.6 to 3.6) at 12-24 hours. There was no statistically significant difference between the palonosetron and ondansetron groups in the use of rescue medication (dimenhydrinate). There were no adverse events associated with the medications under study. CONCLUSION: Palonosetron is not inferior to ondansetron in patients at risk of PONV undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy, providing a good option for PONV prophylaxis, as it can be administered in a single dose.

Prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in the real-world setting in Spain.

PURPOSE: Proper monitoring and management of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) with antiemetics is crucial for cancer patients. This study aimed to evaluate the use of antiemetics for the treatment of highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) including carboplatin in the real-world setting in Spain. METHODS: A representative panel of cancer specialists was asked to collect information about the antiemetic treatments provided to patients receiving chemotherapy. Records formed part of the Global Oncology Monitor© database (Ipsos Healthcare, London, UK). Chemotherapy data were extrapolated using Ipsos Healthcare's projection methodology. RESULTS: A total of 73 experts were finally included. Data from 9519 patients, estimated to be representative of 202,084 patients, were collected. HEC (and carboplatin-based chemotherapy) was administered to 73,118 (36%) patients, cisplatin-based therapy being the most frequent treatment (n = 34,649, 47.38%). Neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists (NK1RAs) alone or in combination were used as prophylaxis for CINV in 14,762 (20%) patients, while the combination of NK1RA with 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist (5-HT3RAs) and dexamethasone as recommended by the international guidelines was used in 5849 (8%) patients only. No antiemetic prophylaxis was administered to 8.46% of the patients receiving HEC (n = 6189). Physicians classified cisplatin-, anthracycline-cyclophosphamide (AC-), and carboplatin-based regimens as HEC in 63%, 22% and 4% of the cases, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The use of NK1RA-containing regimens for CINV prevention in patients treated with HEC was less than expected, suggesting poor adherence to international antiemetic guidelines.

Electrical Stimulation of PC 6 to Control Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting in Patients with Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Objective: A complementary treatment for managing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) with promising results is electrostimulation of Pericardium 6 (PC 6; Neiguan). This review was conducted to evaluate the effects of electrostimulation therapy at PC 6 to control CINV in patients with cancer. The review was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42018087753). Methods: This systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials was accomplished according to the recommendations of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. Studies written in English, Portuguese, or Spanish that met the eligibility criteria organized according to the PICO [Patient, Problem or Population; Intervention; Comparison, Control, or comparator; Outcome(s)] anagram were included. Descriptors used to search the databases were identified and selected according to the Medical Subject Headings of the National Library of Medicine. The primary outcomes evaluated were the frequency and severity of nausea, vomiting, and general emesis after the experimental protocol. The secondary outcomes evaluated were the numbers of antiemetic pills taken and the patients' quality of life. Results: Fourteen articles were included. There was a reduction in the mean number of episodes of acute nausea (mean difference [MD] = -2.08; 95% confidence interval [95%CI] = -2.76, -1.39) and acute vomiting (MD = -0.91; 95% CI = -1.39, -0.42) or delayed (MD = -0.85; 95%CI = -1.47, -0.23) in patients given the treatment. The other analyses of nausea, vomiting and emesis showed no differences. Conclusions: Electrostimulation at PC6 has an effect on controlling general emesis, and acute nausea and vomiting in different phases of recovery from chemotherapy in patients with cancer.

El paciente con estado migrañoso en urgencias / Patient with status migrainosus in emergency department

RESUMEN Se presentan dos casos de la práctica diaria, de pacientes con migraña con y sin aura que evolucionan a estado migrañoso (SM) y requieren atención hospitalaria. El manejo hospitalario es necesario luego de que se agotaran todas las medidas de manejo ambulatorio indicadas. Se describen los criterios diagnósticos del SM actuales por la ICDH-3, su fisiopatología y la reciente propuesta del SM episódico. Se ofrecen algunas sugerencias del manejo actual de acuerdo con la evidencia disponible que pueden ser de utilidad en la práctica diaria.

SUMMARY We describe two cases with migraine with and without aura who evolves to Migrainous State (MS) requiring hospital care. Admision for management is necessary after all outpatient management measures were exhausted. The current criteria for the diagnosis of MS by the ICDH -3, its pathophysiology and the recent proposal of episodic MS were described. We propose some suggestions of current management according to the available evidence that may be useful for daily practice.

[Effect of palonosetron, ondansetron and dexamethasone in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in video cholecystectomy with total venous anesthesia with propofol-remifentanil - randomized clinical trial]. / Efeito da palonosetrona, ondansetrona e dexametasona na prevenção de náusea e vômito pós­operatório em videocolecistectomia com anestesia venosa total com propofol­remifentanil ­ ensaio clínico randomizado duplo cego.

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.

Effect of palonosetron, ondansetron and dexamethasone in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in video cholecystectomy with total venous anesthesia with propofol-remifentanil - randomized clinical trial / Efeito da palonosetrona, ondansetrona e dexametasona na prevenção de náusea e vômito pós-operatório em videocolecistectomia com anestesia venosa total com propofol-remifentanil - ensaio clínico randomizado duplo cego

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.

Risk factors associated with antineoplastic chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting / Fatores de risco associados a náuseas e vômitos induzidos por quimioterapia antineoplásica

ABSTRACT OBJECTIVE: To estimate the incidence and to evaluate risk factors for antineoplastic nausea and vomiting with high and moderate emetogenic chemotherapy in adult patients in the first treatment cycle. METHODS: Prospective cohort study with follow-up of 269 adults during the first cycle of antineoplastic chemotherapy. The incidence of nausea and vomiting was evaluated in the acute phase (0-24 hours), in the late phase (24 hours-5th day) and in the total phase (0-5th day). RESULTS: In total, 152 patients underwent high emetogenic chemotherapy and 117 moderate emetogenic chemotherapy. The relative frequency of nausea was higher when compared with vomiting in the acute phase (p < 0.001) and in the late phase (p < 0.001). The risk factors identified were: age group ≤ 49 years (odds ratio = 0.47; 95%CI 0.23-0.95) and 50-64 years (odds ratio = 0.45; 95%CI 0.23-0.87), tobacco use (odds ratio = 0.35; 95%CI 0.14-0.88), and high emetogenic chemotherapy (odds ratio 0.55; 95%CI 0.31-0.95). CONCLUSION: The incidence of nausea was higher than that of vomiting, and adverse effects were more frequent in the late phase. The results suggest the risk factors for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting are tobacco, age (young adults), and high emetogenic chemotherapy.

RESUMO OBJETIVO: Estimar a incidência e avaliar os fatores de risco para náuseas e vômitos induzidos por antineoplásicos com alto e moderado potencial emético em pacientes adultos, no primeiro ciclo de tratamento. MÉTODOS: Estudo de coorte prospectiva, com 269 adultos acompanhados durante o primeiro ciclo de quimioterapia antineoplásica. A incidência de náuseas e vômitos foi avaliada na fase aguda (0-24 horas), na fase tardia (24 horas-5° dia) e na fase total (0-5° dia). RESULTADOS: 152 pacientes foram submetidos a quimioterápico com alto potencial emético e 117 a moderado potencial emético. A frequência relativa de náuseas foi maior quando comparada à de vômitos na fase aguda (p < 0,001) e na fase tardia (p < 0,001). Os fatores de risco identificados foram: faixa etária ≤ 49 anos (odds ratio = 0,47; IC95% 0,23-0,95) e 50-64 anos (odds ratio = 0,45; IC95% 0,23-0,87), uso de tabaco (odds ratio = 0,35; IC95% 0,14-0,88) e alto potencial emético dos quimioterápicos (odds ratio 0,55; IC95% 0,31-0,95). CONCLUSÃO: A incidência de náuseas foi maior do que a de vômitos, e na fase tardia os efeitos adversos foram mais frequentes. Os resultados sugerem que os fatores de risco para náuseas e vômitos induzidos por quimioterapia são o tabaco, a idade (adultos jovens) e o alto potencial emético do quimioterápico.

Extrapiramidalismo por antieméticos / Extrapyramidal Side Effects of Antiemetics / Reações extrapiramidais causadas por antieméticos

Resumen: Los antieméticos son usados frecuentemente por diversas áreas de la medicina, aunque existe una tendencia a subestimar sus efectos adversos neurológicos. El objetivo del presente estudio de revisión fue revisar la literatura sobre la fisiología, farmacología, factores predisponentes, clínica y manejo del extrapiramidalismo por antieméticos. Se realizó una búsqueda en la literatura de artículos de revistas científicas, libros y trabajos de grado. Se utilizaron los buscadores Medline, LILACS, PubMed, EMBASE, Current contents y Google Scholar con las siguientes palabras claves: deshidratación, gastroenteritis, vómitos, antieméticos, distonía, dopamina, hipertermia, citocromo, meto-clopramida y domperidona. Se obtuvieron 252 artículos, de los cuales 50 fueron considerados aptos para la revisión. A partir del análisis, se concluyó que el uso de antieméticos es de uso frecuente por medicina general y especialidades como anestesiología y pediatría, por lo cual un conocimiento sobre los efectos extrapiramidales permitirá un diagnóstico y manejo temprano.

Abstract: Antiemetics are frequently used by various areas of medicine, although there is a tendency to underestimate their neurological adverse effects. This paper aims to review the literature on the physiology, pharmacology, predisposing factors, clinical picture, and management of the extrapyramidal side effects of antiemetics. Scientific journal articles, books, and dissertations were searched. The search engines Medline, LILACS, PubMed, EMBASE, Current Contents, and Google Scholar were used with the following keywords: dehydration, gastroenteritis, vomit, antiemetics, dystonia, dopamine, hyperthermia, cytochrome, metoclopramide, and domperidone. Two hundred and fifty-two articles were obtained, 50 of which were considered suitable for review. From the analysis, it was concluded that antiemetics are often used by general medicine and specialties such as anesthesiology and pediatrics; therefore, knowledge of the extrapyramidal effects will allow early diagnosis and treatment.

Resumo: Os antieméticos são frequentemente usados por diversas áreas da medicina, embora possamos constatar uma tendência a subestimar seus efeitos adversos neurológicos. O objetivo do presente estudo é revisar a literatura sobre a fisiologia, a farmacologia, os fatores predisponentes, a clínica e o tratamento de reações extrapiramidais causadas por antieméticos. Foi realizada uma busca na literatura por artigos de revistas científicas, livros e monografias. Os mecanismos de busca Medline, LILACS, PubMed, EMBASE, Current contents e Google Scholar foram utilizados com as seguintes palavras-chave: desidratação, gastroenterite, vómito, antieméticos, distonia, dopamina, hipertermia, citocromo, metoclopramida e domperidona. Foram encontrados 252 artigos, dos quais 50 foram considerados aptos para a revisão. A partir da análise, concluiu-se que os antieméticos são frequentemente utilizados pela medicina geral e especialidades, como anestesiologia e pediatria, portanto, o conhecimento dos efeitos extrapiramidais possibilitará um diagnóstico e tratamento precoces.

Palonosetron versus ondansetron for prevention of nausea and vomiting after total abdominal hysterectomy under spinal anesthesia with intrathecal morphine: a double-blind, randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Hysterectomy is a widely performed surgery and neuraxial anesthesia with intrathecal morphine provides superior quality of recovery. Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a frequent problem with intrathecal morphine use. Although palonosetron is effective for prevention of PONV after general anesthesia, its efficacy after neuraxial anesthesia has not been established. This study was conducted to compare the use of palonosetron with ondansetron for PONV prophylaxis in patients at a high risk of PONV during total abdominal hysterectomy (TAH) under spinal anesthesia with intrathecal morphine. METHODS: This prospective, randomized double-blind study conducted at São Rafael Hospital involved 140 American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I or II women who underwent TAH under spinal anesthesia with intrathecal morphine and who had at least 3 risk factors for PONV based on Apfel's simplified score. The patients were randomized into two groups: one received palonosetron whereas the other received ondansetron. All patients received spinal anesthesia with intrathecal morphine, as well as dexamethasone plus palonosetron or ondansetron for PONV prophylaxis. The overall incidence of PONV, incidence of early- and late-onset nausea and vomiting, severity of nausea, and use of rescue antiemetics were recorded. RESULTS: The overall incidence of PONV was 42.9% in the palonosetron group and 52.9% in the ondansetron group (p > 0.05). No significant differences existed in the incidence of early- and late-onset nausea or early-onset vomiting between the two groups. The incidence of late-onset vomiting was significantly lower in the palonosetron group. CONCLUSIONS: Palonosetron exhibited efficacy similar to that of ondansetron for reducing the overall incidence of PONV after TAH under spinal anesthesia with intrathecal morphine; however, palonosetron reduced the incidence of late-onset vomiting significantly better than ondansetron. TRIAL REGISTRATION: RBR-4gnm8n ( ensaiosclinicos.gov.br ), date of registration: August 18, 2014.

Adverse events associated with aprepitant pediatric bone cancer patients.

An eight-year long case series follow-up study with pediatric bone cancer patients was conducted to compare the occurrence of adverse events associated with aprepitant with official sources of drug information (manufacturer's leaflet, clinical trials, and European Medicines Agency leaflet). All patients admitted were analyzed, representing 192 aprepitant cycles. Anorexia, febrile neutropenia, and headache were observed in frequencies over 43.8 per 100 patients, which was higher than previous estimates. Adverse events were classified as probable or possible, by using Naranjo score. The increased rates of adverse events, especially on the risk febrile neutropenia, warrant further safety studies on this population.

Bromopride, metoclopramide, or ondansetron for the treatment of vomiting in the pediatric emergency department: a randomized controlled trial / Bromoprida, metoclopramida ou ondansetrona no tratamento de vômito no departamento de emergência pediátrica: ensaio controlado randomizado

Abstract Objective: To compare the effectiveness of a single intramuscular dose of bromopride, metoclopramide, or ondansetron for treating vomiting. Methods: Randomized controlled trial including children 1-12 years of age presenting with acute vomiting at the pediatric emergency department. Outcomes: Number of children that stopped vomiting at one, six, and 24 h following treatment; episodes of diarrhea; acceptance of oral liquids; intravenous rehydration; return to hospital and side effects. Results: There were 175 children who completed the study. Within the first hour after treatment, all drugs were equally effective, with ondansetron preventing vomiting in 100%, bromopride in 96.6%, and metoclopramide in 94.8% of children (p = 0.288). Within six hours, ondansetron was successful in preventing vomiting in 98.3% of children, compared to bromopride and metoclopramide, which were successful in 91.5% and 84.4% of patients, respectively (p = 0.023). Within 24 h, ondansetron was superior to both other agents, as it remained efficacious in reducing vomiting in 96.6% of children, as opposed to 67.8% and 67.2% with bromopride and metoclopramide, respectively (p = 0.001). The ondansetron group showed better acceptance of oral liquids (p = 0.05) when compared to the bromopride and metoclopramide. The ondansetron group did not show any side effects in 75.9% of cases, compared to 54.2% and 53.5% in the bromopride and metoclopramide groups, respectively. Somnolence was the most common side effect. Conclusions: A single dose of ondansetron is superior to bromopride and metoclopramide in preventing vomiting six hours and 24 h following treatment. Oral fluid intake after receiving medication was statistically better with Ondansetronwhile also having less side effects compared to the other two agents.

Resumo Objetivo: Para comparar a eficacia de uma unica dose intramuscular de bromoprida, metoclopramida ou ondansetrona no tratamento de vomito. Métodos: Ensaio controlado randomizado incluindo crianc¸as de 1 a 12 anos de idade que apresentam vomito agudo no departamento de emergencia pediatrica. Desfechos: Numero de crianças que pararam de vomitar 1, 6 e 24 horas apos o tratamento; episodios de diarreia; aceitac¸ao de liquidos orais; reidratac¸ao intravenosa, retorno ao hospital e efeitos colaterais. Resultados: 175 crianças concluiram o estudo. Na primeira hora apos o tratamento, todos os medicamentos foram igualmente eficazes, sendo que a ondansetrona preveniu vomito em 100%, a bromoprida em 96,6% e metoclopramida em 94,8% das crianças (p = 0,288). Em 6 horas, a ondansetrona mostrou sucesso na prevençao do vomito em 98,3% das crianças, em comparac¸ao a bromoprida e a metoclopramida, que mostraram sucesso em 91,5% e 84,4% dos pacientes, respectivamente (p = 0,023). Em 24 horas, a ondansetrona foi superior aos dois outros agentes, pois ela continuou eficaz na reduçao do vomito em 96,6% das crianças, diferente de 67,8% e 67,2% com bromoprida e metoclopramida, respectivamente (p = 0,001). O grupo de ondansetrona mostrou melhor aceitaçao de liquidos orais (p = 0,05) em comparaçao a bromoprida e metoclopramida. O grupo de ondansetrona nao mostrou efeitos colaterais em 75,9% dos casos, em comparaçao a 54,2% e 53,5% dos grupos de bromoprida e metoclopramida. O efeito colateral mais comum foi sonolencia. Conclusões: Uma unica dose de ondansetrona e superior a bromoprida e metoclopramida no tratamento de vomito 6 horas e 24 horas apos o tratamento. A ingestao de fluidos orais apos receber medicaçao foi estatisticamente melhor com ondansetrona, ao mesmo tempo em que tambem apresentando menos efeitos colaterais em comparaçao aos outros dois agentes.

Cannabinoids for nausea and vomiting related to chemotherapy: Overview of systematic reviews.

Nausea and vomiting are common and distressing adverse events of chemotherapy. This review focuses on the findings and quality of systematic reviews (SRs) of cannabinoids for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). Review of SRs, a systematic literature search, was conducted in several electronic databases and included SRs evaluating cannabinoids for CINV in cancer patients. Methodological quality and quality of reporting were evaluated by AMSTAR and PRISMA, respectively. Initial search retrieved 2,206 records, and 5 SRs were included. On the basis of findings of the sole SR judged as high methodological quality, cannabinoids seem to be more effective than placebo, equal to prochlorperazine for reducing CINV, and to be preferred by patients. The response to different combinations of antiemetic agents seems to be equal to 1 antiemetic alone. The average of AMSTAR score was 5, and the average of PRISMA score was 13.2. Cannabinoids represent a valuable option for treating CINV, despite the adverse events related to treatment, such as drowsiness and cognitive impairment. There is no good quality evidence to recommend or not the use of cannabinoids for CINV. More studies are still needed to evaluate the effectiveness of cannabinoids when compared with modern antiemetics.