Postoperative Nausea And Vomiting Prophylaxis Research Articles

Prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting after cesarean delivery under neuraxial anesthesia and postpartum analgesia in Japan: A cross-sectional study.

This study aims to investigate the clinical practice of physicians working in obstetric setting toward postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in parturients undergoing cesarean delivery (CD) with neuraxial anesthesia. We conducted this online survey to all active members of the Japan Society of Obstetric Anesthesiology and Perinatology (JSOAP), where leads academic society in obstetric anesthesia in Japan. The questionnaire was developed using the Delphi method. The survey included questions about routine practices for PONV prevention, the use of neuraxial opioids, optimal practices, and perceived obstacles. The email sent three times every 2 weeks as a reminder. A total of 1046 e-mails were sent, and 307 JSOAP members responded to the survey (29.3%). More than half of responders (62.7%) used neuraxial opioids with intrathecal morphine being the most frequent. They had a higher rate of multimodal PONV prophylaxis compared with who did not use neuraxial opioids for postoperative analgesia (19.9% vs 6.7%). Metoclopramide was the commonest medication for PONV prevention, and there was a significant difference in the use of 5-hydroxytryptamine receptor antagonists (19.9% vs. 8.6%, p = 0.012). We observed that 80% of physicians reported the routine administration of prophylaxis for PONV for CD. Among these, 20% indicated the use of two or more agents. Conversely, in the cohort not administering neuraxial opioids, only 6.7% reported the use of two or more agents. The online survey showed that the physicians using neuraxial opioids for CD had a higher proportion of multimodal PONV management involving two or more agents.

Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting in the Ambulatory Surgery Center: A Narrative Review.

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a common complication of ambulatory surgery, leading to numerous deleterious effects such as decreased patient satisfaction, prolonged recovery unit stays, and rarely, more serious complications such as aspiration pneumonia or wound dehiscence. In this paper, we present a narrative review of the literature regarding common risk factors for PONV including patient factors, surgical factors, and anesthetic factors. We then will review anesthetic techniques and antiemetic drugs demonstrated to mitigate the risk of PONV. Finally, we discuss the potential economic benefits of PONV prophylaxis in the perioperative ambulatory setting.

The Association of Guideline-Directed Prophylaxis with Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting in Pediatric Patients: A Single-Center, Retrospective Cohort Study.

Guidelines for postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) prophylaxis in pediatric patients recommend escalation of the number of antiemetics based on a preoperative estimate of PONV risk. These recommendations have been translated into performance metrics, most notably by the Multicenter Perioperative Outcomes Group (MPOG), used at over 25 children's hospitals. The impact of this approach on clinical outcomes is not known. We performed a single-center, retrospective study of pediatric general anesthetic cases from 2018 to 2021. PONV risk factors were defined using MPOG definitions: age ≥3 years, volatile use ≥30 minutes, PONV history, long-acting opioids, female ≥12 years, and high-risk procedure. Adequate prophylaxis was defined using the MPOG PONV-04 metric: 1 agent for 1 risk factor, 2 agents for 2 risk factors, and 3 agents for 3+ risk factors. PONV was defined as documented postoperative nausea/emesis or administration of a rescue antiemetic. Given the nonrandomized allocation of adequate prophylaxis, we used Bayesian binomial models with propensity score weighting. A total of 14,747 cases were included, with PONV in 11% (9% adequate prophylaxis versus 12% inadequate). Overall, there was evidence for reduced incidence of PONV with adequate prophylaxis: weighted median odds ratio 0.82 (95% credible interval, 0.66-1.02; probability of benefit, 0.97) and weighted marginal absolute risk reduction 1.3% (-0.1% to 3.1%). In unweighted estimates, there was an interaction between sum of risk factors and the association of adequate prophylaxis with PONV, with reduced incidence in patients with 1 to 2 risk factors (probability of benefit 0.96 and 0.95) but increased incidence in patients with 3+ risk factors receiving adequate prophylaxis (probability of benefit 0, 0.01, and 0.03 for 3, 4, and 5 risk factors). This was attenuated by weighting, with persistent benefit in 1 to 2 risk factors (probability of benefit 0.90 and 0.94) but equalization of risk in 3+ risk factors. Guideline-directed PONV prophylaxis is inconsistently associated with incidence of PONV across the guideline-defined risk spectrum. This phenomenon, and its attenuation with weighting, is consistent with 2 points: dichotomous risk-factor summation ignores differential effects of individual components, and prognostic information might exist beyond these risk factors. PONV risk at a given sum of risk factors is not homogeneous, but rather is determined by the unique composition of risk factors and other prognostic attributes. These differences appear to have been identified by clinicians, prompting use of more antiemetics. Even after accounting for these differences, however, addition of a third agent did not further reduce risk.

Association between preoperative lumbar skeletal muscle index and postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy: a retrospective study.

Sarcopenia is associated with postoperative complications; however, its impact on the quality of postoperative recovery, such as postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) and pain, remains unclear. We investigated the association of preoperative lumbar skeletal muscle mass index (LSMI) with PONV, postoperative pain, and complications. Medical records of 756 patients who underwent pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy (PPPD) were retrospectively reviewed. The skeletal muscle areas were measured on abdominal computed tomography (CT) images. LSMI was calculated by dividing the skeletal muscle area by the square of the patient's height. We analyzed the correlations between preoperative LSMI calibrated with confounding variables and PONV scores, PONV occurrence, pain scores, rescue analgesic administration, postoperative complications, and length of hospital stay. The median (1Q, 3Q) LSMI was 47.72 (40.74, 53.41) cm2/m2. The incidence rates of PONV according to time period were as follows: post-anesthesia care unit, 42/756 (5.6%); 0-6 h, 54/756 (7.1%); 6-24 h, 120/756 (15.9%); 24-48 h, 46/756 (6.1%); and overall, 234/756 (31.0%). The incidence of PONV was inversely correlated with LSMI 24-48 h post-surgery and overall. LSMI and PONV scores were negatively associated 6-24 h and 24-48 h post-surgery. There was no association between LSMI and postoperative pain scores, rescue analgesic administration, complications, or length of hospital stay. Preoperative LSMI was associated with PONV in patients undergoing PPPD. Therefore, LSMI measured on preoperative abdominal CT can be a predictive indicator of PONV. Appropriate PONV prophylaxis is necessary in patients with low LSMI before PPPD.

Standardizing the Dosage and Timing of Dexamethasone for Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting Prophylaxis at a Safety-Net Hospital System

A single dose of dexamethasone is routinely given during general anesthesia for postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) prophylaxis, although the exact dosage and timing of administration may vary between practitioners. The authors aimed to standardize the dosage and timing of this medication when given to adult patients undergoing general anesthesia for elective surgery. Baseline data for 7,483 preintervention cases were analyzed. The researchers attempted to use a standard dose of 8 to 10 mg induction of anesthesia, which, based on a literature review, was effective for PONV prophylaxis, had a similar safety profile as a 4 to 5 mg dose (including in diabetic patients), and may confer additional benefits such as improved prophylaxis and quality of recovery. The interventions included standardizing the medication concentration vials, altering electronic health record quick-select button options, simplifying the intraoperative charting process, and educating the anesthesia providers. The research team then tracked compliance with the standard of care for 2,167 cases after the interventions. Overall compliance with the standard of care increased from 21.2% preintervention to 53.7% postintervention. The number of patients not receiving dexamethasone was reduced from 29.7% to 19.4%. Patients receiving a compliant dose at a noncompliant time increased from 16.3% to 23.8%. Postanesthesia care unit antiemetic administration also decreased after the interventions. This study showed improvements in compliance with the dosage of medication with the interventions. However, compliance with the timing of administration remains challenging.

Comparison of prophylaxis strategy for postoperative nausea and vomiting and its incidence before and after the implementation of 5-hydroxytryptamine 3 in surgical setting: a single-center, retrospective study.

To investigate the association between adherence to guideline-recommended risk-based postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) prophylaxis, the antiemetics used for PONV prophylaxis, and the incidence of PONV in patients who were underwent general anesthesia before and after 5-HT3 receptor antagonists became available. Patients (≥ 20years old) who were extubated after scheduled surgery and returned to general wards between January 2021 and February 2022 and between June 2022 and July 2023 were included. Risk factors included age < 50, female, motion sickness, nonsmoker, surgical factors, and postoperative opioid use. Two and three or more prophylaxis were recommended for patients with one or two and three or more risk factors, respectively. The primary outcome was the number of patients who received adequate prophylaxis, and the secondary outcomes were antiemetic agents used during anesthesia and the incidence of PONV on postoperative days 0 and 1. PONV was defined as documented PONV or rescue antiemetic administration. From January 2021 to February 2022 and from June 2022 to July 2023, 2342 and 2682 patients were included, respectively. Before ondansetron became available, more D2 receptor antagonists were used (p < 0.001), and after ondansetron became available, both ondansetron (p < 0.001) and propofol (p < 0.001) were given more frequently. Before and after ondansetron became available, the number of patients with adequate prophylaxis was 3.7% and 9.2%, respectively (p < 0.001), and the incidence of PONV on postoperative days 0 and 1 was 44.6% and 44.0%, respectively (p = 0.67). The availability of ondansetron increased the number of patients with adequate PONV prophylaxis, but did not decrease the incidence of PONV.

Opioid-free anaesthesia reduces postoperative nausea and vomiting after thoracoscopic lung resection: a randomised controlled trial

BackgroundIntraoperative opioid use has a positive relationship with postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), and opioid-free anaesthesia (OFA) may reduce PONV. We investigated whether OFA compared with opioid-based anaesthesia would reduce PONV during the first 2 postoperative days among patients undergoing thoracoscopic lung resection. MethodsIn this randomised controlled trial, 120 adult patients were randomly assigned (1:1, stratified by sex) to receive either OFA with esketamine, dexmedetomidine, and sevoflurane, or opioid-based anaesthesia with sufentanil and sevoflurane. A surgical pleth index (SPI) of 20–50 was applied for intraoperative analgesia provision. All patients received PONV prophylaxis (dexamethasone and ondansetron) and multimodal analgesia (flurbiprofen axetil, ropivacaine wound infiltration, and patient-controlled sufentanil). The primary outcome was the occurrence of PONV during the first 48 h after surgery. ResultsThe median age was 53 yr old and 66.7% were female. Compared with opioid-based anaesthesia, OFA significantly reduced the incidence of PONV (15% vs 31.7%; odds ratio [OR]=0.38, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.16–0.91; number needed to treat, 6; P=0.031). Secondary and safety outcomes were comparable between groups, except that OFA led to a lower rate of vomiting (OR=0.23, 95% CI, 0.08–0.77) and a longer length of PACU stay (median difference=15.5 min, 95% CI, 10–20 min). The effects of OFA on PONV did not differ in the prespecified subgroups of sex, smoking status, and PONV risk scores. ConclusionsIn the context of PONV prophylaxis and multimodal analgesia, SPI-guided OFA administration halved the incidence of PONV after thoracoscopic lung resection, although it was associated with a longer stay in the PACU. Clinical trial registrationChinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2200059710).

The Association of Guideline-Directed Prophylaxis With Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting in Adult Patients: A Single-Center, Retrospective Cohort Study.

Consensus guidelines for postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) prophylaxis recommend a risk-based approach in which the number of antiemetics administered is based on a preoperative estimate of PONV risk. These guidelines have been adapted by the Multicenter Perioperative Outcomes Group (MPOG) to serve as measures of clinician and hospital compliance with guideline-recommended care. However, the impact of this approach on clinical outcomes is not known. We performed a single-center, retrospective study of adult patients undergoing general anesthesia from 2018 to 2021. Risk factors for PONV were defined using MPOG definitions: female sex, history of PONV or motion sickness, nonsmoker, inhaled anesthesia >60 minutes, high-risk procedure (cholecystectomy, laparoscopic, gynecologic), and age <50 years. Adequate prophylaxis was defined using the MPOG PONV-05 metric: at least 2 agents for patients with 1 to 2 risk factors and at least 3 agents for patients with 3+ risk factors. PONV was defined as documented PONV or receipt of rescue antiemetics. To estimate the association between adequate prophylaxis and PONV, we used Bayesian binomial models with overlap propensity score weighting. We included 76,703 cases (43% receiving adequate prophylaxis) with PONV occurring in 19%. In unadjusted and unweighted comparison, adequate prophylaxis was associated with increased incidence of PONV: median odds ratio 1.21 (95% credible interval [1.16-1.25]). However, after propensity score weighting and multivariable adjustment, adequate prophylaxis was associated with reduced relative and absolute risk for PONV: weighted marginal median odds ratio 0.90 [0.84-0.98] and absolute risk reduction (ARR) 1.6% [0.6%-2.6%]. There was evidence for a differential effect of adequate prophylaxis across the guideline-defined risk spectrum, with benefit seen in patients with 1 to 5 risk factors (conditional probabilities of benefit >0.81), but not in those at high predicted risk. Patient-specific, covariate-adjusted ARR was heterogeneous, with a median patient-specific conditional probability of benefit of 0.84 (95% credible interval, 0.73-0.90). Guideline-directed PONV prophylaxis is associated with a modest reduction in PONV, although this effect is small and heterogeneous on the absolute scale. We found evidence for a differential association between adequate prophylaxis and PONV across the guideline-defined risk spectrum, with diminution in patients at very high predicted preoperative risk. While patient-specific benefit was heterogenous, most patients had reasonably high predicted probabilities of absolute benefit from a guideline-directed strategy. Further assessment of these associations in a multicenter setting, with more robust investigation of risk prediction methods will allow for better understanding of the optimal approach to PONV prophylaxis.

Postoperative nausea and vomiting at Landspitali: A prospective study.

In the last decade, anaesthesia practice has changed at Landspitali, where the majority of patients now receive antiemetic prophylaxis, and the use of total intravenous anaesthesia is the dominant mode for maintenance of anaesthesia. The aim of this study was to assess the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in a prospective way, the use of PONV prophylaxis, and clinical risk factors associated with PONV during this era. A prospective cohort study using a convenience sample of 438 patients ≥18 years old admitted to the postoperative care unit (PACU) after elective or emergency operations in May-July 2022 at Landspitali University Hospital in Iceland. Patients answered questionnaires in the PACU and 24 h after discharge from PACU. The incidence of self-reported moderate/severe nausea (5/10 or higher on NRS) in PACU was 4% and 3% on postoperative day 1. A total of 91% of delivered anaesthetics were with intravenous medications only, and 82% of patients received at least one prophylactic medication for PONV. When asked to rate the worst nausea experienced, this was described as moderate/severe by 7% in PACU and 17% on postoperative day 1. Risk factors associated with PONV were female gender (OR 1.90, 95% CI 1.04-3.53) and a history of motion sickness or PONV (2.74, 1.51-4.94), but increasing age was protective (0.83 per decade, 0.71-0.98). Despite a more liberal administration of antiemetics, patients with more risk factors per Apfel PONV risk classification had a higher incidence of PONV. The incidence of PONV is generally low in this diverse surgical population where anaesthesia is mostly maintained with total intravenous anaesthesia and PONV prophylaxis is common. PONV remains a predictable complication following anaesthesia, suggesting further improvement in its prevention is possible.

Effect of 5% Dextrose Infusion on Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting in Patients undergoing Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Randomised Controlled Study

Introduction: Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting (PONV) is defined as nausea, vomiting, or retching occurring in the postanaesthesia care unit within the first 24 hours of postoperative period. It is most common following laparoscopic cholecystectomy, causing postoperative discomfort and increasing patients’ stay in the postanaesthesia care unit. Aim: To evaluate the effect of a 500 mL infusion of 5% dextrose on PONV in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Materials and Methods: A randomised controlled study was conducted at Department of Anaesthesiology, ESICMC PGIMSR, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India from January 2019 to June 2020, involving 90 consenting patients who were randomly assigned to two groups. One group (Group-C) received a 500 mL infusion of 5% dextrose, while the other group (Group-D) received Ringer’s lactate 30 minutes before the end of surgery. Anaesthesia and surgical techniques were standardised for all cases. Postoperatively, primary parameters such as the incidence of nausea, vomiting, and retching, and secondary parameters such as rescue antiemetic consumption and changes in blood glucose changes were recorded. The Bellville scale was used to assess PONV. Data were analysed using the Chi-square (χ2 ) test, with a significance level of 0.05. Continuous variables were reported as mean±Standard Deviation (SD), and categorical variables were reported as proportions. Results: Demographic parameters such as age (p=0.601), gender (p=0.259), weight (p=0.802), height (p=0.391), and Body Mass Index (BMI) (p=0.806) were comparable between the two study groups. A 5% dextrose infusion during laparoscopic cholecystectomy reduced nausea and vomiting during the postoperative period (p&lt;0.05), decreased the overall incidence of PONV (p&lt;0.001), and also reduced the requirement for rescue antiemetic dose (p&lt;0.004). When comparing blood sugar levels, Group-D and Group-C showed no significant difference at T1, but there was a significant difference between the both groups at T2 (T1: p=0.211, T2: p&lt;0.001). Conclusion: A 5% dextrose infusion during laparoscopic cholecystectomy reduces the incidence of PONV and decreases the need for rescue antiemetic medication. Additionally, comparing blood sugar levels, Group-D and Group-C showed a significant difference after the drug infusion. Therefore, a 5% dextrose infusion can be recommended as an effective and safe method for the prophylaxis of PONV in laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

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.&#x0D; 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.&#x0D; 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.&#x0D; 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&lt;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.&#x0D; 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.

Implementation of Electronic Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting Assessment and Best Practice Advisory Tools to Improve Patient Care.

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) affects 30% of surgical patients undergoing anesthesia. PONV is a substantial cause of increased length of stay, cost of care, and unanticipated patient admission and readmission. Seventy percent of patients received PONV prophylaxis; PONV assessment was performed in only 63% of patients in this hospital system. A standardized PONV preoperative assessment checklist and a best practice advisory (BPA) were implemented in our electronic medical record (EMR) and charting system. Anesthesia providers and postanesthesia care unit (PACU) nurses completed training on patient management for PONV, including preoperative assessment and BPA use. The PONV preoperative assessment achieved high adoption, and providers followed its recommendations in more than 90% of cases. During the 6-month implementation phase, PONV rates decreased from 56% to 43.6%. Implementing a standardized, electronic PONV preoperative risk assessment checklist and a BPA effectively reduced PONV rates in this hospital system.

Gravid status is not associated with postoperative nausea and vomiting: a matched case-control study.

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a common and unpleasant complication of general anesthesia. There are well-known risk factors that predispose a patient to develop PONV. While studies exist that explore PONV incidence in gravid and non-gravid women separately, limited studies exist to compare the two cohorts to identify if pregnancy is associated with increased risk for PONV or differences in PONV prophylaxis and treatment. This is a retrospective case-control cohort study, with 1:2 matching based on age, year of surgery, and surgical procedure. Electronic medical records were abstracted for demographic information, predisposing risk factors, prophylactic antiemetics, PONV documentation, rescue antiemetics, PACU stay, and length of hospitalization. Analyses of risk factors for PONV were performed using logistic and multinomial logistic regression analyses. 237 gravid women who underwent non-obstetric procedures with general anesthesia were identified and matched with 474 non-gravid women. PONV complicated the course of 51 (21.5%) gravid and 72 (15.2%) non-gravid women. The number of prophylactic antiemetics was fewer among gravid (median 2 [1, 2]) than non-gravid (3 [2, 3]) women (P < 0.001). No association was found between gravid status and risk for PONV (adjusted odds ratio 1.35 [95%CI 0.84, 2.17], P = 0.222). Gravid women had longer hospital lengths of stay (P < 0.001), despite having shorter surgical duration (P = 0.015). The risk for PONV is similar between gravid and similarly aged women. However, anesthesiologists administer fewer prophylactic antiemetics to gravid women during non-obstetric surgery.

Ginger (Zingiber officinale Roscoe) preparations for prophylaxis of postoperative nausea and vomiting: A Bayesian network meta-analysis

Ethnopharmacological relevanceGinger has been proposed for prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), however it remains equivocal whether ginger can be an alternative option and which certain preparation is optimal for PONV prophylaxis. Aim of the studyWe conducted a network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare and rank relative efficacy for PONV control among all available ginger preparations collected in the databases. MethodsEligible records were identified by retrieving Medline (via Pubmed), Embase, Web of Science, CENTRAL, CNKI, WHO ICTRP and ClinicalTrials.gov for randomized controlled trials that investigated the efficacy of ginger therapies for the prophylaxis of PONV. A bayesian NMA within random-effects models was implemented. Certainty of evidence for estimates was investigated following GRADE framework. We prospectively registered the protocol (CRD 42021246073) in PROSPERO. ResultsEighteen publications comprising 2199 participants with PONV were identified. Ginger oil (RR [95%CI], 0.39 [0.16, 0.96]) appeared to have the highest probability of being ranked best to decrease the incidence of postoperative vomiting (POV), with statistical significance compared with placebo, based on high to moderate confidence in estimates. With regard to reducing postoperative nausea (PON), statistically superiority was not observed in ginger regimens compared with placebo based on moderate to low certainty of evidence. Reduction in antemetic use and nausea intensity were noticed in ginger powder and oil. Ginger was significantly associated with better efficacy for Asian, older age, higher dosage, preoperative administration, hepatobiliary and gastrointestinal surgery. ConclusionsGinger oil appeared to be superior to other ginger treatments for the prophylaxis of POV. With regard to reducing PON, ginger preparations indicated no obvious advantages.

Neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting.

Despite the availability of several classes of antiemetics, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) remains a substantial burden for patients following surgery, resulting in patient dissatisfaction and prolonged stays in post-anesthesia care units and ultimately increasing the cost of care. Enhanced recovery protocols and PONV management guidelines are now centered on the assessment of the individual patient's risk for developing PONV, as well as multimodal prophylaxis using antiemetics targeting different mechanisms of action. Over the last two decades, the neurokinin-1 receptor (NK1R) has emerged as a therapeutic target for the management of PONV. This review of the literature explains the role of the NK1R and its ligand-substance P-in vomiting, describes the pharmacologic and pharmacokinetic properties of NK1R antagonists (NK1RAs) and summarizes the clinical evidence supporting NK1RAs for PONV prophylaxis in patients undergoing surgery. In particular, we discuss the therapeutic application of NK1RA in PONV prophylaxis protocols owing to their advantages over other antiemetic classes in efficacy, duration of efficacy, safety, pharmacology, and ease of administration. Future studies will be aimed at further investigating the efficacy and safety of NK1RA-based multimodal combinations, particularly among vulnerable populations (e.g., children and elderly).

The impact of the Apfel scoring system for prophylaxis of post-operative nausea and vomiting: A randomized controlled trial.

Post-operative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is common, undesirable, and stressful following surgery. By focusing attention and resources on those groups of patients most likely to develop PONV, the quality of care provided to the patients can be improved. The primary objective was to compare the incidence of PONV after implementation of the Apfel scoring system with the control group receiving prophylaxis for every surgery. The secondary objective was to identify the effect on the patient's expenditure/savings with respect to management of PONV. This prospective randomized controlled double-blinded study enrolled 70 patients undergoing surgeries under general anesthesia. Patients were randomized to group A (control group - all received PONV prophylaxis) and group B (Apfel stratification performed for PONV prophylaxis). Based on the Apfel system, the risk of PONV was classified as the grades low, moderate, and high risk. Patients at moderate and high risk received PONV prophylaxis in group B. Patients were monitored for PONV during 24 h after surgery and rescue medication given as required. The effect of implementing Apfel risk stratification on the incidence of PONV (primary outcome measure) and on patient expenditure was compared. Compared to administering prophylaxis for all patients, the incidence of PONV [group A-5 patients (14.3%)] did not increase (P = 0.428) after implementing the Apfel scoring system [group B-2 patients (5.7%)]. The number of patients spending on prophylaxis for PONV in group A [35 (100%)] was higher than that in group B [17 (48%)], without increasing expenditure on PONV treatment. Withholding prophylaxis on the basis of the Apfel scoring system did not increase the incidence of PONV compared to providing prophylaxis for all the patients. The overall cost of prevention and treatment of PONV is less when the Apfel scoring system is used.

Comparative Efficacy of Granisetron and Droperidol After Orthognathic Surgery for Prophylaxis of Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting: A Retrospective Study

In the fall of 2021, granisetron was approved for postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) management in Japan. However, the comparative efficacy of droperidol and granisetron in the field of orthognathic surgery has not been determined. We compare the efficacy of droperidol and granisetron for PONV prophylaxis following orthognathic surgery. We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent orthognathic surgery at a single institution from September 2020 to December 2022. Patients who had undergone Le Fort I osteotomy with sagittal split ramus osteotomy or isolated sagittal split ramus osteotomy were included. Patients were divided into three groups; the isolated droperidol (D), isolated granisetron (G), and droperidol with granisetron (DG) groups. General anesthesia was performed using total intravenous anesthesia for all patients; however, droperidol and granisetron were administered at the anesthesiologist's discretion. PONV prophylactic therapy included isolated droperidol, isolated granisetron, and droperidol with granisetron administration. Postoperative nausea (PON) and postoperative vomiting (POV) were determined through medical examination within 48hours following surgery. Secondary outcomes included complications due to droperidol and/or granisetron administration. Age, sex, body mass index, Apfel's score, duration of surgery, duration of anesthesia, intraoperative blood loss, and type of surgery. Statistical analysis was conducted using Fisher exact test, Mann-Whitney U test with Bonferroni correction for univariate comparison, and modified Poisson regression for comparison of PON and POV efficacy for multivariate analyses. P values <.05 were considered statistically significant. Our study included 218 participants. There were no significant differences in covariates between groups D (n=111), G (n=52), and DG (n=55). No significant difference in PON incidence was observed between groups. However, POV incidence was significantly lower in group DG than group D (relative risk, 0.21; 95% confidence interval, 0.05 to 0.86; P=.03). No significant difference in complication incidence was observed between groups. Granisetron was as effective as droperidol for PONV management, while droperidol combined with granisetron was more effective than isolated droperidol for POV management. As compared to the use of each drug separately, their combination was considered safe, with no increase in complication rates.

Sociodemographic Disparities in Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting.

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) prophylaxis is consistently considered a key indicator of anesthesia care quality. PONV may disproportionately impact disadvantaged patients. The primary objectives of this study were to examine the associations between sociodemographic factors and the incidence of PONV and clinician adherence to a PONV prophylaxis protocol. We conducted a retrospective analysis of all patients eligible for an institution-specific PONV prophylaxis protocol (2015-2017). Sociodemographic and PONV risk data were collected. Primary outcomes were PONV incidence and clinician adherence to PONV prophylaxis protocol. We used descriptive statistics to compare sociodemographics, procedural characteristics, and protocol adherence for patients with and without PONV. Multivariable logistic regression analysis followed by Tukey-Kramer correction for multiple comparisons was used to test for associations between patient sociodemographics, procedural characteristics, PONV risk, and (1) PONV incidence and (2) adherence to PONV prophylaxis protocol. Within the 8384 patient sample, Black patients had a 17% lower risk of PONV than White patients (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73-0.95; P = .006). When there was adherence to the PONV prophylaxis protocol, Black patients were less likely to experience PONV compared to White patients (aOR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.70-0.93; P = .003). When there was adherence to the protocol, patients with Medicaid were less likely to experience PONV compared to privately insured patients (aOR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.64-1.04; P = .017). When the protocol was followed for high-risk patients, Hispanic patients were more likely to experience PONV than White patients (aOR, 2.96; 95% CI, 1.18-7.42; adjusted P = .022). Compared to White patients, protocol adherence was lower for Black patients with moderate (aOR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.64-0.91; P = .003) and high risk (aOR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.42-0.78; P = .0004). Racial and sociodemographic disparities exist in the incidence of PONV and clinician adherence to a PONV prophylaxis protocol. Awareness of such disparities in PONV prophylaxis could improve the quality of perioperative care.

A pharmacological overview of aprepitant for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting

ABSTRACT Introduction Post-operative nausea and vomiting (PONV) affects 30% of all patients undergoing surgery and up to 80% of high-risk patients. Antiemetics for PONV prophylaxis target a variety of receptor systems, with varying degrees of efficacy and side effect profile. Neurokinin −1 receptor antagonists are the most recent class of compounds investigated for PONV prophylaxis, with aprepitant being the only one currently approved for this indication. Areas covered This review covers the pathophysiology of PONV, current recommendations for PONV prophylaxis, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of aprepitant, and the evidence for its efficacy in the management of PONV as a single agent and in combination therapy. Expert opinion Aprepitant is effective for PONV prophylaxis. It has superior antivomiting efficacy, long half-life, and favorable side effect profile. Data on antiemetic combinations involving aprepitant are limited, and it is not clear if the addition of other antiemetics to aprepitant results in improved PONV prophylaxis. The oral route of administration of aprepitant is a potential limitation in a busy clinical practice. However, the recent approval of an intravenous formulation could provide a more convenient route of administration. Aprepitant remains more expensive than other antiemetics, and there are no studies assessing the cost effectiveness of its use.

A CLINICAL AUDIT OF PERIOPERATIVE NAUSEA VOMITING PREVENTION AND MANAGEMENT PATHWAY AT NEPAL MEDICITI HOSPITAL

Background Postoperative Nausea and vomiting (PONV) are two of the common adverse events in the postoperative period. Though there has been advances in the eld of medicine and surgery, PONV still continues to be a problem with evidence revealing high incidence rates of 20-30% in non-high-risk groups and up to 70% in high-risk groups. This is the rst clinical audit of PONV at Nepal Mediciti Hospital after the implementation of departmental PONV pathway. This audit assessed incidence of PONV Methods in the rst twenty-four hours in all post operative patients undergoing elective surgery under anesthesia over a year period between Jan 1, 2022, to Dec 31, 2022, by reviewing the medical records. Out of 4022 patients 28 (0.7%) had all 4 ris Results k factors. 1122 (27.9%) had 3 risk factors. 1392 (34.6%) had 2 risk factors. 1094 (27.2%) had only one risk factor and 386 patients (9.6%) had no risk factors. 2912 (72.4 %) patients received Perioperative PONV prophylaxis. 1110 (27.6%) patients didn't receive perioperative PONV prophylaxis. 168 patients vomited whereas 3854 patients had no vomiting. 3716 (92.4 %) didn't have nausea and 306 (7.6%) patients had nausea. There was a call for management for PONV in 2.7% of the patients. 2% of the patients said that PONV interfered with daily activities. Overall, 27% patients didn't receive prophylaxis. Conclusion Our ndings indicate that PONV management remains a signicant target for improved clinical practice. Despite the extensive evidence base, strategies such as risk stratication, reduction of baseline risk and rational antiemetic prescription can be improved, especially in high-risk patients