Rate Of Postoperative Nausea And Vomiting Research Articles

An explorative comparison of self - perception and the perception of others concerning postoperative nausea and vomiting in infants

Background Quality assurance and process improvements of side effects are becoming more and more important in the context of an outcome orientated postoperative pain therapy [1-3]. In particular PONV (postoperative nausea and vomiting) leads to an impairment of patients’ wellbeing. It can be assumed that the incidence exceeds the number of cases documented in the patient’s chart. So the actual rate of PONV may be underestimated [4].

Use of Aprepitant and Factors Associated With Incidence of Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting in Patients Undergoing Facial Plastic Surgery.

Patients who experience immediate postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) after their facial plastic surgery procedure have a higher incidence of complications and dissatisfaction. To determine whether a single dose of aprepitant administered preoperatively can decrease the incidence of immediate PONV in patients undergoing facial plastic surgery compared with patients who are administered ondansetron hydrochloride alone and whether patient-related factors pose a greater risk of developing immediate PONV after surgery. In this retrospective study, we reviewed 172 patients undergoing facial plastic surgery with general anesthesia at an accredited office-based surgery practice from January 1, 2012, through December 31, 2013. All patients received prophylactic treatment to mitigate against immediate PONV. Fifty-six patients received aprepitant in addition to ondansetron as prophylaxis for PONV. Patients undergoing facial plastic surgery were assessed during the immediate postoperative period for PONV. In addition, patient age, type of procedure, duration of surgery, and sex were reported. The addition of aprepitant preoperatively effectively reduced the PONV rate from 15.5% to 1.8% (P = . 02). Logistic regression analysis revealed that duration of surgery longer than 90 minutes (odds ratio [OR], 2.936; 95% CI, 0.560-15.385; P = .20), female sex (OR, 1.893; 95% CI, 0.379-9.448; P = .44), and type of procedure increased the likelihood of PONV after facial plastic surgery with an odds ratio of greater than 1 in this sample population. However, the odds ratios were not statistically significantly greater than 1 for the 95% CIs. Of the 19 patients who experienced PONV, 17 were women, and 17 patients had a duration of surgery longer than 90 minutes. Patient age did not appear to affect the rate of PONV (P = .32). Preoperative aprepitant administered within 1 hour before facial plastic surgery in patients at risk of developing PONV effectively reduce the rate of immediate PONV. Female patients and patients with facial surgery duration of longer than 90 minutes might benefit from the added expense of aprepitant to further reduce the likelihood of PONV. 3.

Efficacy of celecoxib for acute pain management following total hip arthroplasty in elderly patients: A prospective, randomized, placebo-control trial.

The aim of the present study was to determine whether celecoxib is able to ameliorate pain intensity, provide a narcotic-sparing effect, achieve early ambulation and improve rehabilitation following total hip arthroplasty (THA) in elderly patients. Peri- and post-operative oral celecoxib was administered to verify the efficacy of celecoxib for acute pain management in a multimodal analgesic strategy. All 64 eligible patients were randomly allocated to either the celecoxib group, who took an oral 400 mg capsule of celecoxib peri-operatively and 200 mg per 12 h post-operatively for the first 5 days, or the control group, who were orally treated with a placebo capsule having the same appearance. A multimodal analgesic technique was used in which oral celecoxib or placebo capsule was combined with intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) morphine pump for peri- and post-operative pain management. Pain assessments were recorded at 6, 12, 24, 48 and 72 h, and 7 and 14 days after THA using the visual analog scale (VAS). PCA morphine consumption; 6, 12, 24 and 48-h post-operative Harris hip score (HHS); time interval until initial ambulation; rates of urinary retention and post-operative nausea and vomiting (PONV) within 72 h; and intra- and post-operative blood loss were also documented. The celecoxib and control groups comprised 34 and 30 patients, respectively. Baseline demographics were comparable between the two groups. The post-operative VAS in the celecoxib group was significantly lower than that in the control group at 12, 24, 48 and 72 h after THA. The post-operative HHS had no significant difference between the two groups, while the time interval until initial ambulation in the celecoxib group (4.5±1.2 days) was significantly less than that in the control group (5.83±2.04 days; P<0.05). Morphine consumption was significantly decreased in the celecoxib group when compared with the control group at 6, 12, 24 and 24 h. Although the 72-h post-operative rates of urinary retention and PONV were lower in the celecoxib group than in the control group, there were no significant differences in these rates between the two groups. The intra- or post-operative blood loss was not significantly different between groups. In conclusion, pre-and post-operative oral celecoxib in a multimodal analgesic strategy can achieve favorable pain relief, reduce opioid consumption, and provide earlier ambulation and improved rehabilitation when compared with PCA morphine alone following THA in elderly patients.

Retrospective investigation of postoperative outcome after reversal of residual neuromuscular blockade

Postoperative residual neuromuscular blockade (RNMB) is associated with significant morbidity. The aim of this retrospective data analysis was to investigate the influence of the method of RNMB reversal on postoperative outcome. Tertiary teaching hospital in Western Australia. With Ethics Committee approval, data from 1444 patients who received at least one dose of a non-depolarising muscle relaxant intraoperatively during 2011 were analysed. Endpoints included unwanted events in the postanaesthesia care unit (PACU); symptoms of pulmonary complications within 7 postoperative days (0 to 100 outcome score based on 'temperature >38°C', 'leucocyte count >11 × 10 l', 'physical examination consistent with pneumonia' and 'shortness of breath'); PACU turnover time; and length of hospital stay. Data from 1444 patients (722 sugammadex, 212 neostigmine and 510 no-reversal) were analysed. The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in PACU was higher in neostigmine-reversed than sugammadex-reversed patients (21.5 vs. 13.6%; P <0.05). No differences were found regarding other PACU incidents, length of PACU stay or hospital stay. Pulmonary outcome deteriorated significantly (outcome score increased) with age and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status. This was observed particularly in ASA 3/4 patients more than 60 years of age in neostigmine-reversed or non-reversed patients, but almost no detrimental effect of age on pulmonary outcome was found in the sugammadex group (P <0.05). RNMB reversal with sugammadex was associated with the lowest rate of PONV and may reduce the risk of pulmonary complications in elderly ASA 3/4 patients. Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12612000087853.

Comparing Dexamethasone and Metoclopramide for preventing nausea and vomiting and Pain after Hernia Inguinal surgery

Background: Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is the commonest consequence after surgery which can lead to multiple difficulties on different body systems. The aim of this study was to compare Dexamethasone and Metoclopramide effect in preventing PONV and pain. Methods : In a clinical trial, 60 ASA 1-2 patients who were candidate for elective inguinal surgery were randomly divided into two equal groups. One group (M) received the intravenous 10mg Metoclopramide and the other group (D) received 8mg Dexamethasone 10 min before extubation and 6 hours after the end of the surgery. The indication of PONV, the time to the first request for analgesic and the amount of analgesic in the course was recorded 24 hours after surgery. Data was analyzed using SPSS version 16. Results: The indication of PONV had no significant difference in both groups (P>0.05). The time to the first request for analgesic in group (M) was less than group (D) (p=0.063) and the amount of used analgesic in group (D) was less than group (M) (p=0.177) but had no significant difference. Prescription frequency of analgesic was significantly lower in dexamethasone group (P=0.033). Conclusion: There was no statistically significant difference between two groups in the rate of PONV, but due to the analgesia effects of Dexamethasone, using this drug after surgery is recommended.

A Prospective Randomised Comparison of the LMA ProSeal™ versus Endotracheal tube on the Severity of Postoperative Pain following Gynaecological Laparoscopy

Pain and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) are common problems after gynaecologic laparoscopy. Two recent studies have shown that morphine requirements and PONV are lower when an LMA ProSeal™ is used, rather than an endotracheal tube (ETT), for female patients undergoing breast and gynaecological surgery. We conducted a patient and observer-blinded randomised controlled trial, recruiting non-obese women without gastro-oesophageal reflux undergoing laparoscopic gynaecological surgery. Patients received a standardised relaxant general anaesthetic and then were randomised to receive either an LMA ProSeal or an endotracheal tube. Patients were assessed at two and 24 hours post-anaesthesia. The primary outcome was postoperative pain score and secondary endpoints included morphine consumption, postoperative emesis and adverse upper airway symptoms. We recruited 116 patients to the study, 57 patients in the ETT group and 59 patients in the LMA ProSeal group. The patients were similar in demographic and surgical characteristics. At two hours, the ETT group was similar to the LMA ProSeal group in regards to pain scores (Visual Analogue Scale 3.0 vs 3.5, P=0.86), morphine consumption (7.2 vs 7.4 mg, P=0.56) and PONV (47.4 vs 47.5%, P=0.99). After 24 hours, pain scores and PONV rates were also similar. No significant difference in rates of sore throat or dysphagia was observed between the ETT and LMA ProSeal groups. No significant complications were attributable to either airway device. The LMA ProSeal did not decrease pain or PONV in patients undergoing gynaecological laparoscopy when compared to endotracheal intubation.

The Effect of Postoperative Pain Treatment on the Incidence of Anastomotic Insufficiency after Rectal and Rectosigmoideal Surgery

The aim of prospective study was to evaluate the pain relief in the postoperative period and consumption of opioid and non-opioid analgesics as a risk factor of the anastomotic insufficiency after rectal and rectosigmoideal resection for carcinoma. Anastomotic insufficiency is one of the most feared and life threatening early complications. No articles about the effect of the response to opioid therapy in the postoperative period on the risk of this major clinical problem have been published. We compared the effect of opioid and non-opioid analgesics in 109 patients who underwent rectal and rectosigmoideal resection in a prospective study. We evaluated the appearance of anastomotic insufficiency and clinical conditions in the relationship with the pain relief in the postoperative period and consumption of opioid and non-opioid analgesics. The pain intensity and the consumption of analgesics were significantly increased in the group of nonresponders. The rate of PONV (postoperative nausea and vomiting) in the responders and nonresponders groups was 69% and 78%, respectively. However, the differences did not reach significant level. Other clinical conditions were not significantly different between the both groups, too. The difference in the incidence of anastomotic insufficiency between both groups was highly significant, 6% cases of anastomotic insufficiency in the responders group and 19% in nonresponders group (χ2 = 7.73; p=0.0054). Nonrespoders to opioid therapy and their high consumption of second-line analgesics is a high risk factor for anastomotic insufficiency.

Intravenous Dextrose Administration Reduces Postoperative Antiemetic Rescue Treatment Requirements and Postanesthesia Care Unit Length of Stay

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) remains the most common postoperative complication, and causes decreased patient satisfaction, prolonged postoperative hospital stays, and unanticipated admission. There are limited data that indicate that dextrose may reduce nausea and vomiting. In this trial, we attempted to determine whether the rate of PONV can be decreased by postoperative administration of IV dextrose bolus. To test the effect of postoperative dextrose administration on PONV rates, we conducted a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. We enrolled 62 nondiabetic, ASA class I or II nonsmoking outpatients scheduled for gynecologic laparoscopic and hysteroscopic procedures. Patients were randomized into 2 groups: the treatment group received dextrose 5% in Ringer lactate solution, and the control (placebo) group received Ringer lactate solution given immediately after surgery. All patients underwent a standardized general anesthesia and received 1 dose of antiemetic a half hour before emergence from anesthesia. PONV scores, antiemetic rescue medications, narcotic consumption, and discharge time were recorded in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) in half-hour intervals. The 2 groups were similar with regard to age, weight, anxiety scores, prior PONV, non per os status, presurgical glucose, anesthetic duration, intraoperative narcotic use, and total weight-based fluid volume received. Postoperative nausea scores were not significantly different in the dextrose group compared with the control group (P > 0.05) after Bonferroni correction for repeated measurements over time. However, patients who received dextrose 5% in Ringer lactate solution consumed less rescue antiemetic medications (ratio mean difference, 0.56; 95% confidence interval, 0.39-0.82; P = 0.02), and had a shorter length of stay in the PACU (ratio mean difference, 0.80; 95% confidence interval, 0.66-0.97; P = 0.03) compared with patients in the control group. In this trial, postanesthesia IV dextrose administration resulted in improved PONV management as defined by reductions in antiemetic rescue medication requirements and PACU length of stay that are worthy of further study. In light of its ease, low risk, and benefit to patient care and satisfaction, this therapeutic modality could be considered.

Effects of etomidate on blood cortisol, insulin, and glucose levels and PONV rates in smokers

To observe differences in the effects of etomidate, used for anesthesia induction, on surgery-induced endocrine response and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) among nonsmokers and smokers. Materials and methods: Eighty adult patients with ASA I-II risk status were randomly divided into 2 groups: smokers (Group I, n = 40) and nonsmokers (Group II, n = 40). Patients were then further divided into subgroups according to the drug used for anesthesia induction, either propofol (Group IP and Group IIP) or etomidate (Group IE and Group IIE). Blood cortisol, insulin, glucose, and white blood cell (WBC) levels were measured and PONV scores were recorded. Results: Blood cortisol values were significantly lower in Group IE and Group IIE compared to Group IP and Group IIP during the 1st and 2nd hours after induction. By the 8th hour, blood insulin levels had increased significantly compared to the baseline values in Groups IE, IP, and IIP. Blood glucose levels were significantly higher in Group IIE compared to both Group IP and Group IIP. There was no significant difference between the WBC levels of the different groups. PONV scores were significantly higher in Group IIE compared to the other groups. Conclusion: We determined that the use of etomidate causes a lower stress response and more PONV compared to propofol, while smoking increases the stress response and decreases PONV.

Randomised trial of intranasal nicotine and postoperative pain, nausea and vomiting in non-smoking women

The primary aim of this study is to test the hypothesis that intranasal nicotine reduces postoperative opioid use among non-smoking women. The second aim is to determine the effects of intranasal nicotine on the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). In this double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial, non-smoking women undergoing gynaecological procedures received either 3 mg intranasal nicotine (N=90) or placebo spray (N=89) at the conclusion of surgery. Postoperative opioid use (intravenous morphine equivalents) and PONV rates were recorded during the recovery room (postanaesthesia care unit, PACU) stay and first 24 postoperative hours. From an overall analysis, opioid dose administered within the first 24 h was lower in patients receiving nicotine [median (25th, 75th) 38 (17, 62) mg for placebo vs. 25 (13, 46) mg for nicotine; P=0.012]. Inpatients who received intranasal nicotine used less opioid. From an overall analysis, patients in the nicotine group were more likely to experience nausea (71.1 vs. 56.2% P=0.044), receive rescue antiemetics (57.8 vs. 38.2% P=0.011), and report higher Nausea Verbal Descriptive Scores [2 (0, 2; vs. 1 (0, 2), P=0.006] in PACU. Inpatients who received nicotine were more likely to receive antiemetics (P=0.009) and report higher Nausea Verbal Descriptive Scores (P=0.025) in the PACU. Intraoperative use of intranasal nicotine has a sustained opioid-sparing effect in non-smoking women undergoing gynaecological procedures and is associated with a higher frequency of PONV.

Preventing Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting After Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind Study

Background Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) are potential complications in patients after laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). Combination antiemetic therapy often is effective for preventing PONV in patients undergoing LC, and combinations of antiemetics targeting different sites of activity may be more effective than monotherapy. Objective The aim of this study was to compare the administration of a subhypnotic dose of propofol combined with dexamethasone with one of propofol combined with metoclopramide to prevent PONV after LC. Methods Sixty adult patients scheduled for LC were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 treatment groups. The patients in group 1 received 0.5 mg/kg propofol plus 8 mg dexamethasone, and those in group 2 received 0.5 mg/kg propofol plus 0.2 mg/kg metoclopramide. The number of patients experiencing nausea and vomiting at 0 to 4, 4 to 12, and 12 to 24 hours postoperatively and as well as additional use of rescue antiemetics were recorded. Results The total PONV rates up to 24 hours postanesthesia were 23.3% and 50% for group 1 and group 2, respectively. Comparisons of the data revealed that at 0 to 4 hours, the number of patients experiencing vomiting was 6 (20%) in group 1 and14 (46.7%) in group 2 ( P = 0.028). The frequency of vomiting in group 1 was significantly lower than that for group 2 ( P = 0.028), and the rate of rescue antiemetic use in group 2 was higher than that in group 1 (20% vs 46.7%; P = 0.028). In the evaluation of PONV based on the nausea and vomiting scale scores, the mean PONV score was 0.4 (0.2) in group 1 compared with 1.0 (0.2) in group 2 ( P = 0.017). There were no significant differences between the values at 4 to 12 hours and at 12 to 24 hours. The frequency of adverse reactions (respiratory depression: 1.3%, 1.3%; laryngospasm: 1.3%, 0%; cough: 1.3%, 0%; hiccup: 1.3%, 0%;) was not significantly different in the 2 groups. Conclusions Administration of a subhypnotic dose of 0.5 mg/kg propofol plus 8 mg dexamethasone at the end of surgery was more effective than administration of 0.5 mg/kg propofol plus metoclopramide in preventing PONV in the early postoperative period in adult patients undergoing LC.

Effect of pharyngeal packing during nasal surgery on postoperative nausea and vomiting

Objective The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of pharyngeal packing in reducing postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) after nasal surgery by taking into consideration the surgery types. Study Design A prospective, randomized, controlled trial. Setting A tertiary referral center. Subjects and Methods After the study was approved by the local ethics committee, this study was conducted in the Otorhinolaryngology clinic with the collaboration of the Anesthesiology clinic. The development of PONV within 24 hours after surgery was evaluated in patients who were applied a pharyngeal pack (Group 1) or not (Group 2) during nasal surgery. Results There were 104 adult patients for routine nasal surgery included in the current study, yielding 100 (group 1, n = 50; group 2, n = 50) evaluable subjects. No significant difference was found in the incidence of PONV between the two groups at two ( P = 0.41), four ( P = 0.54), eight ( P = 0.51), and 24 hours. According to surgery type, the incidence of PONV after two hours was 71 percent in septorhinoplasty, 68 percent in endoscopic sinus surgery, and 50 percent in septoplasty; after four hours it was 59 percent in septorhinoplasty, 53 percent in endoscopic sinus surgery, and 37 percent in septoplasty; and after eight hours it was 35 percent in septorhinoplasty, 39 percent in endoscopic sinus surgery, and 21 percent in septoplasty. PONV was not seen at 24 hours. Compared to the septoplasty group for which pharyngeal packing was used, significantly lower rates of PONV at four and eight hours were found in the septoplasty group in which pharyngeal packing was not used ( P = 0.02). Conclusion Pharyngeal packing in nasal surgery has no impact on PONV.

Post-Operative Nausea and Vomiting (PONV) after Thyroid Surgery: A Prospective, Randomized Study Comparing Totally Intravenous versus Inhalational Anesthetics

The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) after thyroidectomy and the association of Propofol versus Sevoflurane use for anesthesia maintenance were investigated during a randomized, prospective study. One hundred and ninety-eight patients underwent thyroidectomy receiving either Sevoflurane (0.5-1.3% end-tidal) or Propofol (50-200 mg/kg/min) for anesthesia maintenance. All patients received Propofol for induction of anesthesia, Succinylcholine or Vecuronium, Nitrous Oxide, and Fentanyl. Prophylactic antiemetics were not administered. The combined incidence of PONV was 54.4 per cent over the 24-hour postoperative evaluation period. PONV was more common in patients receiving Sevoflurane than Propofol for maintenance of anesthesia (64.6% vs 43.8%). In women (n = 117), the incidence of PONV resulted higher when receiving inhalational Sevoflurane than Propofol for maintenance (70.6% vs 42.4%). However, in men (n = 81), there was no significant difference in PONV between anesthetic regimens (47.4% with Sevoflurane vs 49.6% with Propofol). Patients undergoing thyroid surgery are at high risk for the development of PONV. Propofol for maintenance of anesthesia, although more expensive than Sevoflurane, may reduce the rate of PONV.

Comparison of ramosetron, dexamethasone, and a combination of ramosetron and dexamethasone for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in Korean women undergoing thyroidectomy: A double-blind, randomized, controlled study

Background: Thyroidectomy is associated with a relatively high incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), ranging from 51% to 76%. Because these symptoms are distressing for patients, prophylactic medication to avoid or reduce PONV is recommended. Objective: The aim of the present study was to compare the efficacy of ramosetron, dexamethasone, and a combination of ramosetron and dexamethasone in preventing PONV in Korean women undergoing thyroidectomy. Methods: In this double-blind, randomized, controlled trial, consecutive adult female patients who were scheduled to undergo thyroidectomy under general anesthesia at the Kyungpook National University Hospital (Daegu, Korea) were randomly assigned to receive ramosetron 0.3 mg alone, dexamethasone 8 mg alone, or a combination of ramosetron 0.3 mg and dexamethasone 8 mg administered intravenously as a single dose immediately after induction of anesthesia. The primary end point of this study was the total PONV rate up to 24 hours postanesthesia. The secondary end points were the incidence of nausea, incidence of vomiting, severity of nausea (0 = no nausea to 10 = nausea as bad as it could be), use of rescue antiemetic drugs, and the occurrence of adverse events (AEs) determined through interview or spontaneous patient report for 24 hours postanesthesia. Results: A total of 198 female patients were approached for study inclusion, 18 of whom were excluded. Therefore, 180 Korean women (mean [SD] age, 46.5 [12.6] years; height, 159.8 [2.7] cm; weight, 53.2 [3.6] kg) were enrolled and completed the study. The total PONV rates up to 24 hours postanesthesia were 35%, 13%, and 10% in the dexamethasone, ramosetron, and combination groups, respectively. The PONV rate was significantly lower in the combination group than in the dexamethasone alone group ( P = 0.006). The PONV rate was not significantly different in the combination group compared with the ramosetron alone group. The PONV rate in the dexamethasone alone group was significantly higher than that in the ramosetron alone group ( P = 0.03). The severity of nausea (median [25th–75th percentiles], 0 [0-0] vs 0 [0–4]; P = 0.009) and rate of use of rescue antiemetic drugs (5% vs 27%; P = 0.006) were significantly lower in the combination group than in the dexamethasone alone group, whereas the severity of nausea (median [25th–75th percentiles], 0 [0-0] vs 0 [0-0]) and rate of use of rescue antiemetic drugs (5% vs 7%) were not significantly different between the combination and ramosetron alone groups. The severity of nausea (median [25th–75th percentiles], 0 [0–4] vs 0 [0-0]; P = 0.033) and the rate of use of rescue antiemetic drugs (27% vs 7%; P = 0.018) were significantly higher in the dexamethasone alone group than in the ramosetron alone group. The rates of AEs (headache: 15%, 20%, and 18%; dizziness: 18%, 22%, and 15%) were not significantly different in the dexamethasone alone, ramosetron alone, or combination groups, respectively. Conclusions: The combination of ramosetron and dexamethasone was more effective in reducing PONV than was dexamethasone monotherapy. However, the combination did not show additional benefits compared with ramosetron alone in preventing PONV after thyroidectomy in these Korean women.

Prevention and Management of Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting in Adults

In early 2007, patients at our small community hospital's outpatient surgery center experienced postoperative nausea and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) at a rate of 27% to 35%. Many record reviews and a written survey of nurses in the postanesthesia care unit and same day surgery center revealed that little or no risk assessment and no consistent prophylaxis or treatment were in use by nurses, physicians, or anesthesia care providers. After a review of the literature and discussions with anesthesia care providers, we developed and put into practice a risk assessment tool and perioperative care path. A formal evaluation to assess the effectiveness of the plan was performed one year after implementation. We found that the rates of PONV had decreased to 16%. AORN J 90 (September 2009) 391-413. (c) AORN, Inc, 2009.

Comparison of recovery characteristics, postoperative nausea and vomiting, and gastrointestinal motility with total intravenous anesthesia with propofol versus inhalation anesthesia with desflurane for laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A randomized controlled study

Background: Clinical effects, recovery characteristics, and costs of total intravenous anesthesia with different inhalational anesthetics have been investigated and compared; however, there are no reported clinical studies focusing on the effects of anesthesia with propofol and desflurane in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Objective: The aim of this study was to determine the effects of total intravenous anesthesia with propofol and alfentanil compared with those of desflurane and alfentanil on recovery characteristics, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), duration of hospitalization, and gastrointestinal motility. Methods: Patients classified as American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I or II undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy due to benign gallbladder disease were enrolled in the study. Patients were randomly assigned at a 1:1 ratio to receive total intravenous anesthesia with propofol (2–2.5 mg/kg) and alfentanil (20 μg/kg) or desflurane (4%–6%) and alfentanil (20 μg/kg). Perioperative management during premedication, intraoperative analgesia, relaxation, ventilation, and postoperative analgesia were carried out identically in the 2 groups. Extubation time, recovery time, PONV, postoperative antiemetic requirement, time to gastrointestinal motility and flatus, duration of hospitalization, and adverse effects were recorded. Postoperative pain was assessed using a visual analogue scale. Results: Sixty-eight patients were assessed for inclusion in the study; 5 were excluded because they chose open surgery and 3 did not complete the study because they left the hospital. Sixty patients (33 women, 27 men) completed the study. Recovery time was significantly shorter in the propofol group (n = 30) compared with the desflurane group (n = 30) (8.0 [0.77] vs 9.2 [0.66] min, respectively; P < 0.005). Fifteen patients (50.0%) in the propofol group and 20 patients (66.7%) in the desflurane group experienced nausea during the first 24 hours after surgery. The difference was not considered significant. In the propofol group, significantly fewer patients had vomiting episodes compared with those in the desflurane group (2 [6.7%] vs 16 [53.3%]; P < 0.005). Significantly fewer patients in the propofol group required analgesic medication in the first 24 hours after surgery compared with those in the desflurane group (10 [33.3%] vs 15 [50.0%]; P < 0.005). Patients in the propofol group experienced bowel movements in a significantly shorter period of time compared with patients in the desflurane group (8.30 [1.67] vs 9.76 [1.88] hours; P = 0.02). The mean time to flatus occurred significantly sooner after surgery in the propofol group than in the desflurane group (8.70 [1.79] vs 9.46 [2.09] hours; P = 0.01). The duration of hospitalization after surgery was significantly shorter in the propofol group than in the desflurane group (40.60 [3.49] vs 43.60 [3.56] hours; P = 0.03). Conclusion: Total intravenous anesthesia with propofol and alfentanil was associated with a significantly reduced rate of PONV and analgesic consumption, shortened recovery time and duration of hospitalization, accelerated onset of bowel movements, and increased patient satisfaction compared with desflurane and alfentanil in these patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery who completed the study.

Dexamethasone for the reduction of postoperative nausea and vomiting and analgesic requirements after middle ear surgery in adult Japanese patients

A prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was undertaken to evaluate the efficacy of dexamethasone for reducing postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) and analgesic requirements after middle ear surgery. Adult Japanese patients were allocated randomly to 1 of 3 groups (n = 30 each) to receive either placebo or dexamethasone at 2 different doses (4 mg and 8 mg) immediately before induction of anesthesia. Postoperatively, emetic episodes and analgesic requirements were evaluated by a blinded investigator. The rate of patients experiencing PONV during the first 24 h after anesthesia was 30% with dexamethasone 4 mg (P = 0.005) and 23% with dexamethasone 8 mg (P = 0.001) compared with 67% with placebo. The need for indomethacin for postoperative intolerable pain control was less in patients who had received dexamethasone 8 mg than in those who had received placebo (P = 0.018). No difference in analgesic requirement was found between the dexamethasone 4 mg and placebo groups (P = 0.396). No clinically important adverse events attributable to the study drug were observed in any of the groups. In conclusion, dexamethasone 8 mg is effective in reducing the rate of PONV and analgesic requirements in adult Japanese patients undergoing middle ear surgery.

The best concentration ratio of propofol controlled-infusion combined with sevoflurane in anesthesia for patients undergoing laparoscopy

To investigate the best concentration ratio of propofol controlled-infusion combined with sevoflurane in anesthesia for patients undergoing laparoscopy. One hundred patients undergoing cholecystectomy under laparoscopy were randomly divided into 5 equal groups treated with propofol controlled plasma at the concentrations of 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 microg/ml respectively (Group 1-5). Bispectral index (BIS) was maintained at a range of 50 +/- 5 by adjusting sevoflurane inhalation. The end-tidal concentration of sevoflurane (ETsevo), systolic pressure, diastolic pressure, recovery time, awareness, and post-operative nausea and vomiting (PONV) within 24 h after operation were recorded. The best concentration ratio of propofol controlled-infusion combined with sevoflurane with the definition as the highest ETsevo without PONV decrease along with the increase of propofol concentration. ETsevo was negatively correlated with and propofol concentration. There were nit significant differences in the systolic pressure, diastolic pressure, and recovery time among different groups. No incidence of intra-operative awareness was found. The PONV rates of Group 1 and 2 were both 60%, significantly higher than those of the other 3 groups (all P < 0.05) without significant differences in PONV rate among Group 3 - 5. The best concentration ratio of propofol controlled-infusion combined with sevoflurane was propofol controlled-infusion at the concentration of 1 microg/ml with ETsevo at the concentration as 1 minimal alveolar concentration (MAC). Propofol controlled-infusion at the concentration of 1 microg/ml with ETsevo at the concentration as 1 MAC is the best concentration ratio with low PONV rate and a possibility to prevent intra-operative awareness.

Adaptation of the OODA Loop to Reduce Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting in a High-Risk Outpatient Oncology Population

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) remains a ubiquitous concern for surgical outpatients with published rates ranging from 14% to 80%. An evidence-based approach was used to reduce PONV in a high-risk adult outpatient oncology population. The Observe, Orient, Decide, and Act (OODA) Loop, a rapid cycle management strategy, was adapted for use in an outpatient surgery center with six ORs. A PONV prophylaxis protocol was developed and adapted until a stable PONV rate was achieved. A combination of dexamethasone, promethazine, and ondansetron was used in patients with one to three PONV risk factors. Patients with four major risk factors received an additional intervention. The PONV rate for the final protocol stabilized below 4% by 46 weeks and remained stable through 79 weeks. The OODA paradigm provides an effective technique for interfacing health care research with clinical practice. In this case, an effective PONV prophylaxis plan was developed from within a collaborative nursing and medical setting.

Comparison of two instruments for assessing risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting

Two instruments for assessing patients' risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) were compared. The existing protocol (protocol 1) assessed PONV risk using 16 weighted risk factors and was used for both adults and pediatric patients. The new protocol (protocol 2) included a form for adults and a pediatric-specific form. The form for adults utilized the simplified risk score, calculated using a validated, nonweighted, 4-point scale, and categorized patients' risk of PONV as low, moderate, or high. The form for pediatric patients used a 7-point, non-weighted scale and categorized patients' risk of PONV as moderate or high. A list was generated of all patients who had surgery during August 2005, for whom protocol 1 was used, and during April 2006, for whom protocol 2 was used. Fifty patients from each time period were randomly selected for data analysis. Data collected included the percentage of the form completed, the development of PONV, the number of PONV risk factors, patient demographics, and the appropriateness of prophylaxis. The mean +/- S.D. number of PONV risk factors was significantly lower in the group treated according to protocol 2 ( p = 0.001), but fewer patients in this group were categorized as low or moderate risk and more patients were identified as high risk (p < 0.001). More patients assessed by protocol 2 received fewer interventions than recommended (p < 0.001); however, the frequency of PONV did not significantly differ between groups. Implementation of a validated and simplified PONV risk-assessment tool appeared to improve form completion rates and appropriate risk assessment; however, the rates of PONV remained similar and fewer patients received appropriate prophylaxis compared with patients assessed by the existing risk-assessment tool.