1
|
Busse J, Louie A, Crotty J, Lin A, Muratova Z, Malka M, Givens R, Roye B, Vitale M, Schechter W. Fosaprepitant Use as an Antiemetic to Prevent Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting in Pediatric Spinal Fusion Patients May Be Associated With More Rapid Transition to Oral Pain Medication and Reduced Length of Stay. JOURNAL OF THE PEDIATRIC ORTHOPAEDIC SOCIETY OF NORTH AMERICA 2025; 11:100174. [PMID: 40432848 PMCID: PMC12088247 DOI: 10.1016/j.jposna.2025.100174] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/10/2024] [Revised: 03/07/2025] [Accepted: 03/07/2025] [Indexed: 05/29/2025]
Abstract
Background Significant postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in pediatric patients undergoing posterior spinal fusion is common and limits recovery, prolonging hospital stay. Fosaprepitant is a long-acting antiemetic and works by blocking substance P binding to the neurokinin-1 (NK1) receptor. There is evidence that its perioperative use substantially reduces PONV in adults, but there is a dearth of literature on its use in pediatric PONV. We seek to elucidate whether a postoperative dose of fosaprepitant in pediatric posterior instrumentation and fusion (PSIF) patients decreases PONV, thus improving recovery and decreasing the length of hospital stay. Methods This is a retrospective chart review of 173 pediatric patients with idiopathic scoliosis undergoing PSIF. The anesthetic methodology was standardized among both groups. The cohort was divided into two groups according to the use of fosaprepitant intraoperatively (or within four hours postoperatively) or no use. We examined patient characteristics, fosaprepitant dose, incidence of PONV, time to transition from parenteral to oral opioids, and length of hospital stay. Results 78 (45%) patients received fosaprepitant and 95 (55%) did not. There were no statistically significant differences between groups based on demographics or intraoperative management. No significant difference was found in the incidence of PONV between the groups, but there was a reduction in the number of rescue antiemetics required and a quicker transition from parenteral to oral opioids in the fosaprepitant group. There was also a significantly decreased length of stay. Conclusions While fosaprepitant did not significantly decrease PONV in pediatric PSIF patients, it was associated with decreased use of additional antiemetics. The patients also demonstrated a more rapid transition to oral from parenteral opioids and a shorter length of hospital stay. A larger study may show a statistically significant reduction in PONV in patients who received fosaprepitant. Future studies are needed to elucidate the optimal dose and timing needed to treat PONV in pediatrics. Key Concepts (1)Spinal fusion surgery patients are at risk of having significant postoperative nausea and vomiting.(2)Fosaprepitant is an effective agent to treat postoperative nausea and vomiting in adults, but has not been extensively studied in pediatrics for this purpose. Level of Evidence The level of evidence is a 3 as it is a cohort study looking at the relationship between an exposure and an outcome.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jennifer Busse
- Department of Anesthesiology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Aaron Louie
- Department of Anesthesiology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Jennifer Crotty
- Department of Orthopedics, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Albert Lin
- Department of Anesthesiology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Zarema Muratova
- Department of Pharmacy, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Matan Malka
- Department of Orthopedics, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Ritt Givens
- Department of Orthopedics, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Benjamin Roye
- Department of Orthopedics, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Michael Vitale
- Department of Orthopedics, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - William Schechter
- Department of Anesthesiology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA
- Department of Pediatrics, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Andrews PLR, Golding JF, Sanger GJ. An assessment of the effects of neurokinin 1 receptor antagonism against nausea and vomiting: Relative efficacy, sites of action and lessons for future drug development. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2023; 89:3468-3490. [PMID: 37452618 DOI: 10.1111/bcp.15852] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/12/2023] [Revised: 07/03/2023] [Accepted: 07/04/2023] [Indexed: 07/18/2023] Open
Abstract
A broad-spectrum anti-vomiting effect of neurokinin1 receptor antagonists (NK1 RA), shown in pre-clinical animal studies, has been supported by a more limited range of clinical studies in different indications. However, this review suggests that compared with vomiting, the self-reported sensation of nausea is less affected or possibly unaffected (depending on the stimulus) by NK1 receptor antagonism, a common finding for anti-emetics. The stimulus-independent effects of NK1 RAs against vomiting are explicable by actions within the central pattern generator (ventral brainstem) and the nucleus tractus solitarius (NTS; dorsal brainstem), with additional effects on vagal afferent activity for certain stimuli (e.g., highly emetogenic chemotherapy). The central pattern generator and NTS neurones are multifunctional so the notable lack of obvious effects of NK1 RAs on other reflexes mediated by the same neurones suggests that their anti-vomiting action is dependent on the activation state of the pathway leading to vomiting. Nausea requires activation of cerebral pathways by projection of information from the NTS. Although NK1 receptors are present in cerebral nuclei implicated in nausea, and imaging studies show very high receptor occupancy at clinically used doses, the variable or limited ability of NK1 RAs to inhibit nausea emphasizes: (i) our inadequate understanding of the mechanisms of nausea; and (ii) that classification of a drug as an anti-emetic may give a false impression of efficacy against nausea vs. vomiting. We discuss the potential mechanisms for the differential efficacy of NK1 RA and the implications for future development of drugs that can effectively treat nausea, an area of unmet clinical need.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paul L R Andrews
- Division of Biomedical Sciences, St George's University of London, London, UK
| | | | - Gareth J Sanger
- Blizard Institute, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Li C, Cui W, Song P, Liu W, Wang X, Yang Q. Effect of ondansetron for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting after breast cancer surgery. Am J Transl Res 2022; 14:6689-6695. [PMID: 36247242 PMCID: PMC9556477] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/30/2021] [Accepted: 08/09/2022] [Indexed: 06/16/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To evaluate the preventive effect of preoperative administration of ondansetron on postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in patients receiving breast cancer surgery. METHODS Data from 225 patients who received modified radical mastectomy from January 2019 to December 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. The patients were divided into an ondansetron group and a control group according to whether they received preoperative ondansetron or not. The incidence of PONV, visual analog scale (VAS) score, the rescue analgesics use and rescue antiemetic use, as well as the patient satisfaction degree about their PONV were compared between the two groups. RESULTS The ondansetron group showed lower total incidence of PONV, lower VAS score at 6 h post-operation as well as less rescue antiemetic use than the control group (P<0.05). Patients in the ondansetron group were more satisfied with their PONV condition than those in the control group (P<0.05). CONCLUSION Preoperative administration of ondansetron can prevent PONV and relieve pain 2-24 hours after breast cancer surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chunlei Li
- Department of Anesthesiology, Cangzhou Central HospitalCangzhou 061000, Hebei, China
| | - Wenbin Cui
- Department of Anesthesiology, Cangzhou Central HospitalCangzhou 061000, Hebei, China
| | - Panpan Song
- Department of Anesthesiology, Cangzhou Central HospitalCangzhou 061000, Hebei, China
| | - Wang Liu
- Department of Anesthesiology, Children’s Ward of Cangzhou Central HospitalCangzhou 061000, Hebei, China
| | - Xiaodong Wang
- Department of Anesthesiology, Cangzhou Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine HospitalCangzhou 061000, Hebei, China
| | - Qiang Yang
- Department of Anesthesiology, Cangzhou Central HospitalCangzhou 061000, Hebei, China
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Braga ELC, Verçosa N, Cavalcanti IL. Comparative Study Between Fosaprepitant and Palonosetron in the Prophylaxis of Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting in Women Undergoing Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: Prospective, Randomized and Double-Blind Study. Front Pharmacol 2022; 13:915347. [PMID: 35645797 PMCID: PMC9130472 DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2022.915347] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/07/2022] [Accepted: 04/20/2022] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Objective: To test the hypothesis that the single use of fosaprepitant is not inferior to the use of palonosetron as antiemetic prophylaxis in the first 48 h after surgery in women undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Method: Eighty-eight nonsmoking women (American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I or II) aged between 18 and 60 years who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy received 150 mg of fosaprepitant or 75 μg of palonosetron, administered intravenously after the induction of general anesthesia. Results: In the fosaprepitant group and in the palonosetron group, 13.6 and 18.2% of the patients, respectively, vomited in the first 48 h after surgery (p = 0.560). There were no differences between groups in the total frequency and intensity of nausea, number of complete responders, need for rescue medication, time required for the first rescue medication dose or number of adverse events. Conclusion: The administration of a single dose of fosaprepitant after the induction of anesthesia was as effective as the administration of a single dose of palonosetron for the prophylaxis of vomiting in the first 48 h after surgery in women undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Estêvão Luiz Carvalho Braga
- Department of General and Specialized Surgery, Medical Sciences Postgraduate Program, Fluminense Federal University, Niterói, Brazil
| | - Nubia Verçosa
- Department of Surgery/Anaesthesiology, Surgical Sciences Postgraduate Program, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
| | - Ismar Lima Cavalcanti
- Department of General and Specialized Surgery, Medical Sciences Postgraduate Program, Fluminense Federal University, Niterói, Brazil
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Jin Z, Daksla N, Gan TJ. Neurokinin-1 Antagonists for Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting. Drugs 2021; 81:1171-1179. [PMID: 34106456 DOI: 10.1007/s40265-021-01532-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 04/29/2021] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) are the second most frequent adverse events after surgery second only to postoperative pain. Despite the advances in antiemetics and implementation of multimodal prophylactic interventions, the clinical management of PONV remains problematic. Neurokinin-1 (NK-1) receptor is a tachykinin receptor found throughout the central and peripheral nervous systems, with a particular affinity towards substance P. NK-1 receptors interact with several parts of the neuronal pathway for nausea and vomiting. This includes the chemoreceptor trigger zone, the gastrointestinal tract, and dorsal motor nucleus of the vagus. NK-1 antagonists are thought to prevent nausea and vomiting by downregulating the emetogenic signals at those points. As more head-to-head trials are conducted between the various anti-emetics, there is emerging evidence that NK-1 antagonists may be more effective in preventing PONV than several other antiemetics currently in use. In this review, we will discuss the pharmacology of NK-1 antagonists, their efficacy in clinical practice, and how they could fit into the framework of PONV management.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zhaosheng Jin
- Department of Anesthesiology, Stony Brook University Renaissance School of Medicine, Stony Brook, NY, 11794-8480, USA
| | - Neil Daksla
- Department of Anesthesiology, Stony Brook University Renaissance School of Medicine, Stony Brook, NY, 11794-8480, USA
| | - Tong J Gan
- Department of Anesthesiology, Stony Brook University Renaissance School of Medicine, Stony Brook, NY, 11794-8480, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Beard TL, Michalsky C, Candiotti KA, Rider P, Wase L, Habib AS, Demitrack MA, Fossler MJ, Viscusi ER. Oliceridine is Associated with Reduced Risk of Vomiting and Need for Rescue Antiemetics Compared to Morphine: Exploratory Analysis from Two Phase 3 Randomized Placebo and Active Controlled Trials. Pain Ther 2020; 10:401-413. [PMID: 33210266 PMCID: PMC8119517 DOI: 10.1007/s40122-020-00216-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/23/2020] [Accepted: 10/28/2020] [Indexed: 12/21/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Use of parenteral opioids is a major risk factor for postoperative nausea and vomiting. Conventional opioids bind to µ-opioid receptors (MOR), stimulate both the G-protein signaling (achieving analgesia); and the β-arrestin pathway (associated with opioid-related adverse effects). Oliceridine, a next-generation IV opioid, is a G-protein selective MOR agonist, with limited recruitment of β-arrestin. In two randomized, placebo- and morphine-controlled phase 3 studies of patients with moderate-to-severe acute pain following bunionectomy or abdominoplasty, oliceridine at demand doses of 0.1, 0.35, and 0.5 mg provided rapid and sustained analgesia vs. placebo with favorable gastrointestinal (GI) tolerability. In this exploratory analysis, we utilized a clinical endpoint assessing gastrointestinal tolerability, "complete GI response" defined as the proportion of patients with no vomiting and no use of rescue antiemetic to characterize the GI tolerability profile of oliceridine vs. morphine. METHODS A logistic regression model was utilized to compare oliceridine (pooled regimens) vs. morphine, after controlling for analgesia (using the sum of pain intensity difference [SPID]-48/24 [bunionectomy/abdominoplasty] with pre-rescue scores carried forward for 6 h). This analysis excluded patients receiving placebo and was performed for each study separately and for pooled data from both studies. RESULTS In the unadjusted analysis, a significantly greater proportion of patients in the placebo (76.4%), oliceridine 0.1 mg (68.0%), and 0.35 mg (46.2%) demand dose achieved complete GI response vs. morphine 1 mg (30.8%), p ≤ 0.005. In the adjusted analysis, after controlling for analgesia, the odds ratio of experiencing a complete GI response with oliceridine (pooled regimens) vs. morphine was 3.14 (95% CI: 1.78, 5.56; p < 0.0001) in bunionectomy study and 1.92 (95% CI: 1.09, 3.36; p = 0.024) in abdominoplasty study. CONCLUSIONS When controlled for the analgesic effects (constant SPID-48/24), the odds ratio for complete GI response was higher with oliceridine than morphine, suggesting better GI tolerability with oliceridine.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Timothy L Beard
- Department of Surgery and Clinical Research, Summit Medical Group, Bend Memorial Clinic, Bend, OR, USA.
| | | | - Keith A Candiotti
- Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative Medicine, and Pain Management, University of Miami, Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Paul Rider
- Department of Surgery, University of South Alabama Medical Center, Mobile, AL, USA
| | | | - Ashraf S Habib
- Department of Anesthesiology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA
| | | | | | - Eugene R Viscusi
- Department of Anesthesiology, Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
The next generation of antiemetics for the management of postoperative nausea and vomiting. Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol 2020; 34:759-769. [PMID: 33288125 DOI: 10.1016/j.bpa.2020.11.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/04/2020] [Accepted: 11/09/2020] [Indexed: 11/23/2022]
Abstract
Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) afflict approximately 30% of patients overall and up to 80% of high-risk patients after surgery. Optimal pharmacological prophylaxis of PONV is challenging as it necessitates the consideration of PONV risk, drug efficacy, and potential adverse effects. Despite significant advances in our understanding of the pathophysiology and risk factors of PONV, its incidence has remained largely unchanged. Newer antiemetics have been introduced that may have improved safety profiles, longer duration of action, and better efficacy. This review aims to summarize the recent developments pertaining to these new agents and their potential application toward the management of PONV.
Collapse
|
8
|
|
9
|
Chen Y, Chang J. Anti-emetic Drugs for Prophylaxis of Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting After Craniotomy: An Updated Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis. Front Med (Lausanne) 2020; 7:40. [PMID: 32158760 PMCID: PMC7052291 DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2020.00040] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/14/2019] [Accepted: 01/28/2020] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: There is uncertainty about the effect of antiemetic drugs (AED) for the prophylaxis of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) after craniotomy. In this study, we assessed the effectiveness and safety of AED for PONV. Methods and Findings: We searched online databases including the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Wiley, Elsevier Science Direct, Ovid LWW, and Springer for publications from 1985 to June 2018. Adults undergoing craniotomy with the prophylactic use of at least one AED were included. The primary outcomes were the incidence of postoperative nausea (PON) and postoperative vomiting (POV) during the first and second day. A total of 1,433 participants from 17 clinical trials were enrolled in this Network Meta-Analysis (NMA). Compared to placebo, ramosetron was the most effective treatment for PON 24 h after surgery (OR = 0.063, 95% Crl: 0.006–0.45), with a 69.2% probability. On the other hand, for POV, droperidol was the best treatment during the first 2 h with a 71.1% probability (OR = 0.029, 95% Crl: 0.003–0.25); while fosaprepitant was the most effective treatment at 0–24 h (OR = 0.027, 95% Crl: 0.007–0.094; 66.9% probability) and 0–48 h (OR = 0.036, 95% Crl: 0.006–0.18; 56.6% probability). Besides, ramosetron showed a significantly higher incidence of complete response (OR = 29. 95% Crl: 1.4–6.5e + 02), as well as lower requirement for rescue AED (OR = 0.022, 95% Crl: 0.001–0.2). Granisetron was associated with the lowest incidence of headache and excessive sedation. Conclusions: Compared with placebo, ramosetron appears to be the best prophylactic treatment for PON 24 h after craniotomy, with higher complete responses. Fosaprepitant appears to be the most effective prophylaxis option for POV on the first 0–24 and 0–48 h. Both may be better applied in combination with perioperative dexamethasone. These findings may guide clinicians to provide improved pharmacological prophylaxis for PONV after craniotomy with fewer adverse effects.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yijing Chen
- Department of Health Care, First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China.,Academy of Medical Science, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China
| | - Jing Chang
- Department of Health Care, First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China
| |
Collapse
|