A rational approach to the control of postoperative nausea and vomiting: evidence from systematic reviews. Part II. Recommendations for prevention and treatment, and research agenda

Acupuncture alleviates acute peritonitis: A case report

Many inflammatory and infectious entities can affect the peritoneum acutely, and patients with peritonitis often have painful expressions. Abdominal pain can be aggravated by coughing, breathing, and turning the body. Here we report the case of an 88-year-old patient with acute gastrointestinal perforation. The patient has been experiencing pain in the right lower abdomen, presenting persistent colic. The X-ray of abdomen and abdominal computed tomography showed perforation of digestive tract. In addition to the use of anti-infection and stomach protection agents, we use different analgesic injections, but the effect on reducing the pain was not obvious. After acupuncture treatment, the patient quickly relieved the pain of acute peritonitis in 1 minute. However, to our knowledge, there is few literature showing that acupuncture relieves preoperative opioid-induced hyperalgesia in patients with acute peritonitis. Based on this case, we suggest acupuncture as an option in the management of relieving the pain of acute peritonitis when opioid therapy is ineffective.

Effect of pre-operative carbohydrate loading on aspiration risk evaluated with ultrasonography in type 2 diabetes patients: a prospective observational pilot study

Owing to concerns about delayed gastric emptying or hyperglycemia, evidence is lacking regarding whether pre-operative carbohydrate loading can be routinely administered to patients with type 2 diabetes. The objective of this study was to determine the aspiration risk and gastric volume after pre-operative carbohydrate loading in patients with type 2 diabetes. A prospective, single-center, observational cohort study. The study was conducted at a tertiary teaching hospital in Seoul, Korea, from May 2020 to May 2021. Patients (n = 49) with type 2 diabetes underwent elective noncardiac surgery. All patients were administered carbohydrate loading two hours before surgery. Once in the operating room, they underwent gastric ultrasonography to determine gastric volume. The anesthesiologists monitored the patients' glucose concentrations during and after surgery. The primary outcome was the predicted risk of aspiration. The secondary outcomes were gastric volume, antral grade, satisfaction score, and perioperative glucose profile. Forty-nine patients were analyzed. All patients had a low risk of aspiration after carbohydrate loading, as follows: 33 (67.3%) patients classified as antral grade 0 and 16 (32.7%) patients classified as antral grade 1. The median time from carbohydrate drink ingestion to ultrasound examination was 120 min (IQR 115-139). After carbohydrate loading, the median gastric volume in the right-lateral position after carbohydrate loading was 2.64 ml (IQR 0.00-32.05). The mean glucose concentrations (SD) were 134 (24) mg/dl, 159 (37) mg/dl, 150 (32) mg/dl, and 165 (36) mg/dl at baseline, after induction, 30 min after surgery, and in the post anesthesia care unit, respectively. The median satisfaction score of the patients was 5 (IQR 4-5). Pre-operative carbohydrate loading may be feasible for patients with type 2 diabetes and without complications.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04456166). Registered on 2 July 2020.

Incidence and risk factors of postoperative nausea and vomiting in lung cancer patients following lobectomy and application of analgesic pumps

Objective

To investigate the occurrence rate and risk factors of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in lung cancer patients following lobectomy and application of analgesic pumps.

Methods

This retrospective study reviewed clinical data from patients that had undergone lobectomy for lung cancer under general anaesthesia. The risk factors of PONV were analysed using binary logistic regression models.

Results

A total of 203 patients (97 females) were enrolled. The rate of PONV was 29.6% (60 of 203 patients) for all patients, 42.3% (41 of 97 patients) for female patients and 17.9% (19 of 106 patients) for male patients. Female patients undergoing thoracotomy (odds ratio [OR] 7.770, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.747, 34.568) or having surgery durations ≥120 min (OR 4.493, 95% CI 1.502, 12.851) were significantly more susceptible to PONV. The risk of PONV in female patients that received postoperative dolasetron (100 mg, once a day) was significantly lower (OR 0.075, 95% CI 0.007, 0.834). For male patients, the risk of PONV was significantly lower in those with a body mass index ≥24 kg/m² (OR 0.166; 95% CI 0.035, 0.782).

Conclusion

Female and male patients have different risk factors for PONV following lobectomy for lung cancer and application of analgesic pumps.

Predictors of Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting After Endoscopic Skull Base Surgery

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS

The objective of this study is to evaluate the impact of patient and surgical factors, including approach and reconstruction type, on postoperative nausea and vomiting episodes following endoscopic skull base surgery.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective review.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective chart review from July 2018 to August 2020 of 99 consecutive patients undergoing endoscopic skull base surgery at a tertiary academic skull base surgery program. All patients were treated with a standardized postoperative protocol consisting of scheduled ondansetron, along with promethazine and scopolamine for breakthrough nausea and vomiting episodes. Cumulative nausea and vomiting episodes throughout hospital stay were recorded for each patient.

RESULTS

Of the 99 patients identified, the mean number of nausea and vomiting episodes per patient were 0.4 ± 1.2 and 0.3 ± 0.7, respectively. Female sex (β = .65, P = .034) and extended surgical approach (β = .90, P = .027) were associated with increased risk for postoperative nausea. Furthermore, female sex (β = .44, P = .018), cavernous sinus dissection (β = .52, P = .002), and extended approach (β = .79, P = .025) significantly increased odds of postoperative vomiting episodes. There was no association between total operative time or total postoperative opioid dose and nausea and vomiting episodes (all Ps > .05). Neither increased nausea nor vomiting episodes significantly increased odds of prolonged hospitalization (P = .105 and .164, respectively).

CONCLUSION

This report highlights novel risk factors for patients undergoing endoscopic skull base surgery. Upfront standing antiemetic therapy may be considered when treating patients with independent predictors of postoperative nausea and vomiting, including female sex, cavernous sinus dissection, and extended surgical approach.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4 Laryngoscope, 132:761-768, 2022.

Opioid-Free Anesthesia Benefit-Risk Balance: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) is used in surgery to avoid opioid-related side effects. However, uncertainty exists in the balance between OFA benefits and risks. We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing OFA to opioid-based anesthesia (OBA) in five international databases. The co-primary outcomes were postoperative acute pain and morphine consumption at 2, 24, and 48 h. The secondary outcomes were the incidence of postoperative chronic pain, hemodynamic tolerance, severe adverse effects, opioid-related adverse effects, and specific adverse effects related to substitution drugs. Overall, 33 RCTs including 2209 participants were assessed. At 2 h, the OFA groups had lower pain scores at rest MD (0.75 (−1.18; −0.32)), which did not definitively reach MCID. Less morphine was required in the OFA groups at 2 and 24 h, but with very small reductions: 1.61 mg (−2.69; −0.53) and −1.73 mg (p < 0.05), respectively, both not reaching MCID. The reduction in PONV in the OFA group in the PACU presented an RR of 0.46 (0.38, 0.56) and an RR of 0.34 (0.21; 0.56), respectively. Less sedation and shivering were observed in the OFA groups with an SMD of −0.81 (−1.05; −0.58) and an RR of 0.48 (0.33; 0.70), respectively. Quantitative analysis did not reveal differences between the hemodynamic outcomes, although severe side effects have been identified in the literature. No clinically significant benefits were observed with OFA in terms of pain and opioid use after surgery. A clear benefit of OFA use was observed with respect to a reduction in PONV. However, more data on the safe use of OFAs should be collected and caution should be taken in the development of OFA.

Consideration of Migraines Among Risk Factors for Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting

The impact of migraine on postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is controversial, and few studies have focused on their relationship. Thus, we investigated the impact of migraine, among other risk factors, on PONV in a large retrospective study. We analyzed 10 years of clinical data from the Smart Clinical Data Warehouse of Hallym University Medical Center. PONV was defined as nausea or vomiting within the first 24 h after surgery. Patients diagnosed by a neurologist and with a history of triptan use before surgery were enrolled into the migraine group. We enrolled 208,029 patients aged > 18 years who underwent general anesthesia (GA), among whom 19,786 developed PONV within 24 h after GA and 1982 had migraine. Before propensity score matching, the unadjusted and fully adjusted odds ratios (ORs) for PONV in subjects with versus without migraine were 1.52 (95% confidence interval (CI), 1.34–1.72; p < 0.001) and 1.37 (95% CI, 1.21–1.56; p < 0.001), respectively. The OR for PONV in patients with migraine was also high (OR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.13–1.66; p = 0.001) after matching. Our findings suggest that migraine is a significant risk factor for PONV.

Can Liposomal Bupivacaine Be Safely Utilized in Elective Spine Surgery?

STUDY DESIGN

Single-blinded prospective randomized control trial.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the incidence of adverse events (AEs) and hospital length of stay between patients who received liposomal bupivacaine (LB) versus a single saline injection, following posterior lumbar decompression and fusion surgery for degenerative spondylosis.

METHODS

From 2015 to 2016, 59 patients undergoing posterior lumbar decompression and fusion surgery were prospectively enrolled and randomized to receive either 60 mL injection of 266 mg LB or 60 mL of 0.9% sterile saline, intraoperatively. Outcome measures included the incidence of postoperative AEs and hospital length of stay.

RESULTS

The most common AEs in the treatment group were nausea (39.3%), emesis (18.1%), and hypotension (18.1%). Nausea (23%), constipation (19.2%), and urinary retention (15.3%) were most common in the control group. Patients who received LB had an increased risk of developing nausea (relative risk [RR] = 1.7; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.75-3.8), emesis (RR = 2.3; 95% CI = 0.51-10.7), and headaches (RR = 2.36; 95% CI = 0.26-21.4). Patients receiving LB had a decreased risk of developing constipation (RR = 0.78; 95% CI = 0.25-2.43), urinary retention (RR = 0.78; 95% CI = 0.21-2.85), and pruritus (RR = 0.78; 95% = 0.21-2.8) postoperatively. Relative risk values mentioned above failed to reach statistical significance. No significant difference in the hospital length of stay between both groups was found (3.9 vs 3.9 days; P = .92).

CONCLUSION

Single-dose injections of LB to the surgical site prior to wound closure did not significantly increase or decrease the incidence or risk of developing AEs postoperatively. Furthermore, no significant difference was found in the hospital length of stay between both groups.

Incidence of Nausea and Vomiting After Fast-Track Anaesthesia for Heart Surgery

Objective

The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) after fast-track cardiac anesthesia (FTCA) in the first 24-48 hours in the cardiac intensive care unit (CICU) after open-heart surgery, risk factors for PONV and its influence on CICU length of stay.

Methods

A prospective observational study from January 1, 2013 to the end of December 2015 was performed in the CICU of a university hospital in the north of Jordan and Queen Alia Heart Institute, Amman, Jordan. Three hundred consecutive patients undergoing fast-track cardiac anesthesia in elective cardiac surgery were enrolled in the study. Nausea and vomiting were assessed after tracheal extubation, which was performed within 6-10 hours after surgery and during the first 24-48 hours in the CICU. Metoclopramide 10 mg intravenously was used as the initial antiemetic drug, but ondansetron 4 mg intravenously was also used as second line of management.

Results

Nausea was reported in 46 (15.3%) patients, and vomiting in 31 (10.3%). Among females, 38 (33.9%) patients developed nausea and 20 (17.9%) developed vomiting. Among males, 8 (4.3%) patients developed nausea and 11 (5.9%) developed vomiting.

Conclusion

PONV are relatively low after FTCA and the prophylactic administration of antiemetic drug before anesthesia or after extubation is not necessary.

Efficacy of Palonosetron-Dexamethasone Combination Versus Palonosetron Alone for Preventing Nausea and Vomiting Related to Opioid-Based Analgesia: A Prospective, Randomized, Double-blind Trial

Background: The efficacy of dexamethasone plus palonosetron for postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) prophylaxis is not firmly established. This randomized, double-blind, controlled study evaluated whether the combination was superior to palonosetron alone in preventing PONV in patients receiving intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV-PCA) after upper extremity surgery. Methods: A total of 202 patients undergoing upper extremity surgery were randomly assigned to group P (palonosetron alone) or group PD (palonosetron plus dexamethasone). Group P patients received palonosetron 0.075 mg and normal saline 1.6 mL; group PD patients received palonosetron 0.075 mg and dexamethasone 8 mg. In both groups, palonosetron was added to the IV-PCA opioid infusion, which was continued for 48 h postoperatively. Incidence and severity of nausea, incidence of vomiting, rescue antiemetic requirements, pain intensity, and rescue analgesic requirements were evaluated for 72 h postoperatively. Quality of recovery was assessed using the quality of recovery-15 (QoR-15) questionnaire. Results: The incidence of PONV was significantly lower in group PD than in group P at 0-48 h postoperatively (61.5% vs 77.1%; p = 0.019). Severity of nausea at 0-6 h postoperatively was significantly less in group PD compared with group P (none/mild/moderate/severe: 49/22/15/10 vs. 36/16/25/19, p = 0.008). The incidence of vomiting and rescue antiemetic requirements were similar between groups. Pain intensity was significantly less in group PD than in group P at 0-48 h and 48-72 h postoperatively. Global QoR-15 was similar 24 h postoperatively between groups. Conclusions: Dexamethasone-palonosetron combination therapy reduced PONV incidence and postoperative pain in patients receiving opioid-based analgesia after upper extremity surgery.

The Effect of Ginger Extract on the Incidence and Severity of Nausea and Vomiting After Cesarean Section Under Spinal Anesthesia

Background

Nausea and vomiting are one of the most common complications of cesarean sections under spinal anesthesia. Recently, the use of drugs to treat nausea and vomiting has decreased, and nonpharmaceutical and alternative traditional medicine are often preferred.

Objectives

This study aimed to determine the effect of ginger extract on the incidence and severity of nausea and vomiting after cesarean section under spinal anesthesia.

Methods

In this double-blind randomized clinical trial, 92 pregnant women, each of whom underwent a cesarean section under spinal anesthesia, were divided in two groups: a control group and an intervention group. The intervention group received 25 drops of ginger extract in 30 cc of water, and the control group received 30 cc of water one hour before surgery. The incidence and severity of nausea and vomiting were assessed during the surgery and two and four hours after the surgery using a self-report scale. Data analysis was performed using SPSS software and statistical tests.

Results

There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of maternal age, duration of fasting, duration of surgery, and confounding factors (P > 0.05). According to an independent t-test, there was a significant relationship between the two groups in terms of the incidence and mean severity score of nausea and vomiting during the cesarean section (P < 0.05). However, no statistically significant relationship was found between the two groups in terms of the incidence and mean severity score of nausea and vomiting two and four hours after surgery (P > 0.05).

Conclusions

The findings of this study showed that ginger extract can be used for the prevention of nausea and vomiting during cesarean section under spinal anesthesia.

Comparison of dexamethasone or intravenous fluids or combination of both on postoperative nausea, vomiting and pain in pediatric strabismus surgery

BACKGROUND

Strabismus surgery is perhaps a pediatric surgical procedure that has the strongest evidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) risk. This randomized controlled blind study was designed to evaluate the efficacy of combined therapy of dexamethasone and intraoperative superhydration vs their monotherapy on the incidence and severity of PONV and on pain intensity after pediatric strabismus surgery.

METHODS

A total of 120 children aged 6 to 12 years undergoing strabismus surgery were randomized to equally 3 groups to receive 0.15 mg/kg dexamethasone (dexamethasone group) or intraoperative superhydration of lactated Ringer's solution in a dose of 30 mL/kg per fasting time (superhydration group), or a combination of dexamethasone and intraoperative fluid in the same strategy (combination therapy group). The incidence and severity of PONV and pain using visual analog scale score, and need for supplemental antiemetic and analgesic therapy and their consumptions were assessed and compared in the 3 studied groups for 24 hours postoperatively.

RESULTS

The incidence of PONV and postoperative vomiting was significantly lower (P> .001) in the combination therapy group (5% and 5% respectively) compared with the dexamethasone group (35% and 30%) and superhydration group (32.5% and 35%). There was no significant difference among patients in the superhydration group and dexamethasone group in the cumulative incidences of PONV in the whole 24 hours postoperatively. Postoperative aggregated visual analog scale pain score and total acetaminophen consumption showed a significant reduction (P> .05) in the combination therapy group together with significant prolongation of time to the first analgesic request compared with both the superhydration group and the dexamethasone group.

CONCLUSION

Combined therapy of 0.15 mg/kg dexamethasone 1 minute before induction and intraoperative fluid superhydration is an effective and safe way to reduce PONV and pain better than monotherapy of dexamethasone, or intraoperative superhydration separately for pediatric strabismus surgery.

Neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Newly developed neurokinin-1 receptor (NK-1R) antagonists have been recently tried in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to explore whether NK-1R antagonists were effective in preventing PONV.The PRISMA statement guidelines were followed. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that tested the preventive effects of NK-1R antagonists on PONV were identified by searching EMBASE, CINAHL, PubMed, and the Cochrane Library databases followed by screening. Data extraction was performed using a predefined form and trial quality was assessed using a modified Jadad scale. The primary outcome measure was the incidence of PONV. Meta-analysis was performed for studies using similar interventions. Network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted to compare the anti-vomiting effects of placebo, ondansetron, and aprepitant at different doses.Fourteen RCTs were included. Meta-analysis found that 80 mg of aprepitant could reduce the incidences of nausea (3 RCTs with 224 patients, pooled risk ratio (RR) = 0.60, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.47 to 0.75), and vomiting (3 RCTs with 224 patients, pooled RR = 0.13, 95% CI = 0.04 to 0.37) compared with placebo. Neither 40 mg (3 RCTs with 1171 patients, RR = 0.47, 95% CI = 0.37 to 0.60) nor 125 mg (2 RCTs with 1058 patients, RR = 0.32, 95% CI = 0.13 to 0.78) of aprepitant showed superiority over 4 mg of ondansetron in preventing postoperative vomiting. NMA did not find a dose-dependent effect of aprepitant on preventing postoperative vomiting.Limited data suggested that NK-1R antagonists, especially aprepitant were effective in preventing PONV compared with placebo. More large-sampled high-quality RCTs are needed.

Palonosetron, Ondansetron, and Granisetron for antiemetic prophylaxis of postoperative nausea and vomiting - A comparative evaluation

Background:

Postoperative nausea and vomiting is commonly associated with adverse consequences and hamper the postoperative recovery in spite of the availability of many antiemetic drugs and regimens for its prevention. The study was aimed to compare the prophylactic effects of intravenously administered palonosetron, ondansetron, and granisetron on prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting after general anesthesia.

Materials and Methods:

This prospective, double-blind study, comprised 120 adult consented patients of ASA grade I and II of either gender, was carried out after approval of Institutional Ethical Committee. Patients were randomized into three equal groups of 40 patients each in double-blind manner. Group P received inj. palonosetron (0.075 mg), group O received inj. ondansetron (4 mg), and group G received inj. granisetron (2 mg) intravenously five minutes before induction of anesthesia. The need for rescue antiemetic, episode of postoperative nausea and vomiting, and side effects were observed for 12 hours in the post-anesthesia care unit. At the end of study, results were compiled and statistical analysis was done by using ANOVA, Chi-square test, and Kruskal Wallis Test. Value of P < 0.05 was considered significant.

Results:

The incidence of nausea and vomiting was maximal during the first four hours postoperatively. The complete control of postoperative nausea and vomiting for first 12 hours was achieved in 30% patients of ondansetron group, 55% patients of granisetron group, and 90% patients of palonosetron group. Safety profile was more with palonosetron.

Conclusion:

Palonosetron was comparatively highly effective to prevent the PONV after anesthesia due to its prolonged duration of action than ondansetron and granisetron.

Effects of a novel method of anesthesia combining propofol and volatile anesthesia on the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing laparoscopic gynecological surgery

BACKGROUND

We investigated the effects of a novel method of anesthesia combining propofol and volatile anesthesia on the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing laparoscopic gynecological surgery.

METHODS

Patients were randomly divided into three groups: those maintained with sevoflurane (Group S, n=42), propofol (Group P, n=42), or combined propofol and sevoflurane (Group PS, n=42). We assessed complete response (no postoperative nausea and vomiting and no rescue antiemetic use), incidence of nausea and vomiting, nausea severity score, vomiting frequency, rescue antiemetic use, and postoperative pain at 2 and 24h after surgery.

RESULTS

The number of patients who exhibited a complete response was greater in Groups P and PS than in Group S at 0-2h (74%, 76% and 43%, respectively, p=0.001) and 0-24h (71%, 76% and 38%, respectively, p<0.0005). The incidence of nausea at 0-2h (Group S=57%, Group P=26% and Group PS=21%, p=0.001) and 0-24h (Group S=62%, Group P=29% and Group PS=21%, p<0.0005) was also significantly different among groups. However, there were no significant differences among groups in the incidence or frequency of vomiting or rescue antiemetic use at 0-24h.

CONCLUSION

Combined propofol and volatile anesthesia during laparoscopic gynecological surgery effectively decreases the incidence of postoperative nausea. We term this novel method of anesthesia "combined intravenous-volatile anesthesia (CIVA)".

Efficacy of orally disintegrating film of ondansetron versus intravenous ondansetron in prophylaxis of postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing elective gynaecological laparoscopic procedures: A prospective randomised, double-blind placebo-controlled study

Background and Aims:

Ondansetron is one of the most widely used drugs for postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) prophylaxis. Orally disintegrating film (ODF) formulations are relatively recent innovations. We evaluated the efficacy of ODF of ondansetron for the prophylaxis of PONV.

Methods:

One hundred and eighty American Society of Anaesthesiologists-I or II women, in the age group 18-65 years, scheduled for elective gynaecological laparoscopic procedures were studied in a prospective randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. The patients were randomised into four groups: Placebo, intravenous (IV) ondansetron 4 mg, ODF of ondansetron 4 mg (ODF4) and 8 mg (ODF8) groups. PONV was assessed in two epochs of 0-6 and 7-24 h. Primary outcome measure was the incidence of PONV and secondary outcome measures were severity of nausea, need for rescue anti-emetic, analgesic consumption, time to oral intake, overall patient satisfaction and side effects such as headache and dizziness. PONV was compared using analysis of variance or Mann–Whitney U-test as applicable.

Results:

Data of 173 patients were analysed. The incidence of postoperative nausea was significantly lower (P = 0.04) only during the 0-6 h in the ODF8 group when compared with the placebo group. During the 0-6 h interval postoperatively, the ODF8 group had a significantly lower incidence of vomiting when compared with the placebo (P = 0.002) and the IV group (P = 0.044). During the 0-24 h interval postoperatively, ODF4 (P = 0.01) and ODF8 (P = 0.002) groups had a significantly lower incidence of vomiting compared to the placebo group.

Conclusions:

Orally disintegrating film of ondansetron is an efficacious, novel, convenient and may be a cost-effective option for the prophylaxis of PONV.

Treatment of acute abdominal pain in the emergency room: a systematic review of the literature

Appropriate pain therapy prior to diagnosis in patients with acute abdominal pain remains controversial. Several recent studies have demonstrated that pain therapy does not negatively influence either the diagnosis or subsequent treatment of these patients; however, current practice patterns continue to favour withholding pain medication prior to diagnosis and surgical treatment decision. A systematic review of PubMed, Web-of-Science and The-Cochrane-Library from 1929 to 2011 was carried out using the key words of 'acute', 'abdomen', 'pain', 'emergency' as well as different pain drugs in use, revealed 84 papers. The results of the literature review were incorporated into six sections to describe management of acute abdominal pain: (1) Physiology of Pain; (2) Common Aetiologies of Abdominal Pain; (3) Pre-diagnostic Analgesia; (4) Pain Therapy for Acute Abdominal Pain; (5) Analgesia for Acute Abdominal Pain in Special Patient Populations; and (6) Ethical and Medico-legal Considerations in Current Analgesia Practices. A comprehensive algorithm for analgesia for acute abdominal pain in the general adult population was developed. A review of the literature of common aetiologies and management of acute abdominal pain in the general adult population and special patient populations seen in the emergency room revealed that intravenous administration of paracetamol, dipyrone or piritramide are currently the analgesics of choice in this clinical setting. Combinations of non-opioids and opioids should be administered in patients with moderate, severe or extreme pain, adjusting the treatment on the basis of repeated pain assessment, which improves overall pain management.

Is there an association between PONV and chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting?

BACKGROUND

Drug-induced nausea and vomiting, both post-operatively and following chemotherapy, is often distressing for the patients. Our clinical impression is that certain patients are not prone to but instead protected against both post-operative and chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). If support for this hypothesis could be generated, it might be easier to identify such patients as low-risk patients and judge all other patients as high-risk patients by default.

METHODS

All patients scheduled for breast cancer surgery at Danderyd Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden during 1 year (March 2003-March 2004) were asked to participate in this prospective, observational study. A number of women went on to receive adjuvant chemotherapy. Post-operatively, patients were assessed for 24 h with regard to the occurrence of post-operative nausea and vomiting (PONV). CINV was assessed for 5 days after start of chemotherapy.

RESULTS

A total of 275 women were included, 33% were classified as PONV and 67% as non-PONV. Sixty-one of the 275 women included were later subjected to adjuvant chemotherapy. In the non-PONV group, 95% of the patients did not experience CINV, whereas the association between PONV and subsequent CINV was only 38%.

CONCLUSIONS

A substantially stronger interrelationship was found between non-PONV and non-CINV than between both PONV and CINV. This may suggest that certain patients, instead of being prone to nausea and vomiting, in fact in some way are protected against these unpleasant side effects.

Granisetron versus tropisetron in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting after total thyroidectomy

Background:

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) are frequently encountered after thyroidectomy. For PONV prevention, selective serotonin 5-hydroxytryptamine type 3 (5-HT₃) receptor antagonists are considered one of the first-line therapy. We report on the efficiency of granisetron and tropisetron, with that of placebo on the prevention of PONV in patients undergoing total thyroidectomy.

Methods:

One hundred twenty-seven patients were divided into three groups and randomized to receive intravenously, prior to induction of anesthesia, tropisetron 5 mg, or granisetron 3 mg, or normal saline. All patients received additionally 0.625 mg droperidol. All episodes of postoperative PONV during the first 24 h after surgery were evaluated.

Results:

Nausea visual analogue scale (VAS) score was lower in tropisetron and granisetron groups than the control group at all measurements (P<0.01) except for the 8-h measurement for tropisetron (P=0.075). Moreover, granisetron performed better than tropisetron (P<0.011 at 4 h and P<0.01 at all other points of time) apart from the 2-h measurement. Vomiting occurred in 22.2%, 27.5%, and 37.5% in granisetron, tropisetron, and control groups, respectively (P=0.43).

Conclusions:

The combination of the 5-HT₃ antagonists with droperidol given before induction of anesthesia is well tolerated and superior to droperidol alone in preventing nausea but not vomiting after total thyroidectomy.

Using haloperidol as an antiemetic in palliative care: informing practice through evidence from cancer treatment and postoperative contexts

Nausea and vomiting are common symptoms in palliative care. Haloperidol is often used as an antiemetic in this context, although direct evidence supporting this practice is limited. To evaluate the efficacy and clinical use of haloperidol as an antiemetic in nonpalliative care contexts to inform practice, the authors conducted a rapid review of (i) published evidence to supplement existing systematic reviews, and (ii) practical aspects affecting the use of haloperidol including formulations and doses that are commonly available internationally. In nausea and vomiting related to cancer treatment, haloperidol was superior to control in two small studies. In postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), two randomized controlled trials found treatment with haloperidol comparable to ondansetron. In palliative care, an observational study found a complete response rate of 24% with haloperidol (one in four patients) which would be consistent with a number needed to treat (NNT) of 3 to 5 derived from PONV. There remains insufficient direct evidence to definitively support the use of haloperidol for the management of nausea and vomiting in palliative care. However, generalizing evidence from other clinical contexts may have some validity.

[Undesired side effects of tapentadol in comparison to oxycodone. A meta-analysis of randomized controlled comparative studies]

OBJECTIVE

Tapentadol is a new centrally acting analgesic with a dual mode of action as an agonist of the µ-opioid receptor and as a norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the results from randomized controlled trials investigating the relative amount of adverse effects using tapentadol or oxycodone for the treatment of pain.

METHODS

A quantitative systematic review was carried out according to the PRISMA recommendations on randomized controlled trials comparing tapentadol and oxycodone in pain treatment. The incidences of typical adverse side effects of opioid-based analgesic therapy (e.g. nausea, vomiting, obstipation or pruritus) were extracted and the pooled relative risks (RR) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 9 trials involving 7,948 patients were included and of these 2,810 patients were treated with oxycodone and 5,138 were treated with tapentadol in equivalent analgesic dosages as documented by an equivalent analgesic effect. The risk of typical opioid-based adverse effects, such as nausea (RR 0.61; 95% CI 0.57-0.66), vomiting (RR 0.50, 95% CI: 0.41-0.60), obstipation (RR 0.47, 95%-CI 0.40-0.56), dizziness (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.78-0.95), somnolence (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.67-0.86) and pruritus (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.37-0.58) was reduced when tapentadol was used for analgesic treatment. These adverse effects were investigated in all nine trials. The risk for dryness of the mouth (6 trials, 6,218 patients, RR 1.79, 95% CI 1.40-2.29) and dyspepsia (1 trial, 646 patients, RR 2.75, 95% CI 1.09-6.94) was increased when tapentadol was used instead of oxycodone. There were no significant differences in the relative risk for any other investigated adverse effect such as dysentery, headache or fatigue.

CONCLUSION

The results show that using tapentadol significantly reduces the risk of the typical opioid-based adverse effects compared with oxycodone while providing equivalent analgesic treatment.

Prophylactic administration of haloperidol plus midazolam reduces postoperative nausea and vomiting better than using each drug alone in patients undergoing middle ear surgery

Aims:

The efficacy of using midazolam or haloperidol for prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) has been investigated before. The main object of the present study was to evaluate the anti-emetic effects of combining administration of intravenous haloperidol with intravenous midazolam on PONV in patients underwent middle ear surgery in comparison with using each drug alone.

Methods:

Study design was randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled. 80 patients, aged 18-60 years, scheduled for middle ear surgery in Kashani Hospital Medical Center under general anesthesia were enrolled in this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Patients were divided into 4 groups of 20 each and received haloperidol 2 mg i.v. (Group H); midazolam 2 mg i.v. (Group M); haloperidol 2 mg plus midazolam 2 mg i.v. (Group HM); saline i.v. (Group C). The incidences of PONV and complete response were evaluated at 0-2 hours after arrival to the PACU and 2-24 hours after arrival to the ward in 4 groups.

Results:

Patients in group HM had significantly lower incidence of PONV compared with groups H, M, and C throughout 0-24 h (P<00.5). The HM group had the lowest incidence of PONV (0-2, 2-24, and 0-24 h) and the highest incidence of complete response. Postoperative anti-emetic requirement was significantly less in group HM compared with group M or H (P<0.05).

Conclusion:

Combine administration of haloperidol 2 mg plus midazolam 2 mg significantly reduced PONV better than using each drug alone in patients underwent middle ear surgery under general anesthesia.

5HT3 antagonists for prophylaxis of postoperative nausea and vomiting in breast surgery: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) are distressing adverse events following breast cancer surgery with an incidence of up to 80%. 5HT 3 antagonists are commonly employed as drugs of first choice for PONV although there is no clear evidence favoring one pharmacological approach over another.

AIMS

The objective of this meta-analysis is to compare the efficacy of 5HT 3 antagonists against all non-5HT 3 antagonism-based pharmacological approaches as a preemptive strategy for PONV in women undergoing breast surgery.

DESIGN

Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Literature search was conducted through PUBMED, reference lists, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials till June 2010 to identify eligible studies. Trials comparing 5-HT 3 antagonists with placebo or active controls for prophylaxis against PONV in women undergoing breast surgery were included. Two reviewers extracted the data independently. Methodological quality of each trial was assessed using Jadad score.

RESULTS

Nineteen trials were included. All trials were of good methodological quality (Jadad score >3). 5HT 3 antagonists were found superior to placebo [Odds ratio (OR)=0.18 (0.13-0.26)] or active controls [OR=0.65 (0.47-0.91)] in the prevention of PONV. 5HT 3 antagonists were also superior to placebo in preventing nausea alone [OR=0.51 (0.34-0.76)], vomiting [OR=0.31 (0.20-0.47)] and the use of rescue antiemetics [OR=0.18 (0.11-0.28)]. No significant difference was observed in the use of rescue antiemetics as compared to active controls [0.59 (0.19 to 1.86)].

CONCLUSION

5HT 3 antagonists are superior to other pharmacological interventions for the prevention of PONV in patients undergoing breast surgery under general anesthesia.

An overview of the clinical use of ondansetron in preschool age children

The introduction of 5-HT₃ receptor antagonist has revolutionized the prevention and treatment of nausea and vomiting in preschool aged children. These distressing symptoms, arising from multiple etiologies such as anesthesia, chemotherapy, and viral infection, are a major concern of patients and their families. Clinical research has demonstrated the antiemetic effectiveness of ondansetron in children. Although most of these studies focus primarily on preventing vomiting across the pediatric age group, they provide strong evidence for the use of ondansetron in preschool age children. For children at high risk, pediatric practice guidelines recommend ondansetron in conjunction with other antiemetics to achieve complete control of symptoms.

Prophylactic antiemetic effects in gynecologic patients receiving fentanyl IV-patient controlled analgesia: comparison of combined treatment with ondansetron and dexamethasone with metoclopramide and dexamethasone

Background

This study was conducted to compare the efficacy of a combination of ondansetron and dexamethasone with that of metoclopramide and dexamethasone for prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in gynecologic patients receiving fentanyl IV-patient controlled analgesia.

Methods

One hundred patients were divided into two groups at random. In Group O, 5 mg of dexamethsone was administered after tracheal intubation, while 4 mg of ondansetron was administered at the end of surgery. In Group M, 5 mg of dexamethsone was administered after tracheal intubation and 20 mg metoclopromide was administered at the end of surgery. During the experiment, the PONV was evaluated at regular intervals. In addition, the incidence of nausea, and vomiting and the numerical rating scale (NRS) of nausea was measured (range, 0-10).

Results

The overall incidence of PONV in Group O was 22/50 (44%) while that in Group M was 19/50 (38%). There were no significant differences in the incidence of nausea, moderate to severe nausea (NRS of nausea, 4-10), or vomiting between groups.

Conclusions

Treatment with a combination of 20 mg metoclopramide and 5 mg dexamethasone is an effective, safe, and inexpensive way to prevent PONV when compared to treatment with 4 mg ondansetron and 5 mg dexamethasone.

Stability-indicating HPLC assays for the determination of piritramide and droperidol in PCA solution

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

A mixture of morphine and droperidol is a well-established antiemetic for reducing the risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting. A mixture of piritramide and droperidol has not yet been evaluated in this context. Our objectives were to develop a high-performance liquid chromatographic assay for piritramide and droperidol in 0·9% saline, and to establish their stability under defined storage conditions.

METHODS

The separation and assay of both drugs were attempted by high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) using a RP-select B column and a mobile phase of 57:43% v/v methanol-monosodium phosphate solution 0·05 M at a flow rate of 1·2 mL/min. UV detection at 205 and 246 nm for piritramide and droperidol were used, respectively.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The HPLC method was successful. Linearity was shown for piritramide from 0·075 to 0·013 mg/mL and for droperidol from 0·8 to 0·2 mg/mL. The intra- and inter-day relative standard deviation (RSD, %) was 0·27% and 0·54% for piritramide and droperidol, respectively. The two drugs were stable for at least 72 h when stored under ambient light at room temperature.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

Seventy-five milligrams piritramide and 2·5 mg droperidol diluted to 50 ml with 0·9% saline should be suitable for clinical use. At this dilution, a Dipidolor(®) and Xomolix(®), mixture, was stable when stored under ambient light exposure at room temperature for at least 72 h.

Documentation of Post-operative Nausea and Vomiting in Routine Clinical Practice

This study investigated the quality of documentation of post-operative nausea and vomiting (PONV) by comparing incidences collected by a research team with those reported routinely by nursing personnel. A total of 560 patients passing through an interdisciplinary recovery room were included in the study. The overall recorded incidence of PONV over 24 h was 30.7%, which was in agreement with the predicted value of 32% calculated using incidences from published randomized controlled trials. Out of the total number of 86 cases of PONV in the recovery room only 36 (42%) were detected by nursing staff. Similarly, out of the total number of 129 cases of PONV on the ward over 24 h, only 37 (29%) were recognized by nursing staff during routine care. In conclusion, PONV in routine clinical care is likely to be under-reported. To use PONV as a valid quality measure, patients need to be actively asked about nausea and vomiting at frequent intervals in a standardized fashion. A considerable proportion of patients experience PONV after discharge from the recovery room, so the assessment of PONV should cover at least 24 h post-operatively

Droperidol has comparable clinical efficacy against both nausea and vomiting

BACKGROUND

Droperidol is commonly noted to be more effective at preventing postoperative nausea (PON) than vomiting (POV) and it is assumed to have a short duration of action. This may be relevant for clinical decisions, especially for designing multiple-drug antiemetic regimens.

METHODS

We conducted a post hoc analysis of a large multicentre trial. Within this trial, 1734 patients underwent inhalation anaesthesia and were randomly stratified to receive several antiemetic interventions according to a factorial design, one of which was droperidol 1.25 mg vs placebo. We considered differences to be significant when: (i) point estimates of one outcome are not within the limits of the confidence interval (CI) of the other outcome; and (ii) differences in risk ratio (also known as relative risks, RR) are at least 20%.

RESULTS

Over 24 h, nausea was reduced from 42.9% in the control to 32.0% in the droperidol group, corresponding to a relative risk (RR) of 0.75 (95% CI from 0.66 to 0.84). Vomiting was reduced from 15.6% to 11.8%, and therefore associated with a similar RR of 0.76 (0.59-0.96). In the early postoperative period (0-2 h), droperidol prevented nausea and vomiting similarly, with an RR of 0.57 (0.46-0.69) for nausea and 0.56 (0.37-0.85) for vomiting. In the late postoperative period (2-24 h), the RR was again similar with 0.83 (0.72-0.96) for nausea compared with 0.89 (0.66-1.18) for vomiting but significantly less compared with the early postoperative period.

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that droperidol prevents PON and POV equally well, yet its duration of action is short-lived.

Ondansetron has similar clinical efficacy against both nausea and vomiting

Ondansetron is widely believed to prevent postoperative vomiting more effectively than nausea. We analysed data from 5161 patients undergoing general anaesthesia who were randomly stratified to receive a combination of six interventions, one of which was 4 mg ondansetron vs placebo. For the purpose of this study a 20% difference in the relative risks for the two outcomes was considered clinically relevant. Nausea was reduced from 38% (969/2585) in the control to 28% (715/2576) in the ondansetron group, corresponding to a relative risk of 0.74, or a relative risk reduction of 26%. Vomiting was reduced from 17% (441/2585) to 11% (293/2576), corresponding to a relative risk of 0.67, or a relative risk reduction of 33%. The relative risks of 0.67 and 0.74 were clinically similar and the difference between them did not reach statistical significance. We thus conclude that ondansetron prevents postoperative nausea and postoperative vomiting equally well.

Prevention and control of postoperative nausea and vomiting in post-craniotomy patients

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) are the most frequent side-effects in the postoperative period, impairing subjective well-being and having economic impact due to delayed discharge. However, emetic symptoms can also cause major medical complications, and post-craniotomy patients may be at an increased risk. A review and critical appraisal of the existing literature on PONV in post-craniotomy patients, and a comparison of these findings with the current knowledge on PONV in the general surgical population, leads to the following conclusions: (1) Despite the lack of a documented case of harm caused by retching or vomiting in a post-craniotomy patient, the potential risk caused by arterial hypertension and high intra-abdominal/intra-thoracic pressure leading to high intracranial pressure, forces to avoid PONV in these patients. (2) There is unclarity about a specifically increased (or decreased) risk for PONV in post-craniotomy patients compared with other surgical procedures. (3) The decision whether or not to administer an antiemetic should not be based primarily on risk scores for PONV but on the likelihood for potential catastrophic consequences of PONV. If such a risk cannot be ruled out, a multimodal antiemetic approach should be considered regardless of the individual risk. (4) Randomized controlled trials with antiemetics in post-craniotomy patients are limited with respect to sample size and methodological quality. This also impacts upon the meaning of meta-analyses performed with trials that showed marked heterogeneity and inconclusive results. (5) No studies on the treatment of established PONV are available. This highlights the need to transfer knowledge about PONV treatment from other surgical procedures. (6) Despite the possibility that PONV in post-craniotomy patients can be triggered by specific conditions (e.g. surgery near the area postrema at the floor of the fourth ventricle with the vomiting centre located nearby), recommendations based on trials in post-craniotomy patients may be flawed. Thus, general knowledge on prevention and treatment of PONV must adopted for craniotomy settings.

Assessing parents preferences for the avoidance of undesirable anesthesia side effects in their children undergoing surgical procedures

BACKGROUND

Willingness to pay (WTP) surveys have proven to be useful tools in determining patient preferences though relatively few pediatric studies have utilized them. Studies in the adult surgical population have used such methods to assess patients' perspectives regarding the avoidance of anesthesia side effects or outcomes. The purpose of this survey was to assess parental preferences, using a relative WTP model, for the avoidance of anesthesia side effects in their children undergoing surgery.

METHODS

The survey was distributed to 150 parents of children who were undergoing surgery. Parents were asked to rank order (1 = most unwanted to 7 = least troublesome) six stated potential anesthesia side effects and to allocate a fixed dollar percentage of a $100 toward prevention of each. A total of 142 surveys were returned (95% response rate).

RESULTS

Parents ranked vomiting as the least desirable side effect for their child (rank order = 1.9) and pain as second (rank order = 2.14). However, parents allocated $33.48 to prevent pain compared with $28.89 for vomiting as a relative dollar amount.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that targeting management toward the prevention of these adverse outcomes may improve parental satisfaction with anesthesia care of their children.

Klinische Pharmakologie

The rule of three describes three steps which are needed for an optimal control of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). Firstly, patients at high risk of PONV need to be identified. Knowledge about predictive factors may help to identify patients who may best profit from prophylaxis and those where prophylaxis is not worthwhile since the baseline risk is too low. Secondly, for high-risk patients a low emetogenic anaesthesia technique should be chosen, and thirdly, these patients should additionally receive a prophylactic antiemetic cocktail. At present, butyrophenones (e.g. droperidol), 5-HT(3) receptor antagonists ("setrons") and steroids (e.g. dexamethasone) are the most rational choices for the antiemetic cocktail. Although there is strong evidence that there is an additive effect when these antiemetics are combined, economic constraints may influence the number of antiemetics that are eventually chosen. Identification of high-risk patients remains the most difficult part of the rule of three. Risk scores have been proposed and have been widely implemented in clinical practice. The sensitivity and specificity of such scores, however, remain particularly unsatisfactory. Unless more reliable risk scores are developed, aggressive treatment of established PONV symptoms may be more useful and more cost-effective than prophylaxis for many patients.

Management of postoperative nausea and vomiting in children

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) continues to be a frequent and important cause of morbidity in children. Postoperative vomiting (POV) is more commonly studied in children than postoperative nausea because of a child's inability to effectively express distress after experiencing nausea. POV is problematic in children and is one of the leading postoperative complaints from parents and the leading cause of readmission to the hospital. POV occurs twice as frequently in children as in adults, increasing until puberty and then decreasing to adult incidence rates. Gender differences are not seen before puberty. POV remains a main cause of morbidity in children because severe vomiting can be associated with dehydration, postoperative bleeding, pulmonary aspiration, and wound dehiscence. While children have an increased potential for dehydration and the resulting physiologic impairments, other associated results such as a delay in hospital discharge or an overnight or longer hospital admission also must be considered. The two most common emetogenic surgical procedures evaluated in children are strabismus repair and adenotonsillectomy. The approach to the management of PONV and POV in children is similar to that in adults. However, as the rate of POV is more frequent in children than in adults, more children are candidates for antiemetic prophylaxis. The management approach is multifactorial and involves proper preoperative preparation, risk stratification, rational selection of antiemetic prophylaxis, choice of anesthesia technique, and a plan for postoperative antiemetic therapy. It is important to identify children at moderate-to-high risk for POV as prophylactic antiemetic therapy is useful in these children. Antiemetics of choice for POV in children include dexamethasone, dimenhydrinate, perphenazine, ondansetron, dolasetron, granisetron, and tropisetron. The serotonin (5-hydroxytryptamine; 5-HT(3)) antagonists are the antiemetic drugs of first choice for POV prophylaxis in children because as a group they have greater efficacy for preventing vomiting than nausea. The 5-HT(3) antagonists can be effectively combined with dexamethasone with an increase in efficacy. If possible, regional anesthesia should be considered. For those undergoing general anesthesia, the baseline POV risk should be reduced. Children at moderate-to-high PONV risk should receive combination therapy with two or three prophylactic antiemetics from different antiemetic drug classes. Reference to and the use of PONV guidelines and management algorithms help improve cost-effective postoperative care.

Management of postoperative vomiting in pediatric patients

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Postoperative vomiting remains a common complication of general anesthesia and occurs more frequently in children than adults. Prophylactic antiemetics have limited efficacy and have a potential for side effects. The new 5 HT3 antagonists are effective but expensive, while the older less expensive drugs such as droperidol have come under disrepute because of the potential for serious, life-threatening, cardiac arrhythmias. This review examines the literature to aid practicing anesthesiologists in the choice of patient who will benefit from prophylactic antiemetics.

RECENT FINDINGS

In this review we discuss the factors associated with postoperative vomiting that are and are not under the control of the anesthesiologist. The Consensus Panel recommendations for reducing the risks of postoperative vomiting and for the rational use of prophylactic antiemetics in selected cases are reviewed. The controversy over the 'black box warning' on the use of droperidol is discussed. Finally, the evidence supports the importance of choosing a drug from another class for rescue therapy when prophylaxis with one drug has failed.

SUMMARY

Anesthesiologists should practice evidence-based medicine in reducing the common anesthetic complication of postoperative vomiting by an individualized approach that balances the choice of drugs with the expected risk of postoperative vomiting for cost-effective management.

[Prevention and treatment of postoperative nausea and vomiting in children. An evidence-based approach]

Significant improvement towards an efficacious control of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) has taken place recently. These improvements may be summarised using the "rule of three". That rule describes a pragmatic and rational approach of PONV control. First, identify the patient at risk using predictive factors. Second, modify the anaesthesia technique to keep the baseline risk as low as possible. Third, administer antiemetics rationally, considering their degree of efficacy, their risk, and their potential additive effects. Despite considerable research efforts, identifying the patient at high risk of PONV remains a difficult task. However, today, we understand the degree of efficacy, dose-responsiveness, and adverse effects of most antiemetics. None of those molecules should be regarded as being universally efficacious, there is no gold standard, and, when used alone, their degree of efficacy is limited. Thus, they should be combined for improved efficacy. Among the most promising molecules are butyrophenones (droperidol, haloperidol), 5-HT(3) receptor antagonists (ondansetron, dolasetron, tropisetron, granisetron), and steroids (for instance, dexamethasone). The lack of relevant paediatric PONV data remains a major drawback and is highly unsatisfactory. Hopefully, future research will further improve the control of PONV not only in adults but also in children.