The effect of anaesthetic technique on postoperative nausea and vomiting after day-case gynaecological laparoscopy

Drugs for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in adults after general anaesthesia: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a common adverse effect of anaesthesia and surgery. Up to 80% of patients may be affected. These outcomes are a major cause of patient dissatisfaction and may lead to prolonged hospital stay and higher costs of care along with more severe complications. Many antiemetic drugs are available for prophylaxis. They have various mechanisms of action and side effects, but there is still uncertainty about which drugs are most effective with the fewest side effects.

OBJECTIVES

• To compare the efficacy and safety of different prophylactic pharmacologic interventions (antiemetic drugs) against no treatment, against placebo, or against each other (as monotherapy or combination prophylaxis) for prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in adults undergoing any type of surgery under general anaesthesia • To generate a clinically useful ranking of antiemetic drugs (monotherapy and combination prophylaxis) based on efficacy and safety • To identify the best dose or dose range of antiemetic drugs in terms of efficacy and safety SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP), ClinicalTrials.gov, and reference lists of relevant systematic reviews. The first search was performed in November 2017 and was updated in April 2020. In the update of the search, 39 eligible studies were found that were not included in the analysis (listed as awaiting classification).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing effectiveness or side effects of single antiemetic drugs in any dose or combination against each other or against an inactive control in adults undergoing any type of surgery under general anaesthesia. All antiemetic drugs belonged to one of the following substance classes: 5-HT₃ receptor antagonists, D₂ receptor antagonists, NK₁ receptor antagonists, corticosteroids, antihistamines, and anticholinergics. No language restrictions were applied. Abstract publications were excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

A review team of 11 authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias and subsequently extracted data. We performed pair-wise meta-analyses for drugs of direct interest (amisulpride, aprepitant, casopitant, dexamethasone, dimenhydrinate, dolasetron, droperidol, fosaprepitant, granisetron, haloperidol, meclizine, methylprednisolone, metoclopramide, ondansetron, palonosetron, perphenazine, promethazine, ramosetron, rolapitant, scopolamine, and tropisetron) compared to placebo (inactive control). We performed network meta-analyses (NMAs) to estimate the relative effects and ranking (with placebo as reference) of all available single drugs and combinations. Primary outcomes were vomiting within 24 hours postoperatively, serious adverse events (SAEs), and any adverse event (AE). Secondary outcomes were drug class-specific side effects (e.g. headache), mortality, early and late vomiting, nausea, and complete response. We performed subgroup network meta-analysis with dose of drugs as a moderator variable using dose ranges based on previous consensus recommendations. We assessed certainty of evidence of NMA treatment effects for all primary outcomes and drug class-specific side effects according to GRADE (CINeMA, Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis). We restricted GRADE assessment to single drugs of direct interest compared to placebo.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 585 studies (97,516 randomized participants). Most of these studies were small (median sample size of 100); they were published between 1965 and 2017 and were primarily conducted in Asia (51%), Europe (25%), and North America (16%). Mean age of the overall population was 42 years. Most participants were women (83%), had American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I and II (70%), received perioperative opioids (88%), and underwent gynaecologic (32%) or gastrointestinal surgery (19%) under general anaesthesia using volatile anaesthetics (88%). In this review, 44 single drugs and 51 drug combinations were compared. Most studies investigated only single drugs (72%) and included an inactive control arm (66%). The three most investigated single drugs in this review were ondansetron (246 studies), dexamethasone (120 studies), and droperidol (97 studies). Almost all studies (89%) reported at least one efficacy outcome relevant for this review. However, only 56% reported at least one relevant safety outcome. Altogether, 157 studies (27%) were assessed as having overall low risk of bias, 101 studies (17%) overall high risk of bias, and 327 studies (56%) overall unclear risk of bias. Vomiting within 24 hours postoperatively Relative effects from NMA for vomiting within 24 hours (282 RCTs, 50,812 participants, 28 single drugs, and 36 drug combinations) suggest that 29 out of 36 drug combinations and 10 out of 28 single drugs showed a clinically important benefit (defined as the upper end of the 95% confidence interval (CI) below a risk ratio (RR) of 0.8) compared to placebo. Combinations of drugs were generally more effective than single drugs in preventing vomiting. However, single NK₁ receptor antagonists showed treatment effects similar to most of the drug combinations. High-certainty evidence suggests that the following single drugs reduce vomiting (ordered by decreasing efficacy): aprepitant (RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.38, high certainty, rank 3/28 of single drugs); ramosetron (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.59, high certainty, rank 5/28); granisetron (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.54, high certainty, rank 6/28); dexamethasone (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.57, high certainty, rank 8/28); and ondansetron (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.60, high certainty, rank 13/28). Moderate-certainty evidence suggests that the following single drugs probably reduce vomiting: fosaprepitant (RR 0.06, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.21, moderate certainty, rank 1/28) and droperidol (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.69, moderate certainty, rank 20/28). Recommended and high doses of granisetron, dexamethasone, ondansetron, and droperidol showed clinically important benefit, but low doses showed no clinically important benefit. Aprepitant was used mainly at high doses, ramosetron at recommended doses, and fosaprepitant at doses of 150 mg (with no dose recommendation available). Frequency of SAEs Twenty-eight RCTs were included in the NMA for SAEs (10,766 participants, 13 single drugs, and eight drug combinations). The certainty of evidence for SAEs when using one of the best and most reliable anti-vomiting drugs (aprepitant, ramosetron, granisetron, dexamethasone, ondansetron, and droperidol compared to placebo) ranged from very low to low. Droperidol (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.08 to 9.71, low certainty, rank 6/13) may reduce SAEs. We are uncertain about the effects of aprepitant (RR 1.39, 95% CI 0.26 to 7.36, very low certainty, rank 11/13), ramosetron (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.05 to 15.74, very low certainty, rank 7/13), granisetron (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.11 to 13.15, very low certainty, rank 10/13), dexamethasone (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.28 to 4.85, very low certainty, rank 9/13), and ondansetron (RR 1.62, 95% CI 0.32 to 8.10, very low certainty, rank 12/13). No studies reporting SAEs were available for fosaprepitant. Frequency of any AE Sixty-one RCTs were included in the NMA for any AE (19,423 participants, 15 single drugs, and 11 drug combinations). The certainty of evidence for any AE when using one of the best and most reliable anti-vomiting drugs (aprepitant, ramosetron, granisetron, dexamethasone, ondansetron, and droperidol compared to placebo) ranged from very low to moderate. Granisetron (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.05, moderate certainty, rank 7/15) probably has no or little effect on any AE. Dexamethasone (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.08, low certainty, rank 2/15) and droperidol (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.98, low certainty, rank 6/15) may reduce any AE. Ondansetron (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.01, low certainty, rank 9/15) may have little or no effect on any AE. We are uncertain about the effects of aprepitant (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.97, very low certainty, rank 3/15) and ramosetron (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.54, very low certainty, rank 11/15) on any AE. No studies reporting any AE were available for fosaprepitant. Class-specific side effects For class-specific side effects (headache, constipation, wound infection, extrapyramidal symptoms, sedation, arrhythmia, and QT prolongation) of relevant substances, the certainty of evidence for the best and most reliable anti-vomiting drugs mostly ranged from very low to low. Exceptions were that ondansetron probably increases headache (RR 1.16, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.28, moderate certainty, rank 18/23) and probably reduces sedation (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.96, moderate certainty, rank 5/24) compared to placebo. The latter effect is limited to recommended and high doses of ondansetron. Droperidol probably reduces headache (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.86, moderate certainty, rank 5/23) compared to placebo. We have high-certainty evidence that dexamethasone (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.09, high certainty, rank 16/24) has no effect on sedation compared to placebo. No studies assessed substance class-specific side effects for fosaprepitant. Direction and magnitude of network effect estimates together with level of evidence certainty are graphically summarized for all pre-defined GRADE-relevant outcomes and all drugs of direct interest compared to placebo in http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4066353.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found high-certainty evidence that five single drugs (aprepitant, ramosetron, granisetron, dexamethasone, and ondansetron) reduce vomiting, and moderate-certainty evidence that two other single drugs (fosaprepitant and droperidol) probably reduce vomiting, compared to placebo. Four of the six substance classes (5-HT₃ receptor antagonists, D₂ receptor antagonists, NK₁ receptor antagonists, and corticosteroids) were thus represented by at least one drug with important benefit for prevention of vomiting. Combinations of drugs were generally more effective than the corresponding single drugs in preventing vomiting. NK₁ receptor antagonists were the most effective drug class and had comparable efficacy to most of the drug combinations. 5-HT₃ receptor antagonists were the best studied substance class. For most of the single drugs of direct interest, we found only very low to low certainty evidence for safety outcomes such as occurrence of SAEs, any AE, and substance class-specific side effects. Recommended and high doses of granisetron, dexamethasone, ondansetron, and droperidol were more effective than low doses for prevention of vomiting. Dose dependency of side effects was rarely found due to the limited number of studies, except for the less sedating effect of recommended and high doses of ondansetron. The results of the review are transferable mainly to patients at higher risk of nausea and vomiting (i.e. healthy women undergoing inhalational anaesthesia and receiving perioperative opioids). Overall study quality was limited, but certainty assessments of effect estimates consider this limitation. No further efficacy studies are needed as there is evidence of moderate to high certainty for seven single drugs with relevant benefit for prevention of vomiting. However, additional studies are needed to investigate potential side effects of these drugs and to examine higher-risk patient populations (e.g. individuals with diabetes and heart disease).

[Comparison of post-operative nausea and vomiting with intravenous versus inhalational anesthesia in laparotomic abdominal surgery: a randomized clinical trial]

BACKGROUND

Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting (PONV) is a multifactorial surgical complication with an unclear underlying cause. Anesthetic methods, patients' characteristics and the type of surgery are considered as factors affecting PONV. This study was designed to compare the effect of inhalational and intravenous anesthesia in abdominal surgery on the incidence and severity of PONV.

METHODS

A single-blinded prospective randomized clinical trial on 105 patients aged 18-65 years was carried out. Patients were divided in two groups of Total Intravenous Anesthesia (TIVA) and Inhalational anesthesia. The incidence and severity of PONV were examined at 0, 2, 6, 12, and 24hours after the surgery. The use of a rescue antiemetic was also evaluated.

RESULTS

Fifty point nine percent of the patients in the inhalation group and 17.3% of the patients in the intravenous group developed PONV (p <0.001). The incidence of vomiting was reported in 11.3% of the Inhalational group and 3.8% of the TIVA group (p=0.15), and 24.5% of patients in the Inhalation group and 9.6% of patients in the intravenous group needed an antiemetic medication (p=0.043).

CONCLUSION

The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting and the need for administration of an antiemetic rescue drug, and the severity of nausea in patients were significantly lower in the TIVA group.

Comparison of post-operative nausea and vomiting with intravenous versus inhalational anesthesia in laparotomic abdominal surgery: a randomized clinical trial

Background

Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting (PONV) is a multifactorial surgical complication with an unclear underlying cause. Anesthetic methods, patients' characteristics and the type of surgery are considered as factors affecting PONV. This study was designed to compare the effect of inhalational and intravenous anesthesia in abdominal surgery on the incidence and severity of PONV.

Methods

A single-blinded prospective randomized clinical trial on 105 patients aged 18 − 65 years was carried out. Patients were divided into two groups of Total Intravenous Anesthesia (TIVA) and inhalational anesthesia. The incidence and the severity of PONV were examined at 0, 2, 6, 12 and 24 hours after the surgery. The use of a rescue antiemetic was also evaluated.

Results

50.9% of the patients in the inhalation group and 17.3% of the patients in the intravenous group developed PONV (p <  0.001). The incidence of vomiting was reported in 11.3% of the inhalational group and 3.8% of the TIVA group (p =  0.15). 24.5% of patients in the inhalation group and 9.6% of patients in the intravenous group needed an antiemetic medication (p =  0.043).

Conclusion

The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting and the need for administration of an antiemetic rescue drug and the severity of nausea in patients were significantly lower in the TIVA group.

WITHDRAWN: Drugs for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting

BACKGROUND

Drugs can prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting, but their relative efficacies and side effects have not been compared within one systematic review.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to assess the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting by drugs and the development of any side effects.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, Issue 2, 2004), MEDLINE (January 1966 to May 2004), EMBASE (January 1985 to May 2004), CINAHL (1982 to May 2004), AMED (1985 to May 2004), SIGLE (to May 2004), ISI WOS (to May 2004), LILAC (to May 2004) and INGENTA bibliographies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials that compared a drug with placebo or another drug, or compared doses or timing of administration, that reported postoperative nausea or vomiting as an outcome.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted outcome data.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 737 studies involving 103,237 people. Compared to placebo, eight drugs prevented postoperative nausea and vomiting: droperidol, metoclopramide, ondansetron, tropisetron, dolasetron, dexamethasone, cyclizine and granisetron. Publication bias makes evidence for differences among these drugs unreliable. The relative risks (RR) versus placebo varied between 0.60 and 0.80, depending upon the drug and outcome. Evidence for side effects was sparse: droperidol was sedative (RR 1.32) and headache was more common after ondansetron (RR 1.16).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Either nausea or vomiting is reported to affect, at most, 80 out of 100 people after surgery. If all 100 of these people are given one of the listed drugs, about 28 would benefit and 72 would not. Nausea and vomiting are usually less common and, therefore, drugs are less useful. For 100 people, of whom 30 would vomit or feel sick after surgery if given placebo, 10 people would benefit from a drug and 90 would not. Between one to five patients out of every 100 people may experience a mild side effect, such as sedation or headache, when given an antiemetic drug. Collaborative research should focus on determining whether antiemetic drugs cause more severe, probably rare, side effects. Further comparison of the antiemetic effect of one drug versus another is not a research priority.

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.

Postoperative nausea and vomiting after total thyroidectomy: sevoflurane combined with prophylactic ramosetron vs. propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia

Background

The frequent and distressing adverse events (AEs) of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) are of major concern in 63-84% of adult patients undergoing thyroidectomy. We conducted this prospective study to compare two prophylactic strategies; sevoflurane combined with ramosetron and propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia in a homogenous group of non-smoking women undergoing total thyroidectomy.

Methods

In the current prospective study, we enrolled a consecutive series of 64 female patients aged between 20 and 65 years with an American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status of I or II who were scheduled to undergo elective total thyroidectomy under general anesthesia. Patients were randomized to either the SR (sevoflurane and remifentanil) group or the TIVA group. We evaluated the incidence and severity of PONV, the use of rescue anti-emetics and the severity of pain during the first 24 h after surgery.

Results

There were no significant differences in the proportion of the patients with a complete response and the Rhodes index, including the occurrence score, distress score and experience score, between the two groups. In addition, there were no significant differences in the proportion of the patients who were in need of rescue anti-emetics or analgesics and the VAS scores between the two groups.

Conclusions

In conclusion, TIVA and ramosetron prophylaxis reduced the expected incidence of PONV in women undergoing total thyroidectomy. In addition, there was no significant difference in the efficacy during the first 24 h postoperatively between the two prophylactic regimens.

A randomized, double-blind trial of palonosetron compared with ondansetron in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting after gynaecological laparoscopic surgery

This randomized, double-blind study evaluated the relative efficacy of palonosetron (a new, selective 5-hydroxytryptamine type 3 [5-HT(3)] receptor antagonist) and ondansetron in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in patients undergoing gynaecological laparoscopic surgery. Patients received either palonosetron 0.075 mg (n = 45) or ondansetron 8 mg (n = 45), intravenously, immediately before induction of general anaesthesia. The occurrence of nausea and vomiting and the severity of nausea according to a visual analogue scale were monitored immediately after the end of surgery and during the following 24 h. The incidence of PONV was significantly lower in the palonosetron group compared with the ondansetron group (42.2% vs 66.7%, respectively). There were no significant statistical differences in the visual analogue scale for nausea. In conclusion, palonosetron 0.075 mg was more effective than ondansetron 8 mg in preventing PONV.

A Randomized Controlled Trial of Two Different Interventions for the Prevention of Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting: Total Intravenous Anaesthesia using Propofol and Remifentanil versus Prophylactic Palonosetron with Inhalational Anaesthesia using Sevoflurane-Nitrous Oxide

Total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) can reduce the risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) almost as much as a single antiemetic. This study compared TIVA (using propofol and remifentanil) with prophylactic palonosetron (a 5-hydroxytryptamine type 3 receptor antagonist) combined with inhalation anaesthesia using sevoflurane in 50% nitrous oxide, for the prevention of PONV. Patients were randomly assigned to one of two prophylactic interventions: (i) palonosetron 0.075 mg, intravenously before induction of inhalation anaesthesia (palonosetron group); and (ii) TIVA (propofol target blood concentration 2.5-6.0 μg/ml; remifentanil target blood concentration 2.5-6.0 ng/ml; TIVA group). Nausea/vomiting occurrence and severity were monitored immediately after the end of surgery for 24 h. The incidence of PONV was around 50% in both groups and the severity of nausea was similar in both groups. Prophylactic palonosetron with inhalational anaesthesia using sevoflurane in 50% nitrous oxide reduced the incidence of PONV after gynaecological laparoscopic surgery almost as much as TIVA using propofol and remifentanil.

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

BACKGROUND

Clinical effects, recovery characteristics, and costs of total intravenous anesthesia with different inhalational anesthetics have been investigated and compared; however, there are no reported clinical studies focusing on the effects of anesthesia with propofol and desflurane in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to determine the effects of total intravenous anesthesia with propofol and alfentanil compared with those of desflurane and alfentanil on recovery characteristics, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), duration of hospitalization, and gastrointestinal motility.

METHODS

Patients classified as American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I or II undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy due to benign gallbladder disease were enrolled in the study. Patients were randomly assigned at a 1:1 ratio to receive total intravenous anesthesia with propofol (2-2.5 mg/kg) and alfentanil (20 μg/kg) or desflurane (4%-6%) and alfentanil (20 μg/kg). Perioperative management during premedication, intraoperative analgesia, relaxation, ventilation, and postoperative analgesia were carried out identically in the 2 groups. Extubation time, recovery time, PONV, postoperative antiemetic requirement, time to gastrointestinal motility and flatus, duration of hospitalization, and adverse effects were recorded. Postoperative pain was assessed using a visual analogue scale.

RESULTS

Sixty-eight patients were assessed for inclusion in the study; 5 were excluded because they chose open surgery and 3 did not complete the study because they left the hospital. Sixty patients (33 women, 27 men) completed the study. Recovery time was significantly shorter in the propofol group (n = 30) compared with the desflurane group (n = 30) (8.0 [0.77] vs 9.2 [0.66] min, respectively; P < 0.005). Fifteen patients (50.0%) in the propofol group and 20 patients (66.7%) in the desflurane group experienced nausea during the first 24 hours after surgery. The difference was not considered significant. In the propofol group, significantly fewer patients had vomiting episodes compared with those in the desflurane group (2 [6.7%] vs 16 [53.3%]; P < 0.005). Significantly fewer patients in the propofol group required analgesic medication in the first 24 hours after surgery compared with those in the desflurane group (10 [33.3%] vs 15 [50.0%]; P < 0.005). Patients in the propofol group experienced bowel movements in a significantly shorter period of time compared with patients in the desflurane group (8.30 [1.67] vs 9.76 [1.88] hours; P = 0.02). The mean time to flatus occurred significantly sooner after surgery in the propofol group than in the desflurane group (8.70 [1.79] vs 9.46 [2.09] hours; P = 0.01). The duration of hospitalization after surgery was significantly shorter in the propofol group than in the desflurane group (40.60 [3.49] vs 43.60 [3.56] hours; P = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

Total intravenous anesthesia with propofol and alfentanil was associated with a significantly reduced rate of PONV and analgesic consumption, shortened recovery time and duration of hospitalization, accelerated onset of bowel movements, and increased patient satisfaction compared with desflurane and alfentanil in these patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery who completed the study.

Acupressure and acupuncture in preventing and managing postoperative nausea and vomiting in adults

This literature review sets out to investigate the effectiveness of acupressure and acupuncture in preventing and managing postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in adult patients. PONV is problematic, affecting patient satisfaction, delayed discharge and even patient re-admission. Current treatment of PONV constitutes a variety of drug therapies, which are only partially effective. With the integration of complementary and alternative medicines in healthcare, this review examined 10 research studies investigating the use of acupressure and acupuncture in treating PONV. Three studies found acupressure to be effective in preventing PONV. However, population samples were small and the research designs had numerous anomalies. Overall the article suggests that acupuncture and acupressure are ineffective in preventing and managing PONV in adult patients. Further investigation of the effectiveness of acupressure and acupuncture, combined with current drug therapies, using well designed and adequately powered studies is needed. Published studies predominantly examined the use of P6 as the pressure point. Further studies should examine other 'acupoint' sites, to ascertain whether these are effective dependent upon the operative site.

Ondansetron and Dexamethasone Dose Combinations for Prophylaxis Against Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting

BACKGROUND

Patients at high risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting often receive more than one prophylactic antiemetic drug. In this study we sought to determine whether one or more of four dose combinations of dexamethasone and ondansetron was superior in efficacy.

METHODS

In a randomized, double-blind trial of four dose combinations, women having day-surgical gynecologic laparoscopy received IV dexamethasone and ondansetron 4 + 4 mg (Group D4/O4, n = 154), 4 + 2 mg (Group D4/O2, n = 151), 2 + 4 mg (Group D2/O4, n = 154), or 2 + 2 mg (Group D2/O2, n = 155).

RESULTS

The groups were not significantly different for predicted risk or characteristics. The incidence of vomiting until discharge did not differ significantly (5%, 4%, 9% and 8% for Groups D4/O4, D4/O2, D2/O4 and D2/O2 respectively, P = 0.17), nor were there significant differences among groups in the incidence of vomiting until 24 h postoperatively, no nausea and no vomiting, antiemetic treatment, neither vomiting nor antiemetic treatment (80%-83% across groups), or inpatient satisfaction and recovery scores, or time to discharge. Average nausea scores were low in all groups, but the incidence of nausea until 24 h postoperatively was significantly higher among groups receiving only 2 mg of dexamethasone (P < 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

All combinations were associated with a low incidence of vomiting and rescue treatment, with dexamethasone 2 mg plus ondansetron 2 mg not significantly different to other dose combinations except that groups receiving 2 mg dexamethasone had a more frequent incidence of nausea.

Randomized comparison of two anti-emetic strategies in high-risk patients undergoing day-case gynaecological surgery

BACKGROUND

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a significant cause of morbidity among patients undergoing general anaesthesia. The optimal strategy for prevention of PONV, however, remains unclear. This study compared two commonly used prophylactic strategies in high-risk, day-case, gynaecological surgery patients.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized trial comparing sevoflurane combined with dolasetron (SD), with propofol-based total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) in 126 high-risk patients undergoing day-case gynaecological surgery. The primary endpoints included the incidence and severity of nausea or vomiting before discharge and the incidence of nausea or vomiting between discharge and 24 h. To identify the factors most predictive of a complete response (no PONV at any time within the 24 h period), multiple logistic regression models were fitted.

RESULTS

Before discharge, there was no significant difference between the two treatment groups with respect to nausea and vomiting outcomes (P = 0.3). Post-discharge nausea and vomiting (PDNV), however, were significantly more common for patients in the TIVA group (nausea, P = 0.004 and vomiting, P = 0.03). Type of anaesthetic, adjusted for weight and anaesthesia duration was significantly associated with complete response (odds ratio = 2.7, 95% confidence interval = 1.15 to 6.4).

CONCLUSIONS

Although both TIVA and dolasetron prophylaxis reduce the predicted rate of PONV in the early postoperative period, the anti-emetic effects of propofol are short-lived. A longer-acting drug such as dolasetron may therefore be necessary to prevent PDNV.

Evidence-Based Interventions for Post Discharge Nausea and Vomiting: A Review of the Literature

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) and postdischarge nausea and vomiting (PDNV) continue to be a problem for one third of all patients who require surgery and anesthesia. Very few studies have been reported that specifically target PDNV in the outpatient surgery population for interventions after discharge home. Twenty studies were identified that specifically addressed the effect of an intervention for the purpose of preventing PDNV or rescuing the patient who develops PDNV. This article presents an integrative review of the research literature to determine the best evidence for prevention of PDNV in adults or for the rescue of patients who suffer from PDNV.

A comparison of cyclizine and granisetron alone and in combination for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting

We conducted a randomised double-blinded study of 960 women undergoing day-case surgery to determine whether combination anti-emetic therapy of granisetron and cyclizine was more effective at decreasing the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting than these agents used alone. The women were randomly allocated to three groups to receive intravenous granisetron 1 mg, cyclizine 50 mg or both before induction of general anaesthesia. The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting was 77/322 (24%) in the granisetron group, 73/316 (23%) in the cyclizine group and 53/322 (17%) in those women given both drugs (p = 0.04). There was no difference in the requirement for rescue anti-emetic drugs. There were no differences in the anaesthetic techniques used in the three groups. We conclude that the risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting is less with cyclizine and granisetron given together than with either given alone.

Drugs for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting

BACKGROUND

Drugs can prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting, but their relative efficacies and side effects have not been compared within one systematic review.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to assess the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting by drugs and the development of any side effects.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, Issue 2, 2004), MEDLINE (January 1966 to May 2004), EMBASE (January 1985 to May 2004), CINAHL (1982 to May 2004), AMED (1985 to May 2004), SIGLE (to May 2004), ISI WOS (to May 2004), LILAC (to May 2004) and INGENTA bibliographies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials that compared a drug with placebo or another drug, or compared doses or timing of administration, that reported postoperative nausea or vomiting as an outcome.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted outcome data.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 737 studies involving 103,237 people. Compared to placebo, eight drugs prevented postoperative nausea and vomiting: droperidol, metoclopramide, ondansetron, tropisetron, dolasetron, dexamethasone, cyclizine and granisetron. Publication bias makes evidence for differences among these drugs unreliable. The relative risks (RR) versus placebo varied between 0.60 and 0.80, depending upon the drug and outcome. Evidence for side effects was sparse: droperidol was sedative (RR 1.32) and headache was more common after ondansetron (RR 1.16).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Either nausea or vomiting is reported to affect, at most, 80 out of 100 people after surgery. If all 100 of these people are given one of the listed drugs, about 28 would benefit and 72 would not. Nausea and vomiting are usually less common and, therefore, drugs are less useful. For 100 people, of whom 30 would vomit or feel sick after surgery if given placebo, 10 people would benefit from a drug and 90 would not. Between one to five patients out of every 100 people may experience a mild side effect, such as sedation or headache, when given an antiemetic drug. Collaborative research should focus on determining whether antiemetic drugs cause more severe, probably rare, side effects. Further comparison of the antiemetic effect of one drug versus another is not a research priority.

Meta-analysis of the use of rescue antiemetics following PONV prophylactic failure with 5-HT3 antagonist/dexamethasone versus single-agent therapies

OBJECTIVE

To assess the use of rescue antiemetic medication following 5-HT3 receptor antagonist (5-HT3RA) plus dexamethasone therapy versus monotherapy with a 5-HT3RA for prophylaxis of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV).

DATA SOURCES

Reports of randomized, controlled trials were identified via a MEDLINE search (1966-September 2005) using the key terms ondansetron, dolasetron, tropisetron, granisetron, 5-HT3, PONV, vomiting, emesis, and nausea.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

Randomized, controlled trials of adult populations that had treatment arms comparing 5-HT3RA/dexamethasone combination therapy with 5-HT3RA or dexamethasone monotherapies versus placebo or 5-HT3RA versus dexamethasone or placebo were selected for analysis. Another criterion was that a proportion of patients required rescue medication 48 hours or less following surgery.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence interval were calculated to determine incidence rates for use of rescue medications within early (0-6 h), late (6-24 h), and overall (0-24 or 48 h) postoperative periods. Overall effect sizes were calculated by pooling ORs within fixed and random effects models.

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylaxis with 5-HT3RA/dexamethasone was associated with lower use of rescue antiemetics than 5-HT3RA (OR(pooled) = 0.48; 95% CI 0.29 to 0.77) or dexamethasone (OR(pooled) = 0.26; 95% CI 0.12-0.57) monotherapy during the overall postoperative period. Insufficient data were available to assess rescue use during early or late postoperative periods. It appears that patients at high risk of PONV who are treated prophylactically with combination 5-HT3RA/dexamethasone therapy are overall less likely to require rescue medication than if treated with 5-HT3RAs or dexamethasone alone. Additional large prospective studies are needed to determine the optimal regimen and timing of administration of prophylactic antiemetic therapy for different surgical populations.

A procedure-specific systematic review and consensus recommendations for postoperative analgesia following laparoscopic cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy has advantages over the open procedure for postoperative pain. However, a systematic review of postoperative pain management in this procedure has not been conducted.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted according to the guidelines of the Cochrane Collaboration. Randomized studies examining the effect of medical or surgical interventions on linear pain scores in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy were included. Qualitative and quantitative analyses were performed. Recommendations for patient care were derived from review of these data, evidence from other relevant procedures, and clinical practice observations collated by the Delphi method among the authors.

RESULTS

Sixty-nine randomized trials were included and 77 reports were excluded. Recommendations are provided for preoperative analgesia, anesthetic and operative techniques, and intraoperative and postoperative analgesia.

CONCLUSIONS

A step-up approach to the management of postoperative pain following laparoscopic cholecystectomy is recommended. This approach has been designed to provide adequate analgesia while minimizing exposure to adverse events.