Rescue Antiemetics Research Articles

DRopEridol for Abdominal pain in the emergency department for Morphine Equivalent Reduction. The DREAMER study.

Droperidol is a dopamine-2 receptor antagonist in the class of butyrophenone antipsychotics with antiemetic, sedative, analgesic, and anxiolytic properties. In the postoperative setting, droperidol provides an opioid sparing effect and decreases nausea/vomiting. Another butyrophenone antipsychotic, haloperidol, has been shown to reduce morphine milliequivalents (MME) administered when used for abdominal pain in the emergency department (ED). The purpose of this study is to evaluate if the use of droperidol for undifferentiated abdominal pain reduces the amount of MME administered in the ED. This retrospective, single-center study included patients ≥18years old who presented to the ED for undifferentiated abdominal pain. Patients must have had two separate encounters for abdominal pain, one encounter where they received droperidol and one encounter where they did not receive droperidol but did receive an opioid. The primary outcome was the difference in MME administered between the two separate patient encounters. Secondary outcomes included utilization rates of rescue antiemetics, rescue analgesics, admission to the hospital, hospital length of stay, and adverse effects (including arrhythmias and extrapyramidal symptoms). Fifty patients with self-matched encounters were evaluated. A majority of the patients were female (33/50, 66%) with a median age of 38years old. All doses of droperidol were intravenous and the majority of patients received a dose of 2.5mg (34/50, 68%; range 1.25-5mg). Non-droperidol encounters received significantly more MME compared to droperidol encounters (19.4 MME [IQR 12-30] vs 10 MME [IQR 0-20], p-value 0.0002). There were no statistically significant differences between the secondary outcomes. Among patients presenting to the ED for abdominal pain, droperidol administration resulted in a significant reduction in MME administration. Future research should include prospective studies, comparison of droperidol to haloperidol, and investigate droperidol use beyond the ED for these encounters.

Efficacy of fosaprepitant for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing gynecologic surgery: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind study

PurposeThis study aims to investigate whether adding fosaprepitant to palonosetron and dexamethasone is effective in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in high-risk patients undergoing gynecologic surgery.MethodsEligible patients undergoing gynecological surgery were randomized into two groups (1:1). One group received fosaprepitant (150 mg) and the other (control) received a placebo infusion. Both groups received a single dose of palonosetron (0.25 mg) and dexamethasone (5 mg) together with therapeutic medication. The primary endpoint was the absence of vomiting and no use of rescue antiemetics during the first 24 h after surgery; complete response rate (CRR).ResultsCRR was significantly higher in the fosaprepitant group compared to the control group 0–24 h after surgery (P = 0.037; relative risk [RR], 1.116; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.007 to 1.235). Moreover, CRR was also significantly higher during the 24–48 h (P = 0.004; RR, 1.148; 95% CI, 1.045 to 1.261) and 48–72 h (P = 0.039; RR, 1.083; 95% CI, 1.005 to 1.168) observation periods respectively. The complete control rate was higher in the fosaprepitant group than in the control group during the 0–24 h observation period (P = 0.012; RR, 1.367; 95% CI, 1.067 to 1.751). Nausea and rescue antiemetic use were comparable between the two groups. The severity of vomiting was significantly higher in the fosaprepitant group than in the control group on the second day (P = 0.016). Dynamic pain visual analog scale score was lower in the fosaprepitant group and quality of recovery-15 scores were significantly higher in the same group during 0–24 h observation period (P = 0.018 and 0.005, respectively).ConclusionsThe triple combination of fosaprepitant, palonosetron, and dexamethasone was superior in the prevention of PONV after gynecologic surgery in high-risk patients. We suggest that for high-risk patients, a triple combination therapy may be a better choice.Trial registrationRegistered at the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=171741) with No. ChiCTR2200060890 on June 13, 2022. Principal investigator: Jingdun Xie.

Utilization of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol in pediatric laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: a quality improvement project.

The obesity epidemic has led to an increased number of adolescents requiring metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS), but there is paucity of data on the impact of implementing all aspects of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols to improve outcomes in this population. We implemented a comprehensive ERAS pathway for adolescents undergoing laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). Key elements included pre-operative fasting with carbohydrate loading in the morning of surgery, comprehensive anti-emetic and analgesic regimens including intra-operative lidocaine infusion (initiated before formal ERAS launch), regional anesthesia, and early goal-directed ambulation. We tracked opioidutilization, rescue anti-emetic use, time to oral intake,and hospital length of stay (HLOS) as outcome measures, and post-operative pain and returns to the system as balancing measures. Eighty-six patients(52 patients pre-ERAS and 34 patients post-ERAS) underwent LSGwith no differences in demographics. The post-ERAS group had earlier time to oral intake (3.0 vs. 5.5 h, p = 0.003), used less rescue anti-emetics, (8.0vs.16.0 mg, p < 0.001), and had shorter HLOS (33 vs. 54 h, p < 0.001) but no difference in opioid use (0.370 vs. 0.435 MME/kg, p = 0.17), post-operative pain scores or return to the system. Our novel use of bariatric-specific ERAS protocol with intra-operative lidocaine infusion accelerates the time to goal-directed oral intake and decreases HLOS without increasing the rate of returns to the system. This study highlights the feasibility and effectiveness of adapting adult ERAS protocols to the pediatric MBS population. Level III.

Incidence of post-operative nausea and vomiting after endoscopic bariatric and metabolic therapy procedures and the role of neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists: a retrospective cohort study.

Both the transoral gastric reduction (TORe) and endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) procedures are novel endoscopic bariatric and metabolic therapies (EBMT). Our practice has an aggressive approach to prophylaxis of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) for EBMT cases, but there is divergence of practice regarding use of prophylactic neurokinin-1 receptor (NK-1) antagonists (aprepitant, fosaprepitant). Herein, we determined the incidence of PONV and its potential association with NK-1 antagonist administration following EBMT. We identified and reviewed medical records of patients who underwent EBMT between 2018 and 2023. Patients were divided into those administered or not administered an NK-1 antagonist. We analyzed rates of PONV, which was defined as rescue antiemetics during anesthesia recovery. A propensity score was calculated, and outcomes were assessed using generalized estimating equations with inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). We identified 404 patients undergoing EBMT (256 [63%] TORe, 148 [37%] ESG), and of these 253 patients developed PONV, (62.6% [95% CI: 57.9% to 67.3%]). NK-1 antagonists were administered to 119 (29.5%) patients. PONV was experienced by 42 (35%) and 211 (74%) of patients who were or were not administered an NK-1 antagonist, respectively (IPTW OR = 0.18, [95%CI: 0.10 to 0.31], P < 0.001). EBMT has a high incidence of PONV during anesthesia recovery. Administration of a NK-1 antagonist as part of a multiagent PONV prophylaxis regimen dramatically reduces risk for this common adverse event.

Comparison of remimazolam and midazolam for preventing intraoperative nausea and vomiting during cesarean section under spinal anesthesia: a randomized controlled trial.

Preventing intraoperative nausea and vomiting (IONV) is crucial for maternal safety during cesarean section under spinal anesthesia. While midazolam is known to prevent IONV, we hypothesized that remimazolam would be superior due to its minimal hemodynamic effects. We compared the effects of the two drugs on IONV. Parturients scheduled for cesarean section were randomly assigned to receive either midazolam or remimazolam. They received midazolam 2 mg or remimazolam 5 mg, with additional doses administered upon request. The primary outcome measure was the incidence of newly developed IONV during sedation. Other outcomes included overall IONV, rescue antiemetic use, shivering, hemodynamic variables, sedation scale scores, and satisfaction scores. Data from 80 participants were analyzed. Deeper sedation was induced in the remimazolam group (PGroup × Time < 0.001) despite comparable hemodynamic trends between the groups. The incidence of overall IONV was comparable between the two groups (27.5% in the midazolam group vs. 17.5% in the remimazolam group, absolute risk reduction [ARR]: 0.100, 95% CI [-0.082, 0.282], P = 0.284); however, newly developed IONV during sedation was significantly reduced in the remimazolam group (20.0% vs. 5.0%, ARR: 0.150, 95% CI [0.009, 0.291], P = 0.043). The need for rescue antiemetics was also lower in the remimazolam group (15.0% vs. 2.5%, ARR: 0.125, 95% CI [0.004, 0.246], P = 0.048). Remimazolam significantly reduced the incidence and severity of newly developed IONV compared with midazolam, with minimal impact on hemodynamics, making it a useful sedative option for cesarean section.

Can a Continuous Wound Infiltration System Replace Intravenous Patient-Controlled Analgesia for Postoperative Pain Management after a Single-Port Access Laparoscopy?

Background: The aim of this study was to determine whether continuous wound infiltration (CWI) can replace intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV PCA) and to investigate effective pain control strategies after a single-port access (SPA) laparoscopy for adnexal disease. Methods: A total of 470 patients (the CWI group [n = 109], the IV PCA group [n = 198], and the combined group [n = 163]) who underwent an SPA adnexal laparoscopy and who received CWI or IV PCA for postoperative pain management were retrospectively reviewed. The numeric rating scale (NRS) pain score at 6, 12, 24, and 48 h (h) after surgery and the total amount of fentanyl administered via IV PCA were collected. The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) and the total amount of rescue antiemetic drugs administered were also evaluated. Results: The mean NRS pain scores at 6 h (combined vs. PCA vs. CWI, 3.08 vs. 3.44 vs. 3.96, p < 0.001), 12 h (2.10 vs. 2.65 vs. 2.82, p < 0.001), and 24 h (1.71 vs. 2.01 vs. 2.12, p < 0.001) after surgery were significantly lower in the combined group. CWI showed a similar pain-reduction effect after surgery compared to IV PCA, except for the acute phase (within 6 h after surgery). The incidence of PONV during the entire hospitalization period was significantly lower in the CWI group compared to the groups using IV PCA (p < 0.05). The combined group had a significantly lower incidence of PONV and use of rescue antiemetics than the IV PCA group (p < 0.05). The combined group required significantly less total PCA fentanyl compared to the IV PCA group (combined vs. PCA, 622.1 μg vs. 703.1 μg, p < 0.001). Conclusions: CWI is an effective alternative to IV PCA and has fewer side effects. Combined use of CWI and IV PCA may be an ideal pain management strategy, offering a strong pain-reduction effect and only moderate side effects.

Comparative effectiveness of acupoint stimulation for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting after general anesthesia: A network meta-analysis of randomized trials.

To systematically evaluate the effectiveness of different acupoint stimulation techniques in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) after general anesthesia. We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Embase for relevant papers, about the effect of acupoint stimulation for preventing PONV from their inception to July 31, 2023. Two reviewers performed study screening, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment. We focused on patient important outcomes including the incidence of PONV, postoperative nausea (PON), or postoperative vomiting (POV), and the number of patients requiring antiemetic rescue. We conducted network meta-analyses to estimate the relative effectiveness between different acupoint stimulation using Stata 17.0 and Revman 5.3 software. We included 50 randomized trials involving 7,372 participants (median age: 43.5 years, female: 73.3%). The network meta-analysis revealed that compared with the control (sham acupoint stimulation or blank control), antiemetic alone could significantly reduce the incidence of POV (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.69), but could not significantly reduce the incidence of PONV and PON (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.69; RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.10; respectively); both TEAS and electroacupuncture alone significantly reduced the incidence of PONV, PON, and POV, and combined with antiemetic was usually more effective than single acupoint stimulation. Both TEAS and electroacupuncture, with or without antiemetic, could significantly reduce the incidences of postoperative nausea and vomiting after general anesthesia.

Bilateral Ultrasound-Guided External Oblique Intercostal Block Vs. Modified Thoracoabdominal Nerve Block Through Perichondrial Approach for Postoperative Analgesia in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Study.

The objective of the present study was to evaluate morphine consumption and pain scores 24h postoperatively to compare the effects of a bilateral External Oblique Intercostal (EOI) block with those of a Modified Thoracoabdominal Nerve Block Trough Perichondrial Approach (M-TAPA) block in laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). Fifty-eight patients aged between 18 and 65years of with American Society of Anesthesiologists class II-III were included in this randomized, double-blinded study. Patients were assigned into two groups either EOI block or M-TAPA block. The primary outcome was cumulative morphine consumption within the first postoperative 24h. Secondary outcomes were numerical rating scale (NRS) scores at rest and during activity, QoR-15 Patient Questionnaire scores, incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), number of patients requiring rescue analgesic and antiemetics drugs, and complications. There was no statistically significant difference between the groups in terms of morphine consumption in the first 24h (EOI block; 10.74 ± 3.94mg vs. M-TAPA block; 11.67 ± 4.66mg, respectively). In addition, no significant difference between the two groups in the NRS and PONV scores, total QoR-15 scores, and the number of patients requiring rescue analgesics and antiemetics. EOI block and M-TAPA block showed similar effectiveness for morphine consumption within 24h postoperatively and in pain scores in LSG.

Preoperative chewing gum versus pericardial p6 point acupressure for attenuation of postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy – A comparative evaluation

: Preoperative use of non-pharmacological agents like chewing gum and acupressure at Pericardial p6 point in prevention on postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients posted for laparascopic cholecystectomy under general anaesthesia. The primary objective of the study was to compare the efficacy of preoperative chewing gum and pericardial P6 acupressure point application in reduction of postoperative nausea and vomiting. Secondary objective was to assess the anxiety and satisfaction scores of the patients in the study. In this Quasi experimental study,3 groups of 62 patients each, with intact mental status in the age group of 18-60 years of either gender posted for laparoscopic cholecystectomy under general anaesthesia, after obtaining written informed consent were included in the study.Group 1 patients received standard treatment, group 2 patients received standard treatment plus Wrigley’s extra sugar free chewing gum, group 3 patients received standard treatment plus bilateral p6 point acupressure by pressure right drug free single use pressure sensitive wrist strip." Patients were assessed for anxiety in preoperative period, before and after the intervention. In postoperative period patients were assessed for nausea and vomiting, requirement of rescue antiemetic and patient satisfaction.The Chi-square test or Fischer’s exact test, as applicable was employed to compare the postoperative incidence of nausea and vomiting.Highly significant decrease in Amsterdam anxiety score in chewing gum group (p&amp;#60;0.001), followed by significant decrease in acupressure group (p=0.005). No significant change in nausea in all the groups, but in context of vomiting, both chewing gum and acupressure showed significant decrease in number of episodes in first 6 hrs (p=0.013). For rescue antiemetics in nausea, there was no significant variance in usage among the groups. However, for vomiting, a substantial decrease was found. Group 2 required significantly less (p=0.001) amount of antiemetics followed by group 3.The patients in the chewing gum group scored more in the satisfaction scoring index and this was found to be statistically significant (p = 0.010). Bothchewing gum and acupressure reduced nausea and vomiting and the need for rescue antiemetics. However, chewing gum proved to be better among the two.

P6 acupressure versus sham acupressure for prevention of intraoperative nausea and vomiting during cesarean delivery under neuraxial anesthesia: a randomized controlled trial

IntroductionIntraoperative and postoperative nausea and vomiting (IONV and PONV) are common during cesarean delivery (CD) with neuraxial anesthesia. Limited information exists on the antiemetic benefit of combined P6 acupoint stimulation with acupressure (P6 acupressure) and pharmacologic antiemetics on preventing IONV and PONV after CD. This study assessed the antiemetic efficacy of P6 acupressure compared to a non-P6 acupoint stimulation with acupressure (sham acupressure) in preventing IONV during CD. MethodsWe performed a randomized double-blinded trial comparing the efficacy of intraprocedural P6 acupressure versus sham acupressure in preventing IONV during CD after following the Society for Obstetric Anesthesia and Perinatology enhanced recovery recommendations. Subjects were instructed to apply additional pressure at the acupressure sites when they perceived nausea. The primary outcome was the incidence of IONV, and the secondary outcome was the need for rescue antiemetic treatment. ResultsNinety-nine P6 acupressure and 100 sham acupressure subjects were studied. There was no difference in the incidence of intraoperative nausea (67%), vomiting (17%), emesis episodes, or the need for rescue antiemetics intraoperatively. There were also no differences in the incidence of PONV and antiemetic treatment from PACU to discharge. At discharge, 70% of respondents reported experiencing nausea, but only 10% reported it affected self-care. Approximately 50% of the patients in both groups were satisfied with acupressure therapy. ConclusionP6 acupressure did not reduce the incidence of IONV or PONV when combined with antiemetic therapy per enhanced recovery recommendations. There does not appear to be sufficient evidence to support using P6 acupressure for IONV prevention.

Comparison of opioid-free and opioid-inclusive propofol anaesthesia for thyroid and parathyroid surgery: arandomised controlled trial.

Postoperative nausea and vomiting occur frequently following thyroid and parathyroid surgery and are associated with worse patient outcomes. We hypothesised that opioid-free propofol anaesthesia would reduce the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting compared with opioid-inclusive propofol anaesthesia in patients undergoing these procedures. We conducted a randomised, double-blinded controlled trial in adult patients scheduled to undergo thyroid and parathyroid surgery at two medical centres in mainland China. Patients were allocated randomly (1:1, stratified by sex and trial site) to an opioid-free anaesthesia group (esketamine, lidocaine, dexmedetomidine and propofol) or an opioid-inclusive group (sufentanil and propofol). Propofol infusions were titrated to bispectral index 45-55. Patients received prophylaxis for nausea and vomiting using dexamethasone and ondansetron and multimodal analgesia with paracetamol and flurbiprofen axetil. The primary outcome was the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting in the first 48 h after surgery. We assessed 557 patients for eligibility and 394 completed this trial. The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting in the first postoperative 48 h was lower in the opioid-free anaesthesia group (10/197, 5%) compared with opioid-inclusive group (47/197, 24%) (OR (95%CI) 0.17 (0.08-0.35), p < 0.001), yielding a number needed to treat of 5.3. Additionally, opioid-free propofol anaesthesia was associated with a reduced need for rescue anti-emetics, lower rates of hypotension and desaturation after tracheal extubation, and higher patient satisfaction. Time to tracheal extubation was prolonged slightly in the opioid-free group. The two groups had similar postoperative pain scores and 30-day outcomes. Opioid-free propofol anaesthesia reduced postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing thyroid and parathyroid surgery. An opioid-free anaesthetic regimen can optimise anaesthetic care during thyroid and parathyroid surgery.

A Meta-Analysis of Dextrose Infusion as Perioperative Strategy on Preventing Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting

Introduction: Dextrose infusion was introduced as a non-pharmacological perioperative strategy to decrease the PONV incidence. However, current published studies reported remain inconsistent and debatable results regarding the efficacy. This research was conducted to improve the evidence-based perioperative strategies of administering dextrose infusion to prevent PONV. Method: A literature search was conducted for randomized controlled trial studies (RCTs) in patients who administered dextrose infusion compared to other infusion fluid perioperatively. A quantitative analysis using Review Manager 5.4 was performed with a 95% confidence interval that was visualized in the forest plot graph using the fixed-effects or random-effects model based on the heterogeneity. Results: A total of 18 RCTs studies analyzed demonstrated there were significant differences in composite PONV (RR, 0.66, 95% CI 0.60, 0.74; P &lt; 0.00001; I2=46%), patients with postoperative antiemetic rescue requirements (RR, 0.67, 95% CI 0.53, 0.86; P &lt; 0.001; I2=68%), and postoperative blood glucose levels (SMD, 2.63, 95% CI 1.76, 3.50; P &lt; 00001; I2=97%). However, there were insignificant results in PONV severity (SMD, -0.94, 95% CI -2.20, 0.31; P = 0.14; I2=97%), patients with analgesic requirements (RR, 0.84, 95% CI 0.60, 1.19; P = 0.33; I2=81%), dose of analgesic requirements (SMD, -2.31, 95% CI -5.76, 1.14; P = 0.19; I2=99%), and PACU stay (MD, -24.73, 95% CI -66.07, 16.61; P &lt; 0.24; I2=99%). Conclusion: This meta-analysis demonstrated that administering dextrose infusion perioperatively prevents both the PONV incidence and postoperative rescue antiemetic requirements, and also increase postoperative blood glucose levels. However, dextrose infusion is not associated with reducing the PONV severity, postoperative analgesic requirements, a dose of postoperative analgesic use, and PACU stay. .

Effect of intravenous palonosetron on hypotension induced by spinal anesthesia for cesarean section: A randomized controlled trial.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of intravenous palonosetron compared to ondansetron on hypotension induced by spinal anesthesia in women undergoing cesarean section. Fifty-four women scheduled for elective cesarean section were, randomly allocated to ondansetron group (n = 27) or palonosetron group (n = 27). Ten minutes prior to the administration of spinal anesthesia, participants received an intravenous injection of either ondansetron or palonosetron. A prophylactic phenylephrine infusion was initiated immediately following the intrathecal administration of bupivacaine and fentanyl. The infusion rate was titrated to maintain adequate blood pressure until the time of fetal delivery. The primary outcome was total dose of phenylephrine administered. The secondary outcomes were nausea or vomiting, the need for rescue antiemetics, hypotension, bradycardia, and shivering. Complete response rate, defined as the absence of postoperative nausea and vomiting and no need for additional antiemetics, were assessed for up to 24 hours post-surgery. No significant differences were observed in the total dose of phenylephrine used between the ondansetron and palonosetron groups (387.5 μg [interquartile range, 291.3-507.8 μg versus 428.0 μg [interquartile range, 305.0-507.0 μg], P = 0.42). Complete response rates also showed no significant differences between the groups both within two hours post-spinal anesthesia (88.9% in the ondansetron group versus 100% in the palonosetron group; P = 0.24) and at 24 hours post-surgery (81.5% in the ondansetron group versus 88.8% in the palonosetron group; P = 0.7). In addition, there was no difference in other secondary outcomes. Prophylactic administration of palonosetron did not demonstrate a superior effect over ondansetron in mitigating hemodynamic changes or reducing phenylephrine requirements in patients undergoing spinal anesthesia with bupivacaine and fentanyl for cesarean section.

Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trial of Topical Capsaicin for Delayed Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting.

We examined the efficacy of topical capsaicin in reducing delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). Adults on highly emetogenic chemotherapy regimens applied 2 g of capsaicin ointment (0.075%) or matching placebo four times a day to the abdomen for 5 days in addition to standard antiemetic regimen in this blinded randomized controlled trial. Patients were monitored for nausea and vomiting in the immediate (day 1), delayed (days 2-5), and extended phases (days 2-15). Self-reported incidence and daily episodes of CINV were compared between the groups. Onset, severity, need for rescue antiemetics, cumulative vomiting episodes, and safety were also compared. In total, 160 patients were enrolled. The final modified intention-to-treat population included 75 patients each in the capsaicin and placebo groups. Fewer patients experienced nausea (36.0% [n = 27] v 53.3% [n = 40]; P = .033) and vomiting (28.0% [n = 21] v 42.7% [n = 32]; P = .060) in the capsaicin arm during the delayed phase. During the extended phase, there was a significantly lower incidence of nausea (44% v 64.0%; P = .014) in the capsaicin arm. No difference in nausea (26.7% v 25.3%) or vomiting (22.7% v 18.7%) was evident in the immediate phase. The average daily episodes of nausea and vomiting were significantly fewer in the capsaicin arm during the delayed and extended phases. With capsaicin, no grade 3 nausea (9.3% v 0.0%; P = .007) was observed, and the time to first nausea and vomiting was significantly prolonged. There were no differences between the groups with respect to rescue antiemetics, unscheduled hospital visits, and adverse events. Topical capsaicin reduced the incidence of nausea and the average number of vomiting episodes during delayed and extended phases without increasing adverse effects.

Intraoperative transcutaneous electroacupoint stimulation on early postoperative fatigue in patients with Parkinson's disease undergoing deep brain stimulation surgery

BackgroundIn this clinical trial, we evaluated the effects of transcutaneous electroacupoint stimulation (TEAS) on postoperative fatigue (POF) in Parkinson disease (PD) patients undergoing deep brain stimulation (DBS) surgery. MethodsA total 60 PD patients undergoing DBS surgery were enrolled. They were randomized to receive either electrical stimulation [alternative frequency 2/10 Hz, dense and disperse, intensity adjusted to the maximum tolerated by the participants (6–15 mAmp)] via surface electrodes (TEAS group) or surface electrodes only without electrical stimulation (Con group) at bilateral Zusanli and Sanyinjiao acupuncture points. All participants received their assigned intervention (TEAS or Con) during the 1st stage of surgery [(except during microelectrode recording (MER)] and the entire 2nd stage of surgery. Intraoperative anesthetic requirements were adjusted based on bispectral index (BIS) monitor. POF was assessed by Christensen fatigue scales (ChrFS), along with Quality of Recovery-15 (QoR-15) and mini-mental state examination (MMSE) postoperatively over a 7-day-period. We recorded the usage of rescue analgesics and anti-emetics. ResultsFifty-nine patients’ datasets were included for final analyses. Fewer patients in TEAS experienced severe POF (defined as ChrFS ≥6) at T3 than those in the Con group (TEAS vs. Con: 7 vs. 22, p < 0.001). During the 1st stage of surgery, more patients in Con group required dexmedetomidine infusion (TEAS vs. Con: 2 vs. 6; P < 0.01). Total dosages of propofol and remifanil during the 2nd stage of surgery were TEAS vs. Con: 374.7 ± 61.2 vs 421.5 ± 81.9; p < 0.001 and 572.3 ± 82.0 vs. 662 ± 148.2; P < 0.001, respectively. Postoperative rescue analgesics (TEAS vs. Con: 2 vs. 6; P < 0.001) were used less in the TEAS group. TEAS patients reported better POF, MMSE and QoR15 scores than those in the Con group during most of the assessment period. ConclusionsIntraoperative TEAS decreased the severity of POF, reduced intraoperative anesthetic requirements and facilitated post-DBS recovery in this group of PD patients.

A study comparing the effectiveness of ondansetron versus ondansetron combined with dexamethasone for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in laparoscopic surgeries

Abstract Background: Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) frequently occur as a side effect of general anesthesia, which can be intensified by the introduction of gas into the peritoneal cavity to create pneumoperitoneum during laparoscopic surgeries. Aims and Objectives: This study examines the comparative effectiveness of ondansetron as a standalone treatment versus its combination with dexamethasone in preventing PONV during laparoscopic surgeries. The research aims to assess the efficacy and duration of anti-nausea and anti-vomiting effects provided by ondansetron alone and in combination with dexamethasone. Materials and Methods: The Institutional Ethics Committee (IEC) approved the trial materials and methods following thorough deliberation. Before surgery, written informed consent was obtained from all patients. Sixty patients were recruited for the study and randomly allocated into groups, denoted as Group O and Group D, each consisting of 30 patients. Group O received intravenous administration of 4 mg of ondansetron, while Group D received a combination of 4 mg of ondansetron and 4 mg of dexamethasone intravenously 30 min before extubation. Duration of Study: The research was conducted at MGM Medical College and Hospital, located in Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, India, from May 2016 to May 2017. Results: In this study, mild and moderate nausea were more prevalent in Group O at the 4-h mark, but there was no notable difference at 24 h. Mild and moderate retching showed no significant variance at 4 h, but Group O exhibited significantly more at 24 h. Mild, moderate, and severe vomiting were inconsequential in both groups at 4 h, but Group O showed a higher incidence of mild and moderate vomiting at 24 h. Instances of severe vomiting were absent in both groups. The need for rescue antiemetics after 24 h and medication-related side effects did not show significant differences between the two groups. Conclusion: The incidence of PONV was reduced in the combination group (ondansetron + dexamethasone) compared to ondansetron alone. Consequently, the combination group had a lower requirement for rescue antiemetics. Thus, the effectiveness of combination therapy surpassed that of ondansetron alone.

Intraoperative Brainstem Auditory Evoked Potentials and Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting After Microvascular Decompression

We performed this study to investigate the effect of intraoperative brainstem auditory evoked potential (IBAEP) changes on the development of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) after microvascular decompression (MVD) for neurovascular cross compression. A total of 373 consecutive cases were treated with MVD. The use of rescue antiemetics after surgery was used as an objective indicator of PONV. IBAEP monitoring was routinely performed in all. The use of rescue antiemetics was significantly associated with female sex (OR=3.427; 95% CI, 2.077-5.654; P < 0.001), PCA use (OR=3.333; 95% CI, 1.861-5.104; P < 0.001), and operation time (OR=1.017; 95% CI, 1.008-1.026; P < 0.001). A Wave V peak delay of more than 1.0milliseconds showed a significant relation with the use of rescue antiemetics (OR=1.787; 95% CI, 1.114-2.867; P= 0.016) and a strong significant relation with the use of rescue antiemetics more than 5 times (OR=2.426; 95% CI, 1.372-4.290; P= 0.002). A wave V peak delay of more than 1.0milliseconds might have value as a predictor of PONV after MVD. More detailed neurophysiological studies will identify the exact pathophysiology underlying PONV after MVD.

Effect of Propofol Infusion on Need for Rescue Antiemetics in Postanesthesia Care Unit After Volatile Anesthesia: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) are frequent after volatile anesthesia. We hypothesized that coadministration of propofol with volatile anesthetic compared to pure volatile anesthetics would decrease the need for postoperative antiemetic treatments and shorten recovery time in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU). We retrospectively identified adult patients who underwent procedures using general anesthesia with volatile agents, with or without propofol infusion, from May 2018 through December 2020, and who were admitted to the PACU. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) analysis was performed using generalized estimating equations with robust variance estimates to assess whether propofol was associated with decreased need for rescue antiemetics. Among 47,847 patients, overall IPTW rescue antiemetic use was 4.7% for 17,573 patients who received propofol and 8.2% for 30,274 who did not (odds ratio [OR], 0.55; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.49-0.61; P <.001). This effect associated with propofol was present regardless of the intensity of antiemetic prophylaxis (OR, 0.59, 0.51, and 0.58 for 0-1, 2, and ≥3 antiemetics used, respectively), procedural duration (OR, 0.54, 0.62, and 0.47 for ≤2.50, 2.51-4.00, ≥4.01 hours), and type of volatile agent (OR, 0.51, 0.52, and 0.57 for desflurane, isoflurane, and sevoflurane) (all P <.001). This effect was dose dependent, with little additional benefit for the reduction in the use of PACU antiemetics when propofol rate exceeded 100 μg/kg/min. Patients who received rescue antiemetics required longer PACU recovery time than those who did not receive antiemetics (ratio of the geometric mean, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.28-1.33; P <.001), but use of propofol did not affect PACU recovery time (ratio of the geometric mean, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.98-1.01; P =.56). The addition of propofol infusions to volatile-based anesthesia is associated with a dose-dependent reduction in the need for rescue antiemetics in the PACU regardless of the number of prophylactic antiemetics, duration of procedure, and type of volatile agent used, without affecting PACU recovery time.

The Efficacy of Acupressure for Nausea and Vomiting After Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Meta-analysis Study.

This meta-analysis aims to explore the impact of acupressure on nausea and vomiting for patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). Acupressure may have some potential in managing nausea and vomiting after LC. PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, EBSCO, and Cochrane library databases were systematically searched, and we included randomized controlled trials assessing the effect of acupressure on nausea and vomiting for LC. Six randomized controlled trials were finally included in the meta-analysis. Overall, compared with control intervention for LC, acupressure was associated with significantly reduced incidence of nausea at 2 hours [odds ratio (OR) = 0.37; 95% CI = 0.21-0.67; P = 0.001] and nausea at 6 hours (OR = 0.38; 95% CI = 0.22-0.66; P = 0.0006; Fig. 4), and decreased need of rescue antiemetic (OR = 0.41; 95% CI = 0.20-0.85; P = 0.02; Fig. 8), but demonstrated no obvious impact on vomiting at 2 hours (OR = 0.76; 95% CI = 0.28-2.10; P = 0.60), vomiting at 6 hours (OR = 0.49, 95% CI = 0.20-1.20; P = 0.12), nausea at 24 hours (OR = 0.71; 95% CI = 0.37-1.35; P = 0.30), or vomiting at 24 hours (OR = 0.81; 95% CI = 0.28-2.35; P = 0.69). Acupressure is effective in controlling nausea and decreasing rescue antiemetics for LC.

Which 5-HT3 antagonist prevents nausea and vomiting in cesarean section more effectively: a network meta-analysis.

Selective 5-hydroxytryptamine 3 receptor (5-HT3) antagonists are commonly used to prevent nausea and vomiting (NV) after cesarean section, but the comparative efficacy of different 5-HT3 antagonists remains unclear. This network meta-analysis aimed to determine which 5-HT3 antagonists might be the preferred choice for preventing NV in parturient scheduled for elective cesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia. PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane library, and Web of Science were searched for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published before August 24, 2023. Random network meta-analysis was performed using Stata 14.0 to estimate the efficacy of different 5-HT3 antagonists in preventing intra- and post-operative NV. Twenty-eight studies involving seven dosing regimens of three 5-HT3 antagonists were included. Pooled results showed that ondansetron 12 mg was superior to other six dosing regimens in the prevention of postoperative NV (PONV), PON, and POV, with the ranking probability of 80.2%, 95.8%, and 87.7%, respectively, followed by granisetron two mg. Ondansetron 4 mg might be the first choice for preventing intraoperative NV (IONV) (92.8%), with the least use of postoperative rescue antiemetics (90.6%). Granisetron 3 mg and tropisetron 2 mg might be the best options for preventing ION and IOV, respectively. Based on available data, ondansetron 12 mg may have the best efficacy in preventing PONV, PON, and POV. Additionally, more studies are warranted to compare the safety of ondansetron 12 mg versus granisetron two mg.