Society for Ambulatory Anesthesia Guidelines for the Management of Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting

Comparing Different Doses of Intravenous Dexamethasone for Prolonging Analgesia After a Single-Shot Ultrasound-Guided Supraclavicular Brachial Plexus Block: A Prospective Randomized Study

Background Supraclavicular brachial plexus block (SCBPB) is a widely used regional anesthesia technique for upper limb surgeries. Intravenous dexamethasone is known to prolong postoperative analgesia, but the optimal dose remains uncertain due to potential side effects like hyperglycemia associated with high doses. This study compares the efficacy of different doses of intravenous dexamethasone in enhancing the duration of analgesia following a single-shot ultrasound-guided SCBPB. Methods This prospective, randomized study included 60 American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade I-III patients undergoing upper limb surgery. All patients received an ultrasound-guided SCBPB, followed by general anesthesia (GA) and were randomly allocated into four groups using computer-generated randomization: group 1: 0.5% levobupivacaine (20 ml) + 8 mg IV dexamethasone; group 2: 0.5% levobupivacaine (20 ml) + 4 mg IV dexamethasone; group 3: 0.5% levobupivacaine (20 ml) + 2 mg IV dexamethasone; group 4 (control): 0.5% levobupivacaine (20 ml) + IV 0.9% normal saline. Postoperative pain scores (visual analog scale, VAS), duration of analgesia, rescue analgesic requirement, incidence of nausea/vomiting, and blood glucose levels were recorded over 24 hours. Statistical analysis was performed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) and chi-square tests. Results Patients who received IV dexamethasone showed significantly prolonged analgesia compared to the control group (p < 0.001). The duration of analgesia in the 8 mg group was 13.8 ± 1.5 hours, compared to 11.2 ± 1.3 hours (4 mg), 9.4 ± 1.2 hours (2 mg), and 6.8 ± 1.1 hours in the control group. This represents a 103% increase in analgesia duration with 8 mg dexamethasone compared to the control. The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) was lower in dexamethasone groups (p = 0.02). However, 8 mg dexamethasone was associated with transient hyperglycemia (p = 0.04), with blood glucose levels peaking at 185 ± 12 mg/dL compared to 145 ± 10 mg/dL in the control group. Conclusion Intravenous dexamethasone significantly prolongs analgesia following SCBPB, with 8 mg providing the longest duration (103% increase vs. control). However, 4 mg may offer a balance between efficacy and minimal side effects, particularly in avoiding postoperative hyperglycemia.

The effect of ultrasound-guided drug injection at Neiguan point on the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting after laparoscopic cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

This study explores the feasibility and effectiveness of ultrasound-guided acupoint injection at Neiguan acupoint to prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

METHODS

A total of 60 patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the General Surgery Department of Zhejiang Hospital from February 2021 to August 2021 were enrolled in this study. The patients were randomly divided into the injection group (n = 30) and the control group (n = 30). The patients in the injection group received ultrasound-guided injections of tropisetron at bilateral Neiguan acupoints, while those in the control group received intravenous injections of tropisetron. The incidence of PONV within 24 hours after surgery, the need for "rescue" treatment, the incidence of puncture complications, and patients' satisfaction with PONV management were evaluated.

RESULT

Neiguan point can be accurately located by ultrasound guidance. Compared with the control group, the incidence of PONV was significantly decreased in the Injection group within 0 to 6 hours after surgery, and the vomiting rate was decreased within 6 to 12 hours after surgery (P < .05).

CONCLUSION

Ultrasound-guided drug injection at Neiguan to prevent PONV has the characteristics of visualization and accuracy, which is easy to promote and use, and the effect is satisfactory.

Nonopioid Drugs for Postoperative Pain: A Selection Governed by Choices of the Authors of Academic Articles

The opioid crisis has profoundly changed the interest in using nonopioid analgesics. This review identified nonopioid drugs receiving the most interest in the treatment of postoperative pain. Publication-based interest, which reflects the authors' choices of subjects for academic articles, was used to show the shifts in their interest. The authors' choices of a particular drug for an article's subject were regarded as reflective of the collective opinion of experts most knowledgeable on the subject. The frequency with which a drug was the topic of an article was measured with the use of specific bibliometric indices. They were employed to select nonopioid drugs for this review. These included acetaminophen, dexmedetomidine, dexamethasone, ketamine, gabapentin, ibuprofen, ketorolac, diclofenac, magnesium sulfate, clonidine, intravenous lidocaine, and meloxicam (in order of most to least bibliometric interest). Individual reviews on these agents described how the bibliometric indices characterized a drug. They also addressed the question of whether a nonopioid analgesic produced a marked opioid-sparing effect. Information relative to this question was presented via the results of meta-analyses with emphasis on the possible reduction of opioid-related side effects. Overall, nonopioid drugs demonstrating the largest popularity among authors and continuous interest growth in 2018-2022 include acetaminophen, dexmedetomidine, dexamethasone, and ibuprofen. The relevant meta-analyses show that nonopioids, administered as components of multimodal analgesia, provided the opioid-sparing effect; they also show that the most common change in the opioid-related side effects was a lower incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting.

Consensus in ERAS protocols for ventral hernia repair: evidence-based recommendations from the ACHQC QI Committee

PURPOSE

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols are widely used in the post-operative care of hernia patients. Despite their prevalence, an absence of published consensus guidelines creates significant heterogeneity in practices. The aim of this study was to evaluate elements in ERAS protocols utilized in ventral hernia repair from institutions across the United States and provide consensus recommendations for each identified element.

METHODS

Institutional members of the Abdominal Core Health Quality Collaborative (ACHQC) Quality Improvement (QI) committee submitted current ERAS protocols. Items within each protocol were classified as "elements", then assigned a topic. Any topic with ≥ 2 elements from separate institutions were labeled as a "theme," then grouped by stage in the patient care cycle. A brief review of current evidence was provided in addition to a ACHQC QI committee consensus statement.

RESULTS

A total of 295 elements from 6 tertiary referral centers specializing in hernia care were compiled into 24 themes and grouped by four separate stages: Pre-Admission Optimization, Pre-Operative Care, Intra-operative Care, and Post-Operative Management.

CONCLUSION

This article represents a multi-institutional review of ERAS protocols for ventral hernia repair and identifies common themes that may provide the framework for a unified ERAS protocol in hernia surgery. Future work may serve to develop societal guidelines defined specifically for enhanced recovery in ventral hernia repair.

The Impact of Enhanced Recovery Protocols Regarding Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting Following Sleeve Gastrectomy under Triple Prophylaxis: A Controlled Randomized Study

Background

Following a sleeve gastrectomy, post-operative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a typical issue. Furthermore, several prophylactic techniques have been developed, such as preventive antiemetic and accelerated recovery after surgery (ERAS). However, PONV has not entirely disappeared, and clinicians are still working to lower PONV incidence.

Aim

Our goal was to evaluate how adopting Enhanced Recovery Protocols (ERAS) affects postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in comparison to standard care protocol after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) while receiving triple antiemetic prophylaxis.

Objective

The objective of this study was to verify that the ERAS procedure is crucial for lowering PONV despite the use of an efficient and effective antiemetic.

Methods

This is a computer-generated randomized clinical trial. Haloperidol, dexamethasone, and ondansetron were administered to all patients undergoing elective LSG, 29 patients within an ERAS protocol, and 29 within a standard care protocol. The primary finding was the incidence of PONV within 36 hours following LSG. The time to initially administer rescue antiemetic medication, number of rescue antiemetic medication administrations, postoperative opioid consumption, oral fluid tolerance, complications, and QoR-15 questionnaire for quality of recovery were the secondary outcomes.

Results

Within the first 36 hours following LSG, the incidence of PONV in the ERAS group was 17.20%, while in the non-ERAS group, it was 51.7%, with P<0.012 and higher PONV severity (P<0.021) in the non-ERAS group. The ERAS group took a longer time (6 hours) for the first rescue antiemetic medicine than the Non-ERAS group (2 hours), with P<0.001 and significantly less number of patients (20.7%) needing rescue antiemetic, compared to the Non-ERAS group (65.5%), with P<0.001. The dosage of nalbuphine needed by the ERAS group was lower (2.7±2.8) than the non-ERAS group (19.9±6.0). Regarding the QoR-15 scores, there was a significant difference in the two groups' overall performance (P <0.001). Between the two groups, there were no significant complications following surgery.

Conclusion

This study reveals that even though triple antiemetic prophylaxis was used, the ERAS protocol had a beneficial effect on PONV when compared to the standard care approach.

An Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Protocol for Orthognathic Surgery Reduces Rates of Postoperative Nausea

For many surgical procedures, enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols have improved patient outcomes, particularly postoperative nausea and vomiting. The purpose of this study was to evaluate postoperative nausea following orthognathic surgery after the implementation of an ERAS protocol. This retrospective cohort study included patients between 12 and 35 years old who underwent orthognathic surgery at Boston Children's Hospital from April 2018 to December 2022. Patients with syndromes or a hospital stay greater than 48 hours were excluded from the study. The primary predictor was enrollment in our institutional ERAS protocol. The main outcome variable was postoperative nausea. Intraoperative and postoperative covariates were compared between groups using unpaired t tests and chi squared analysis. Univariate and multivariate regression models with 95% confidence intervals were performed to identify predictors for nausea. A P value<0.05 was considered significant. There were 128 patients (68 non-ERAS, 60 ERAS) included in this study (51.6% female, mean age 19.02±3.25 years). The ERAS group received less intraoperative fluid (937.0±462.3 versus 1583.6±847.6 mL, P ≤0.001) and experienced less postoperative nausea (38.3% versus 63.2%, P =0.005). Enhanced recovery after surgery status ( P =0.005) was a predictor for less postoperative nausea, whereas bilateral sagittal split osteotomy ( P =0.045) and length of stay ( P =0.007) were positive predictors for postoperative nausea in multivariate logistic regression analysis. Implementing an ERAS protocol for orthognathic surgery reduces postoperative nausea. Level of Evidence: Level III-therapeutic.

Is Intravenous Dextrose Infusion During Emergence From Anesthesia Effective in Improving the PONV in Gynecologic Laparoscopy? A Randomized Controlled Trial

STUDY OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to explore the relationship between intravenous 5% dextrose infusion during emergence from anesthesia to postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in patients after gynecologic laparoscopic surgery.

DESIGN

This was a double-blind randomized controlled trial. Participants were randomized into the experimental group and control group using a computer-generated random number generator. Intervenors and measurers were blinded to group assignments of the study.

SETTING

A single academic tertiary medical center.

PATIENTS

Patients undergoing gynecologic laparoscopic surgery.

INTERVENTIONS

On completion of surgery, participants were randomized into the test group (receive 5% dextrose) and control group (receive Ringer's lactate solution).

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The primary outcome of the present study was the incidence of PONV. Other outcomes included postoperative rescue analgesic and rescue antiemetic, postoperative pain response, and recovery time of postanesthesia care unit. Baseline characteristics were statistically similar between the 2 groups of participants. There were 49 of 105 patients experienced PONV within 24 hours postoperatively. The overall incidence of PONV within 24 hours postoperatively was not significantly different (45.5% vs 48%; relative risk [RR], 0.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.67-1.37; p = .794). However, fewer patients experienced PONV in the test group than in the control group during 0 to 1 hours (6.0% vs 20.0%; RR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.73-0.99; p = .024) and 1 to 3 hours (14.5% vs 32.0%; RR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.64-0.99; p = .033) postoperatively. In addition, recovery time in the postanesthesia care unit was less in the test group (17.07 ± 6.36 vs 22.04 ± 7.33; mean difference, -4.97; 95% CI, -7.62 to -2.32; p <.001) and pain score was lower in the test group during 0 to 0.5 hours postoperatively (2.29 ± 1.74 vs 3.08 ± 1.64; mean difference, -0.79; 95% CI, -1.45 to -0.13; p = .019).

CONCLUSION

In patients after gynecologic laparoscopic surgery, postanesthesia 5% dextrose infusion may be useful in improving the early management of PONV and pain response and may warrant further study.

Olanzapine as a prophylactic antiemetic for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting after general anesthesia: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The antiemetic effectiveness of olanzapine, as a prophylactic off-label antiemetic drug, for Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting (PONV) is unknown. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, the authors evaluate the efficacy and side effects of olanzapine as a prophylactic antiemetic in adult patients who undergo general anesthesia and assess adverse effects.

METHODS

A systematic search was done on electronic bibliographic databases in July 2023. Randomized controlled trials of olanzapine as a prophylactic antiemetic for PONV in adults who underwent general anesthesia were included. The authors excluded non-RCTs and retracted studies. The authors set no date of publication or language limits. The outcomes were the incidence of PONV within 24 h postoperatively and the safety of olanzapine. The risk of bias was assessed according to the tool suggested by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.

RESULTS

Meta-analysis included 446 adult patients. Olanzapine reduced on average 38 % the incidence of PONV. The estimated risk ratio (95 % CI) of olanzapine versus control was 0.62 (0.42-0.90), p = 0.010, I2 = 67 %. In the subgroup meta-analysis, doses of olanzapine (10 mg) reduced on average 49 % of the incidence of PONV (RR = 0.51 [0.34-0.77], p = 0.001, I2 = 31 %).

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review with meta-analysis indicated that olanzapine as a prophylactic antiemetic alone or combined with other antiemetic agents reduced the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting. However, this conclusion must be presented with some degree of uncertainty due to the small number of studies included. There was a lack of any evidence to draw conclusions on side effects.

The efficacy of gastric aspiration in reducing postoperative vomiting after oral and maxillofacial surgery: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Gastric aspiration is applied in oral and maxillofacial procedures to reduce postoperative vomiting (POV), yet its clinical benefit remains largely uncertain. Our study aimed to determine the role of gastric aspiration in the amelioration of POV by a meta-analysis.

METHODS

With adherence to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, global recognized databases, including PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central, were searched to obtain randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the effects of gastric aspiration in oral and maxillofacial surgery. The incidence and the number of episodes of POV and the frequency of rescue antiemetic use were extracted as parametric data for pooled estimation. Funnel plots and Egger's test were utilized to assess bias. The recommendation of evidence was rated by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system.

RESULTS

After detailed evaluation, 5 RCTs containing 274 participants were eventually included. The results of pooled estimation indicated that gastric aspiration could not reduce the incidence of POV (risk ratio [95% CI] = 0.94 [0.73, 1.21], P = .621), the number of episodes of POV (standard mean difference [95% CI] = -0.13 [-0.45, 0.19], P = .431) or the frequency of rescue antiemetic use (RR [95% CI] = 0.86 [0.49, 1.52], P = .609). No publication bias was detected by the funnel plot and Egger test. The overall recommendation of evidence was rated low regarding each outcome.

CONCLUSION

Based on current evidence, gastric aspiration is not recommended for oral and maxillofacial surgery. Meanwhile, more large-scale high-quality RCTs are needed.

Protective effect of sevoflurane on lung function of elderly chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a common respiratory disorder that affects the elderly population and increases the risk of postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) after major surgeries. Sevoflurane is a volatile anesthetic that has been shown to have anti-inflammatory and antioxidant properties and attenuate lung injury in animal models.

AIM

To evaluate the protective effect of sevoflurane on the lung function of elderly COPD patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA).

METHODS

In this randomized controlled trial, we randomly assigned 120 elderly patients with COPD, who were scheduled for THA, to receive either sevoflurane (sevoflurane group) or propofol (propofol group) as the maintenance anesthetic. The primary outcome was the incidence of PPCs within seven days after surgery. The secondary outcomes were changes in the lung function parameters, inflammatory markers, oxidative stress markers, and postoperative pain scores.

RESULTS

The results showed that the incidence of PPCs was significantly lower in the sevoflurane group than in the propofol group (10% vs 25%, P = 0.02). Furthermore, the decline in the forced expiratory volume in 1 s, forced vital capacity, and peak expiratory flow was significantly lesser in the sevoflurane group than in the propofol group at 24 h and 48 h after surgery (P < 0.05). The interleukin-6, tumor necrosis factor-alpha, malondialdehyde, and 8-hydroxy-2 α-deoxyguanosine levels were significantly lower in the sevoflurane group than in the propofol group at 24 h after surgery (P < 0.05). The sevoflurane group showed significantly lower postoperative pain scores than the propofol group at 6 h, 12 h, and 24 h after surgery (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Sevoflurane protects the lung function of elderly COPD patients undergoing THA under general anesthesia by reducing the incidence of PPCs, attenuating inflammatory and oxidative stress responses, and alleviating postoperative pain.

Response of the GE Entropy™ monitor to neuromuscular block in awake volunteers

BACKGROUND

The GE Entropy™ monitor analyses the frontal electroencephalogram (EEG) and generates two indices intended to represent the degree of anaesthetic drug effect on the brain. It is frequently used in the context of neuromuscular block. We have shown that a similar device, the Bispectral Index monitor (BIS), does not generate correct values in awake volunteers when neuromuscular blocking drugs are administered.

METHODS

We replayed the EEGs recorded during awake paralysis from the original study to an Entropy monitor via a calibrated electronic playback system. Each EEG was replayed 30 times to evaluate the consistency of the Entropy output.

RESULTS

Both State Entropy and Response Entropy decreased during periods of neuromuscular block to values consistent with anaesthesia, despite there being no change in conscious state (State Entropy <60 in eight of nine rocuronium trials and nine of 10 suxamethonium trials). Entropy values did not return to pre-test levels until after the return of movement. Entropy did not generate exactly the same results when the same EEG was replayed multiple times, which is primarily because of a cyclical state within the Entropy system itself.

CONCLUSIONS

The GE Entropy™ monitor requires muscle activity to generate correct values in an awake subject. It could therefore be unreliable at detecting awareness in patients who have been given neuromuscular blocking drugs. In addition, Entropy does not generate the same result each time it is presented with the same EEG.

Effect of intravenous dexamethasone on the duration of hyperbaric bupivacaine spinal anesthesia in lower abdominal surgery, Randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of intravenous (IV) dexamethasone on the duration of hyperbaric bupivacaine spinal anesthesia.

METHODS

Two hundred patients between the ages of 18 and 60, of both sexes with ASA I- II classification scheduled for lower abdominal surgery under spinal anesthesia using hyperbaric bupivacaine 0.5% were randomly divided into two groups: the dexamethasone group (Dexa group) and the control group, with 100 patients in each group. Before the administration of spinal anesthesia, the Dexa group received an intravenous infusion of 8 mg dexamethasone in 500 mL normal saline, while the control group received 500 mL normal saline only. The primary outcome of this study was to assess the effect of IV dexamethasone on the regression of hyperbaric bupivacaine spinal anesthesia. Secondary outcome measures included the total duration of sensory and motor blocks, VAS score, time of first analgesic request, total analgesic consumption within the first 24 h, and the occurrence of any side effects.

RESULTS

The Dexa group had significantly delayed onset of 2 dermatomes regression (P < 0.001) compared to the control group. Additionally, the Dexa group had significantly longer duration of both sensory block (P = 0.01) and motor block (P < 0.001). The Dexa group had significantly longer duration until the first postoperative analgesic request (P < 0.001) and a lower incidence of side effects compared to the control group.

CONCLUSION

Although the intravenous administration of dexamethasone had a limited effect on the duration of hyperbaric bupivacaine spinal anesthesia, it improved postoperative VAS scores compared to the control group and decreased overall postoperative analgesic consumption. Therefore, it can be considered a valuable addition to postoperative multimodal analgesia strategies, aiming to minimize total analgesic consumption.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ID: NCT04778189 (2/3/2021).

Variation in prescribing for the prevention of postoperative nausea, vomiting, and pain following abdominal surgery: A retrospective study

Background and Aims

Adequate postoperative analgesia and prevention of post-op nausea and vomiting (PONV) are core components of modern day anaesthesia and peri-operative care. As well as contributing to overall morbidity, postoperative pain and PONV are frequently cited as one of the most unpleasant and distressing aspects of surgery for patients. Variation in healthcare delivery is known to exist but has often been poorly described. A first step to understanding the consequences of variation is to describe the extent of variation. We aimed to assess variation in pharmacological strategies to prevent postoperative pain, nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing elective major abdominal surgery at a tertiary hospital in Perth, Western Australia, over a three-month period.

Methods

Retrospective cross-sectional study.

Results

We observed considerable variation in prescribing of postoperative analgesia and PONV prophylaxis and suggest that despite adequate evidence based guidelines, they are often overlooked in practice.

Conclusion

Measurement of the consequences of variation requires randomised clinical trials that evaluate differences in outcome and cost, associated with the strategies that exist within the spectrum of variation.

Ondansetron: recommended antiemetics for patients with acute pancreatitis? a population-based study

Objective: Ondansetron administration is a common antemetic of acute pancreatitis therapy in the intensive care unit (ICU), but its actual association with patients' outcomes has not been confirmed. The study is aimed to determine whether the multiple outcomes of ICU patients with acute pancreatitis could benefit from ondansetron. Methods: 1,030 acute pancreatitis patients diagnosed in 2008-2019 were extracted from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care (MIMIC)-IV database as our study cohort. The primary outcome we considered is the 90-day prognosis, and secondary outcomes included in-hospital survival and overall prognosis. Results: In MIMIC-IV, 663 acute pancreatitis patients received ondansetron administration (OND group) during their hospitalization, while 367 patients did not (non-OND group). Patients in the OND group presented better in-hospital, 90-day, and overall survival curves than the non-OND group (log-rank test: in-hospital: p < 0.001, 90-day: p = 0.002, overall: p = 0.009). After including covariates, ondansetron was associated with better survival in patients with multiple outcomes (in-hospital: HR = 0.50, 90-day: HR = 0.63, overall: HR = 0.66), and the optimal dose inflection points were 7.8 mg, 4.9 mg, and 4.6 mg, respectively. The survival benefit of ondansetron was unique and stable in the multivariate analyses after consideration of metoclopramide, diphenhydramine, and prochlorperazine, which may also be used as antiemetics. Conclusion: In ICU acute pancreatitis patients, ondansetron administration was associated with better 90-day outcomes, while results were similar in terms of in-hospital and overall outcomes, and the recommended minimum total dose might be suggested to be 4-8 mg.

General Versus Locoregional Anesthesia in TEVAR: An NSQIP Analysis

BACKGROUND

Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair (TEVAR) is a minimally invasive surgery for repairing thoracic aneurysms and dissections. This study aims to compare postoperative outcomes of TEVAR performed under general versus locoregional anesthesia.

METHODS

Utilizing the 2008-2019 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database, patients older than the age of 18 years who received TEVAR, were identified using the following current procedural terminology codes: 33,880, 33,881, 33,883, 33,884, or 33,886. Patients who underwent concomitant procedures, those with both thoracoabdominal and abdominal aortic pathologies, and trauma cases were excluded. Standard descriptive statistics, in addition to χ2, Fisher's exact test, and Mann-Whitney U-tests were used to compare patient baseline characteristics and postoperative outcomes between general and locoregional anesthesia groups as appropriate. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to assess independent predictors of hospital length of stay (LOS) greater than 7 days.

RESULTS

Of the 1,028 patients included in the study, 86.5% received general anesthesia, and 13.5% received locoregional anesthesia, such as local anesthesia with monitored anesthesia care or regional anesthesia. No significant differences were found between patients receiving locoregional versus general anesthesia in mortality (3.6% vs. 7.9%, respectively, P = 0.071) and morbidity (18.7% and 24.8%, respectively, P = 0.121) within 30 days post-TEVAR, including any wound, pulmonary, thromboembolic, renal, septic, and cardiac arrest complications. Patients who received general anesthesia had significantly higher median LOS compared to those who received locoregional anesthesia [5 days (interquartile range (IQR): 3-10) versus 4 days (IQR: 2-7), P = 0.002], with 34.3% of the general anesthesia group having an LOS greater than 7 days compared to 21.6% of locoregional anesthesia group, P = 0.003. On multivariable logistic regression analysis, general anesthesia was found to be an independent predictor of prolonged LOS greater than 7 days (odds ratio (OR): 1.72, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.05-2.81, P = 0.031).

CONCLUSIONS

Locoregional anesthesia results in significantly lower postoperative hospital LOS with similar postoperative mortality and morbidity compared to general anesthesia in patients undergoing TEVAR.

Benefits of PECS Block as Part of the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Protocol for Breast Cancer Surgery in an Asian Institution: A Retrospective Cohort Study

INTRODUCTION

Regional analgesia techniques have been increasingly used for post-operative pain management following mastectomy. We aim to evaluate analgesic benefits of pectoral nerve (PECS2) block incorporated as part of the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol in patients undergoing mastectomy in University Malaya Medical Centre, Malaysia.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A single centre, cohort study evaluating 335 women who have undergone unilateral mastectomy between January 2017 and March 2020 in Malaysia. Regional anaesthesia were given pre-operatively via ultrasound guided pectoral and intercostal nerves block (PECSII).

RESULTS

Utilization of regional anaesthesia increased from 11% in 2017 to 43% in 2020. Types and duration of surgeries were comparable. Opiod consumption was 3 mg lower in those who had PECS2 block ((27 [24-30] mg), in comparison with those who received general anaesthesia only (30 [26-34] mg), p < 0.001, and length of stay was half a day shorter in the regional anaesthesia group and these were statistically significant. However, pain score (2 [1-3]; 2 [1-3], p=0.719) and post-operative nausea and vomiting (PONV) (32.6-32.5%, p = 0.996) were similar.

CONCLUSION

This study highlights the importance of PECS2 block as a component of ERAS protocol for mastectomy in an Asian hospital. This study also inferred that patients may be safely discharged within 24 h of surgery and therefore, same day surgery may be feasible in selected group of patients undergoing mastectomy and this could imply overall cost benefits.

Investigating the Association Between a Risk-Directed Prophylaxis Protocol and Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting: Validation in a Low-Income Setting

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) prevention protocols in low-income countries is not well known. Different surgical procedures, available medications, and co-occurring diseases imply that existing protocols may need validation in these settings. We assessed the association of a risk-directed PONV prevention protocol on the incidence of PONV and short-term surgical outcomes in a teaching hospital in Rwanda.

METHODS

We compared the incidence of PONV during the first 48 hours postoperatively before (April 1, 2019-June 30, 2019; preintervention) and immediately after (July 1, 2019-September 30, 2019; postintervention) implementing an Apfel score-based PONV prevention strategy in 116 adult patients undergoing elective open abdominal surgery at Kigali University Teaching Hospital in Rwanda. Secondary outcomes included time to first oral intake, hospital length of stay, and rate of wound dehiscence. Interrupted time series analyses were performed to assess the associated temporal slopes of the outcome before and immediately after implementation of the risk-directed PONV prevention protocol.

RESULTS

Compared to just before the intervention, there was no change in the odds of PONV at the beginning of the postintervention period (odds ratio [OR], 0.23; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.05-1.01). There was a decreasing trend in the odds of nausea (OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.36-0.97) per month. However, there was no difference in the incidence of nausea immediately after implementation of the protocol (OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.25-3.72) or in the slope between preintervention and postintervention periods (OR, 1.48; 95% CI, 0.60-3.65). In contrast, there was no change in the odds of vomiting during the preintervention period (OR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.61-1.67) per month. The odds of vomiting decreased at the beginning of the postintervention period compared to just before (OR, 0.10; 95% CI, 0.02-0.47; P = .004). Finally, there was a significant decrease in the average time to first oral intake (estimated 14 hours less; 95% CI, -25 to -3) when the protocol was first implemented, after adjusting for confounders; however, there was no difference in the slope of the average time to first oral intake between the 2 periods ( P = .44).

CONCLUSIONS

A risk-directed PONV prophylaxis protocol was associated with reduced vomiting and time to first oral intake after implementation. There was no substantial difference in the slopes of vomiting incidence and time to first oral intake before and after implementation.

Perioperative Supplemental Oxygen and Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting: Subanalysis of a Trial, Systematic Review, and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Intraoperative supplemental oxygen may reduce postoperative nausea and vomiting by mitigating hypoxic stress on the gastrointestinal tract. The authors therefore tested the hypothesis that supplemental oxygen reduces nausea and vomiting in adults recovering from colorectal surgery at the Cleveland Clinic between January 28, 2013, and March 11, 2016.

METHODS

Initially, the authors conducted an unplanned subanalysis of a previous trial that evaluated the effect of 80% versus 30% intraoperative inspired oxygen on surgical site infection. Specifically, they assessed the effect of 80% versus 30% oxygen concentration on the incidence of postoperative nausea and/or vomiting. Thereafter, the authors conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect of supplemental oxygen on postoperative nausea and vomiting.

RESULTS

The authors' underlying analysis included 5,057 colorectal surgeries on 4,001 patients. For 2,554 surgeries, assignment was to 80% oxygen, and in 2,503 surgeries, to 30%. Postoperative nausea and vomiting was 852 of 2,554 (33%) in 80% oxygen and 814 of 2,503 (33%) in 30% oxygen. The estimated relative risk (95% CI) of 80% versus 30% oxygen on postoperative nausea and vomiting was 1.04 (0.96 to 1.12) in a generalized estimating equation model adjusting for within-patient correlation for patients with multiple surgeries, P = 0.355. Furthermore, supplemental oxygen did not reduce antiemetic use (P = 0.911) or the severity of nausea and vomiting (P = 0.924). The authors' meta-analysis included 10 qualifying trials (6,749 patients) and did not find a difference in postoperative nausea and vomiting: relative risk, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.86 to 1.08], P = 0.55, I2 = 52%.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting did not differ in patients assigned to 80% or 30% inspired oxygen. A meta-analysis of available trials similarly indicated that supplemental intraoperative oxygen does not reduce postoperative nausea and vomiting. Therefore, supplemental oxygen should not be given in the expectation that it will reduce nausea and vomiting.

EDITOR’S PERSPECTIVE

Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting in Female Patients Undergoing Breast and Gynecological Surgery: A Narrative Review of Risk Factors and Prophylaxis

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) have been widely studied as a multifactorial entity, being of female gender the strongest risk factor. Reported PONV incidence in female surgical populations is extremely variable among randomized clinical trials. In this narrative review, we intend to summarize the incidence, independent predictors, pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions for PONV reported in recently published clinical trials carried out in female patients undergoing breast and gynecologic surgery, as well as the implications of the anesthetic agents on the incidence of PONV. A literature search of manuscripts describing PONV management in female surgical populations (breast surgery and gynecologic surgery) was carried out in PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase databases. Postoperative nausea and vomiting incidence were highly variable in patients receiving placebo or no prophylaxis among RCTs whereas consistent results were observed in patients receiving 1 or 2 prophylactic interventions for PONV. Despite efforts made, a considerable number of female patients still experienced significant PONV. It is critical for the anesthesia provider to be aware that the coexistence of independent risk factors such as the level of sex hormones (pre- and postmenopausal), preoperative anxiety or depression, pharmacogenomic pleomorphisms, and ethnicity further enhances the probability of experiencing PONV in female patients. Future RCTs should closely assess the overall risk of PONV in female patients considering patient- and surgery-related factors, and the level of compliance with current guidelines for prevention and management of PONV.

To Compare the Effectiveness of Granisetron Versus Ondansetron to Control Nausea and Vomiting During Lower Segment Cesarean Section Under Subarachnoid Block

Background

Nausea and vomiting (NV) seen during and after lower segment cesarean section (LSCS) are due to increased intragastric pressure, hypotension, stretching the peritoneum (exteriorization of the uterus), excessive surgical manipulation and visceral stimulation, using opioids, using uterotonic agents, and the patient's mental status. Ondansetron and granisetron intravenous (i.v.) are useful for avoiding bradycardia and hypotension.

Objectives

The objective of this study is to study the effectiveness of granisetron versus ondansetron to control NV during LSCS under subarachnoid block.

Materials and Methods

Eighty patients undergoing elective cesarean section under spinal anesthesia by intrathecal bupivacaine were randomly divided into two groups (40 pregnant females of the American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status Classes I and II in each Group). Group 1 received granisetron 40 mg.kg-1 i.v. stat after clamping the cord and Group 2 given i.v. ondansetron 8 mg stat after clamping the cord. NV were observed at the "early postoperative period (0-3 h)" and "late postoperative period (4-24 h)."

Statistical Analysis Used

Student's t-test and Chi-square test were used to find out the statistical significance, P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

The mean age was 29.3 years with 4.15 standard deviation (SD) and 28.3 years with 4.41 SD in Groups 1 and 2, respectively. The mean duration of surgery was 53.1 min with 6.67 min SD and 57.7 min with 10.26 SD in Groups 1 and 2, respectively. In the "early postoperative period," NV observed in 7.5% and 10.0% participants in Groups 1 and 2, respectively (P > 0.05), and in "late postoperative period," NV observed in 0.0% and 22.5% participants in Groups 1 and 2, respectively (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

Granisetron reduces the severity of spinal-induced hypotension, need for rescue vasopressor, and incidence of nausea.

Effects of ramosetron orally disintegrating tablets on the prophylaxis of post-discharge nausea and/or vomiting in female patients undergoing day surgery under general anesthesia: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

This study was performed to evaluate the effectiveness of ramosetron orally disintegrating tablets (ODTs) in preventing post-discharge nausea and/or vomiting (PDNV) in female patients following outpatient surgery under general anesthesia.

METHODS

This multicenter randomized study included three South Korean tertiary hospitals. Before surgery, 138 patients were randomly allocated into two groups. In the ramosetron group, ramosetron ODT 0.1 mg was administered after discharge in the morning of postoperative days 1 and 2. Metoclopramide 10 mg was administered as a rescue antiemetic (capped at 30 mg per day). In the control group, patients were administered only metoclopramide 10 mg when nausea and/or vomiting occurred. The primary outcome was the incidence of nausea during 24 h after discharge.

RESULTS

We found significant differences in the incidence (13% vs. 33%, P = 0.008) and severity (P = 0.011) of nausea between the ramosetron and the control groups during 24 h after discharge. In addition, the rate of rescue antiemetic (metoclopramide) administration during 24 h after discharge was lower in the ramosetron group (6%) than in the control group (18%) (P = 0.033). Patient satisfaction score was higher in the ramosetron group than in the control group (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Ramosetron ODT reduces the incidence and severity of postoperative nausea after discharge during the first 24 h and may be a valuable option for the prevention of PDNV in female patients after day surgery under general anesthesia.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04297293 . Registered on 05 March 2020.

Quality of recovery and safety of deep intravenous sedation compared to general anesthesia in facial plastic surgery: A prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Facial plastic surgical procedures are performed under either general anesthesia (GA) or sedation. GA is often associated with post-operative nausea and longer recovery, while deep sedation is thought to greatly facilitate perioperative patient comfort and expedite recovery. The objective of this study was to compare these two anesthetic techniques in a relatively healthy patient population undergoing facial plastic surgery and to discuss optimizing patient safety with a deep sedation technique.

METHODS

A non-randomized, prospective cohort study was conducted to evaluate patients undergoing facial plastic surgery with a focus on rhinoplasty under either deep intravenous sedation (DIVS) in an ambulatory surgery center or under GA in a community hospital. Patients were between ages 18-65 and agreed to participate in the study and complete a quality of recovery (QoR-40) survey. Two-tailed Student's t-test was done for numerical data and Chi-squared test for categorical data.

RESULTS

Twenty-three patients and 16 patients had surgery under DIVS and GA, respectively. Compared to the GA group, the DIVS group had less post-operative nausea and vomiting (21.7% vs 50%, P = 0.04; 4.3% vs 37.5%; P = 0.004, respectively), shorter emergence time (4 vs 13 min, P < 0.001), and higher QoR-40 scores for almost all the categories except for physical independence. There were no post-operative medical or surgical complications.

CONCLUSION

DIVS appeared to be safe in the office-based setting and provided a higher quality recovery after a predominantly rhinoplasty-based practice compared to the GA group. Vigilant monitoring of the patient is crucial for careful titration of sedation to avoid respiratory depression and possible compromise of the surgical result from having to rescue the airway.

Efficacy of evidence-based institutional protocol for prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting: A prospective observational study

BACKGROUND

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is the second most common complaint in the postoperative period, often resulting in increased post anaesthesia care unit (PACU) and hospital stay. Translation of knowledge into consistent practice was considered a major gap. Hence, the present study was undertaken to test the efficacy of locally developed evidence-based institutional protocol for prevention of PONV.

METHODS

Phase I consisted of determining the baseline incidence of PONV before introduction of the institutional protocol for PONV prophylaxis. In phase II, educational sessions for anaesthesiologists for PONV prevention and treatment were conducted, after which an institutional protocol was introduced. In phase III, this protocol was implemented, and the incidence of PONV was recorded using the same methodology as in phase I. The rate of adherence to the institutional protocol was also recorded.

RESULTS

The incidence of postoperative nausea (PON) dropped significantly from 32.5% in phase I to 20% in phase III (p = 0.033). Similarly, the incidence of postoperative vomiting (POV) decreased from 20.5% in phase I to 9.1% in phase III (p = 0.016). Of all anaesthesiologists, 78.18% were noted to adhere to the protocol in phase III. Incidence of PON and POV was significantly less in patients in whom PONV prophylaxis was administered in adherence to protocol (8.3% vs 57.7%, p < 0.001; 3.6% vs 26.9%, p < 0.001, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Evidence-based institutional protocols are effective in significantly reducing the incidence of PONV in adults undergoing noncardiac surgery under anaesthesia.

CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER AND REGISTRY URL

The trial was registered with Clinical Trials Registry of India (http:/ctri.nic.in) (CTRI/2015/12/006432).

Parameters Affecting Nausea and Vomiting After Thoracoscopic Wedge Resection in Patients With Pneumothorax

BACKGROUND

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is one of the complications that can occur frequently in the first 24 hours postoperatively. We aimed to investigate the parameters that could predict PONV in patients who underwent thoracoscopic wedge resection for pneumothorax.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

After obtaining the approval of the ethics committee (ID: 2012-KEAK-15/2358, Date: 14.09.2021), the records of patients who underwent elective video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) between January 2018 and June 2021 were analyzed retrospectively. The patients who underwent elective thoracoscopic wedge resection for pneumothorax, who were between the ages of 18-65, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) I-III, and whose body mass index (BMI) was between 18-30 kg/m² were included in the study. However, patients who received a blood transfusion or used antiemetics, anticholinergic drugs, and analgesics continuously were not included. In addition, patients with a history of chronic pain were not included in the study. The patients were divided into two groups, the PONV group (Group 1) and the control group (Group 2). The PONV incidence, visual analog scale (VAS) scores, 24-hour morphine consumption, additional analgesic requirement, neutrophil/lymphocyte ratios (NLR), and platelet/lymphocyte ratios (PLR) were evaluated.

RESULTS

The groups were similar in terms of demographic data (p > 0.05). Additional analgesic requirement and 24-hour morphine consumption were significantly higher in the PONV group (p: 0.005, p < 0.001, respectively). Preoperative NLR (p < 0.001), postoperative NLR (p < 0.001), preoperative PLR (p < 0.022), the VAS scores of the first hour (p: 0.004), and 24^th hour (p < 0.001) were statistically significantly higher in the PONV group compared to the control group.

CONCLUSIONS

NLR parameters can be effective with high sensitivity and specificity in predicting PONV during the preoperative and postoperative period. Besides, preoperative PLR may also be effective in predicting PONV. A treatment that can be planned according to these parameters may play a key role in preventing PONV. In addition, efficient perioperative analgesia management may be effective in reducing PONV by limiting the emetogenic analgesics.

Drugs for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in adults after general anesthesia: An abridged Cochrane network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

In this abridged version of the recently published Cochrane review on antiemetic drugs, we summarize its most important findings and discuss the challenges and the time needed to prepare what is now the largest Cochrane review with network meta-analysis in terms of the number of included studies and pages in its full printed form.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review with network meta-analyses to compare and rank single antiemetic drugs and their combinations belonging to 5HT₃-, D₂-, NK₁-receptor antagonists, corticosteroids, antihistamines, and anticholinergics used to prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting in adults after general anesthesia.

RESULTS

585 studies (97 516 participants) testing 44 single drugs and 51 drug combinations were included. The studies' overall risk of bias was assessed as low in only 27% of the studies. In 282 studies, 29 out of 36 drug combinations and 10 out of 28 single drugs lowered the risk of vomiting at least 20% compared to placebo. In the ranking of treatments, combinations of drugs were generally more effective than single drugs. Single NK₁ receptor antagonists were as effective as other drug combinations. Of the 10 effective single drugs, certainty of evidence was high for aprepitant, ramosetron, granisetron, dexamethasone, and ondansetron, while moderate for fosaprepitant and droperidol. For serious adverse events (SAEs), any adverse event (AE), and drug-class specific side effects evidence for intervention effects was mostly not convincing.

CONCLUSIONS

There is high or moderate evidence for at least seven single drugs preventing postoperative vomiting. However, there is still considerable lack of evidence regarding safety aspects that does warrant investigation.

Prophylactic transdermal scopolamine for the reduction of postoperative length of stay after uterine aspiration at Kaiser Permanente Northern California from 2017-2018

OBJECTIVE

To determine if transdermal scopolamine is associated with decreased postoperative nausea and vomiting and shorter length of stay in the postoperative care unit among patients undergoing uterine aspiration for abortion or early pregnancy loss.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a retrospective cohort study at an integrated medical center that initiated a protocol to prescribe transdermal scopolamine to patients undergoing uterine aspiration under moderate sedation. We compared outcomes among patients who underwent uterine aspiration in 2017, before the institution enacted the protocol, with their counterparts in 2018, immediately after the institution instated the protocol. We reviewed patient charts for data on the postoperative length of stay, use of additional antiemetics, and a standardized clinician designated postoperative nausea and vomiting score. We analyzed outcomes by relevant demographic and clinical characteristics using chi-square or Fisher's exact tests for categorical variables and t tests for continuous variables.

RESULTS

The final sample included 386 patients; 228 who did not receive scopolamine and 158 who did. The cohorts were comparable in terms of demographic and clinical characteristics. The cohort that received transdermal scopolamine had a similar mean postoperative length of stay (75.4 ± 54.1 vs 71.1 ± 50.8 minutes; p = 0.43). There were no differences in the proportions of patients who were provided additional antiemetics (26 ± 11.4 vs 17 ± 10.8; p = 0.84) or had transient vomiting and retching (3 ± 1.9 vs 3 ± 1.3; p = 0.69) between the cohorts.

CONCLUSION

We found no evidence that prophylactic transdermal scopolamine reduces postoperative nausea, vomiting, or length of stay among patients undergoing uterine aspiration.

IMPLICATIONS

Among patients who underwent uterine aspiration under moderate sedation, use of prophylactic transdermal scopolamine was not associated with shorter postoperative length of stay or lesser use of antiemetics. Prophylactic transdermal scopolamine is not likely to be useful for patients undergoing uterine aspiration and could be an unnecessary cost.

Colecistectomía segura: ¿Qué es y cómo hacerla? ¿Cómo lo hacemos nosotros?

La colecistectomía laparoscópica es uno de los procedimientos más realizados a nivel mundial. La técnica laparoscópica se considera el estándar de oro para la resolución de la patología de la vesícula biliar secundaria a litiasis, y aunque es un procedimiento seguro, no se encuentra exenta de complicaciones. La complicación más grave es la lesión de la vía biliar, que, aunque es poco frecuente, con una incidencia de 0,2 a 0,4%, conduce a una disminución en la calidad de vida y contribuye a un aumento en la morbi-mortalidad. El objetivo de este artículo es reportar nuestra técnica quirúrgica, enfatizando los principios del programa de cultura para una colecistectomía segura, propuesta y descrita por the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES), para minimizar los riesgos y obtener un resultado quirúrgico satisfactorio.

Reduction in post-operative nausea and vomiting (PONV) by preoperative risk stratification and adherence to a standardized anti emetic prophylaxis protocol in the day-care surgical population

Context

Postoperative nausea (PON) and postoperative vomiting (POV) are the most undesirable morbidity after anaesthesia. There is paucity of data on PONV from the Indian subcontinent.

Aims

We aim to study the prevalence of PON and POV, associated risk factors and the effect of following standardized risk stratification and prophylaxis protocols in the day care patient population.

Settings and Design

This was a prospective cohort study at a tertiary care teaching institute.

Methods and Material

Data from 500 patients undergoing day care surgery over a period of 12 months were analysed. We used the Apfel scoring system for evaluation of risk of post-operative nausea and vomiting (PONV) for each participant. A standard PONV prophylaxis protocol was used intra-operatively.

Statistical analysis used

Data analysis was done using the Mann-Whitney U test, the Chi-square and Fisher's exact test.

Results

The period prevalence of post-operative nausea (PON) and post-operative vomiting (POV) was 2.04% and 2.45%, respectively, in this study. The prevalence of PONV in each risk category was lower than that predicted by the Apfel score due to utilization of a standard anti-emetic prophylactic protocol. We found younger age, previous history of nausea, previous history of vomiting, urological surgeries and alcohol consumption as significant risk factors for postoperative nausea. Longer duration of surgery, previous history of nausea, alcohol consumption and higher BMI were the significant risk factors for postoperative vomiting.

Conclusions

Adherence to preoperative risk stratification and a standard anti-emetic prophylactic protocol can significantly reduce the prevalence of postoperative nausea and vomiting.

Polymorphisms of 5-hydroxytryptamine receptor type 3B gene and clinical characteristics for vomiting after breast surgery in chinese han female population

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

The 5-hydroxytryptamine type 3B receptor (HTR3B) is involved in postoperative vomiting. We aimed to investigate whether genomic variations of rs1176744 and rs1672717 in HTR3B are associated with postoperative vomiting (POV) in the Chinese Han female population after surgery.

METHODS

Five hundred and sixty-eight female patients classified as ASA I-II undergoing breast surgery under standard general anaesthesia were enrolled in the study. Episodes of POV in the first 24 h after surgery were recorded. Targeted single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in the HTR3B gene were identified by genotyping using the SNPscan^TM technique. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted to investigate the association between SNPs and POV.

RESULTS

We eventually analysed 407 subjects undergoing breast surgery under general anaesthesia. Of these, 104(25.6%) patients suffered POV within 24 h after surgery. In the multivariate logistic regression analysis, we found that age≥50 years (p = 0.012) and longer duration of surgery (p = 0.019) were independent risk factors for POV. Simultaneously, in the dominant model of rs1672717, compared with the AA genotype, GG+GA carriers suffered more POV (OR=1.669, p = 0.038). However, the use of atropine reduced the incidence of POV in our study (p = 0.019).

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

Our investigation demonstrated that polymorphism of rs1672717 (HTR3B) may be a genetic risk factor for developing POV.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT03705026.

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

Postoperative nausea and vomiting is a common adverse effect of anaesthesia. Although dozens of different anti-emetics are available for clinical practice, there is currently no comparative ranking of efficacy and safety of these drugs to inform clinical practice. We performed a systematic review with network meta-analyses to compare, and rank in terms of efficacy and safety, single anti-emetic drugs and their combinations, including 5-hydroxytryptamine₃ , dopamine-2 and neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists; corticosteroids; antihistamines; and anticholinergics used to prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting in adults after general anaesthesia. We systematically searched for placebo-controlled and head-to-head randomised controlled trials up to November 2017 (updated in April 2020). We assessed how trustworthy the evidence was using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) and Confidence In Network Meta-Analysis (CINeMA) approaches for vomiting within 24 h postoperatively, serious adverse events, any adverse event and drug class-specific side-effects. We included 585 trials (97,516 participants, 83% women) testing 44 single drugs and 51 drug combinations. The studies' overall risk of bias was assessed as low in only 27% of the studies. In 282 trials, 29 out of 36 drug combinations and 10 out of 28 single drugs lowered the risk of vomiting at least 20% compared with placebo. In the ranking of treatments, combinations of drugs were generally more effective than single drugs. Single neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists were as effective as other drug combinations. Out of the 10 effective single drugs, certainty of evidence was high for aprepitant, with risk ratio (95%CI) 0.26 (0.18-0.38); ramosetron, 0.44 (0.32-0.59); granisetron, 0.45 (0.38-0.54); dexamethasone, 0.51 (0.44-0.57); and ondansetron, 0.55 (0.51-0.60). It was moderate for fosaprepitant, 0.06 (0.02-0.21) and droperidol, 0.61 (0.54-0.69). Granisetron and amisulpride are likely to have little or no increase in any adverse event compared with placebo, while dimenhydrinate and scopolamine may increase the number of patients with any adverse event compared with placebo. So far, there is no convincing evidence that other single drugs effect the incidence of serious, or any, adverse events when compared with placebo. Among drug class specific side-effects, evidence for single drugs is mostly not convincing. There is convincing evidence regarding the prophylactic effect of at least seven single drugs for postoperative vomiting such that future studies investigating these drugs will probably not change the estimated beneficial effect. However, there is still considerable lack of evidence regarding safety aspects that does warrant investigation.

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).

Management of postoperative nausea and vomiting in the context of an Enhanced Recovery after Surgery program

The concept of Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) emerged at the turn of the millennium and quickly gained footing worldwide leading to the establishment of institutional ERAS protocols and subspecialty guidelines. While the use of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) prophylaxis predates ERAS by a significant extent, the emergence of ERAS amplified the importance of antiemetic prophylaxis in perioperative care and drew attention to the truly multifactorial nature of postoperative gastrointestinal dysfunction. The following discussion will review key paradigms behind PONV prophylaxis and ERAS, highlight the interrelationship between these two endeavors, and then explore subspecialty ERAS guidelines that uniquely influence PONV prophylaxis. Attention will center on the ERAS Society guidelines (ESGs) as the primary representative of current ERAS practice, though many deviations from the guidelines exist within the literature and institutional practices.

Evaluation of the effectiveness of preoperative administration of maropitant citrate and metoclopramide hydrochloride in preventing postoperative clinical gastroesophageal reflux in dogs

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the prophylactic effectiveness of preoperative administration of maropitant citrate and metoclopramide hydrochloride in preventing postoperative clinical gastroesophageal reflux (GER) in dogs and to identify risk factors for clinical postoperative GER in dogs.

ANIMALS

93 client-owned dogs undergoing surgery at the Washington State University Veterinary Teaching Hospital between March 2016 and February 2017.

PROCEDURES

Dogs were randomly assigned to either the intervention group (preoperatively received maropitant and metoclopramide) or the control group (did not preoperatively receive maropitant and metoclopramide). After surgery, all dogs were recovered and monitored, and occurrences of GER were noted. The prophylactic effectiveness of maropitant and metoclopramide was evaluated, and univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to identify variables associated with postoperative clinical GER in dogs.

RESULTS

No meaningful difference in the incidence of clinical GER during the postoperative period was detected between the control and intervention groups. Results indicated that variables associated with significantly increased odds of postoperative clinical GER included the male sex (OR, 9.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.26 to 195.0), an overweight BCS (OR, 12.3; 95% CI, 2.1 to 135.1), gastrointestinal surgery (OR, 30.5; 95% CI, 3.0 to 786.9), and requirement for a dexmedetomidine constant rate infusion after surgery (OR, 9.6; 95% CI, 1.3 to 212.5).

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Findings indicated that incidence of clinical GER during the postoperative period was not lower for dogs that received preoperative prophylactic administration of metoclopramide and maropitant, compared with incidence dogs that did not receive the prophylactic treatment. Further research is required into alternative measures to prevent postoperative clinical GER in dogs.

Enhanced recovery programs in gastrointestinal surgery: Actions to promote optimal perioperative nutritional and metabolic care

The enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathway is an evidence-based approach to the use of care elements along the patient perioperative pathway. All care elements that may impact on clinically relevant outcomes have been considered and reviewed. The combined ERAS actions allow a quicker return to bowel function, oral feeding, nutritional and metabolic equilibrium, normal activity and ultimately to achieve better outcomes. Because of the multi factorial approach and the commitment of all the professionals caring for the patient, it is necessary to have the engagement of all disciplines, such as surgery, anesthesiology, clinical nutrition, nursing, physiatry, involved. ERAS is a dynamic process and new evidence are constantly integrated into the program. The primary endpoint of this review is to give updated information on the key ERAS actions to achieve optimal perioperative nutritional and metabolic care.

Risk-adapted strategy or universal multimodal approach for PONV prophylaxis?

The issue of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) remains important in surgical practice, contributing to patient distress, slower recovery, and increased use of healthcare resources. Many surgical patients report it to be a worse problem than pain. Numerous findings of research indicate that PONV significantly affects patients' well-being and is among the important determinants of patient satisfaction with perioperative care. Numerous investigations have confirmed the efficacy of combining pharmacological interventions indicating that PONV is a clinical complication that is in principle avoidable. Nonetheless, PONV continues to be bothersome for too many patients. Thus, perhaps the biggest challenge across the field is to achieve a uniformly high standard of PONV management using the currently available resources. Although a risk-adapted approach has been advocated in the past, the current trend incorporated in clinical guidelines support a more liberal approach of multimodal antiemetic prevention. The current article emphasizes pros and cons of the various approaches to PONV prophylaxis and depicts most promising strategies to achieve a "PONV-free hospital."

Incidence and risk factors for postoperative nausea and vomiting in orthognathic surgery: a 10-year retrospective study

Objectives

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is considered as one of the most incessant and anguishing factors for patients who have surgery under general anesthesia. The occurrence of PONV after orthognathic surgery can lead to dehydration, infection, bleeding at the surgical site, and patient discomfort, all of which leave a patient with a negative impression of anesthesia and surgery. The purpose of this study is to assess the incidence of PONV after orthognathic surgery and to correlate it with factors related to patient, anesthesia, and surgery.

Materials and Methods

A 10-year retrospective survey was done for patients who underwent orthognathic surgery between January 2008 and March 2018. The incidence of PONV was evaluated, correlations with factors related to patient, anesthesia, and surgery were studied, and the duration between the end of surgery and the occurrence of the first episode of PONV was tabulated.

Results

The medical records of 109 patients were screened, out of which 101 satisfied the inclusion criteria. Amongst these patients, 60 patients (59.4%) suffered from PONV. Patient’s sex, induction agent used, intravenous fluids administered intraoperatively, duration and type of surgery, and the presence of a nasogastric tube were seen to have a significant influence on precipitating PONV. It was noted that among the patients who suffered from PONV, 61.7% of them experienced it 48-96 hours after the end of surgery.

Conclusion

Despite the improved anesthetic equipments, drugs, and surgical techniques currently used, the incidence of PONV was high in our study. Certain factors that were seen to influence PONV in this study need to be considered in order to develop an efficacious protocol to reduce PONV in orthognathic surgeries.

Effects of intravenous dextrose on preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting: A systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis

BACKGROUND

It is reported that postoperative nausea and vomiting, common general anesthesia complications, may be prevented by perioperative intravenous dextrose administration, but with controversial clinical effectiveness.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate perioperative intravenous dextrose for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting through a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials with trial sequential analysis.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, Web of Science, clinicaltrials.gov, and the University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry were searched from inception until 22 June 2019.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Trials investigating intravenous dextrose effects vs. placebos on postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients who underwent general anesthesia.

RESULTS

Eleven trials (1,250 patients) were included. All participants were ASA1-2. The nine trials included laparoscopic surgeries, and 92.2% of the participants were women. The timing of dextrose infusion was before, during, and after surgery in three, five, and three trials, respectively. Our results revealed intravenous dextrose administration significantly reduced postoperative nausea, but not vomiting, during early and late postoperative periods (risk ratio [95% confidence interval], early nausea: 0.76 [0.59-0.99], late nausea: 0.65 [0.48-0.89]; early vomiting: 1.00 [0.81-1.25], late vomiting: 0.96 [0.43-2.16]). Evidence quality was downgraded to low because the trial sequential analysis indicated more trials are needed for firm conclusions.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with placebos, perioperative intravenous dextrose administration may decrease postoperative nausea but not vomiting.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry (registration number: UMIN000030901).

A pharmacological profile of intravenous amisulpride for the treatment of postoperative nausea and vomiting

INTRODUCTION

The issue of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) remains important in surgical practice, contributing to patient distress, slower recovery, and increased use of healthcare resources. Many surgical patients report it to be a worse problem than the pain. New antiemetics of different classes are still needed to help manage PONV effectively, especially the treatment of established PONV after the failure of common prophylactic antiemetics such as 5-HT₃-antagonists and corticosteroids. Intravenous amisulpride, a drug with a long history of safe use in oral form as an antipsychotic, has recently been approved in the US (trade name: Barhemsys) as an intravenous antiemetic for the prevention and treatment of PONV.

AREAS COVERED

This review article summarizes the published data on the clinical pharmacology, safety, and efficacy of intravenous amisulpride as an antiemetic, supplemented by published data on oral amisulpride, where relevant to the intravenous form. Literature was obtained via the PubMed search terms 'intravenous amisulpride' and 'amisulpride AND safety.' Both primary and secondary pharmacology are covered, along with clinical pharmacokinetics (distribution, metabolism, and excretion). The review of clinical safety and efficacy includes data from four studies in the prevention of PONV, two in the treatment of PONV and two investigating effects on the QT interval of the electrocardiogram in healthy volunteers.

EXPERT OPINION

Given the importance of sufficient PONV prevention for patients and the healthcare system, the availability of intravenous amisulpride is helpful, restoring the dopamine-antagonist class as a potential mainstay in both combination prophylaxis and treatment.

Efficacy of amisulpride on postoperative nausea and vomiting: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM AND BACKGROUND

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) remains a significant clinical problem for surgical patients. Amisulpride is a well-studied D_2/D₃ antagonist that has the potential to be used for preventing and treating PONV. Our aim was to assess the efficacy and safety of amisulpride for prevention and treatment of PONV through a systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHOD

A systematic literature search was performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE, PUBMED, clinicaltrials.gov, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from their inception to Feb 15th, 2019. The efficacy outcome was the incidence of complete response, defined as no emesis and no rescue antiemetic use in a 24-h period after study drug administration. The safety outcomes were the adverse effects associated with amisulpride.

RESULTS

Five studies comprising 3243 patients met inclusion critieria. Compared with placebo, amisulpride showed a significantly improved incidence of complete response [relative risk (RR): 1.30; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.20-1.41; P < 0.00001, I² = 0%] with firm evidence from the trial sequential analysis. Particularly, the amisulpride at 5 mg dose indicated a significant benefit than placebo [relative risk (RR): 1.28; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.18-1.39; P < 0.00001, I² = 4%]. The adverse event profile of amisulpride was generally similar to the placebo.

CONCLUSION

Based on our findings, low-dose, intravenous amisulpride is safe and efficacious for the prevention and treatment of PONV compared to placebo. Further studies are needed to explore the optimal dose and timing.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO: CRD42019121483.

Evidence-based prophylaxis strategies for postoperative nausea and vomiting when considering ethnicity factor

In most western countries, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is an important issue and prophylaxis guideline for PONV will be followed in clinical practice. We tried to conduct a review study and a local study to elucidate the incidence and severity of PONV to see if considering ethnicity factor, should we still need to follow those prophylaxis guidelines from western countries. The PubMed, and MEDLINE were consulted from January 2000 to 2018 and also Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2010). The key word for searching is PONV (incidence, severity and prevention strategy), without language limitation and focus on Asian countries. The results showed that the overall incidence and severity of PONV in Asian countries was less significant than in western countries. PONV in western countries could be a serious issue and prophylaxis strategy adjusted by Apfel score could be adopted in routine practice. After this review consultation, the issue of PONV in different ethnic countries (including Taiwan) might be over emphasized and we may suggest not to follow west countries PONV prophylaxis guideline as our routine practice.

Prevalence of postoperative nausea and vomiting: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective:

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a daily phenomenon, to which less attention has been paid in a variety of surgeries. Despite the individual studies, there is no comprehensive study on the prevalence of PONV. The aim of this study was to determine the global prevalence of PONV.

Materials and Methods:

In this systematic and meta-analysis study, descriptive studies of four databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar) were searched for relevant texts from the time they were created until 31 December 2018. The random effects model was used for meta-analysis of studies included. All the steps were carried out by two individuals. Hoy et al.'s tool was used to evaluate its risk bias.

Results:

A total of 23 studies that were performed on 22,683 people from 11 countries were entered into the final phase. The prevalence of PONV, nausea, and vomiting was 27.7%, 31.4%, and 16.8%, respectively. The prevalence of PONV was higher during the first 24 h in European countries.

Conclusion:

Considering the high prevalence of PONV and our goal to better control it, it is necessary to use high cost-effective approaches and recommendations and to educate health caregivers and patients.

Antiemetic efficacy of dexmedetomidine versus dexmedetomidine-dexamethasone combination in patients undergoing breast surgery

Objective

To compare the antiemetic efficacy of dexmedetomidine alone versus combined dexmedetomidine–dexamethasone on incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in patients undergoing breast surgery.

Methods

A total of 149 patients (aged 20–65 years) were assigned to receive normal saline (control group, n = 50), dexmedetomidine 0.5 μg/kg (DEX group, n = 49), or a combination of dexmedetomidine 0.5 μg/kg and dexamethasone 5 mg (dual group, n = 50) at 30 minutes prior to the end of surgery. The primary outcome measure was the incidence of PONV in the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU).

Results

During the first 24 hours after surgery, the incidence of PONV was significantly higher in the control group than in the DEX and dual groups (70% vs. 20% and 12%, respectively), with no intergroup difference observed between the DEX and dual groups. In the PACU, the incidence of PONV differed significantly among the control, DEX, and dual groups (12%, 4%, and 3%, respectively).

Conclusion

Dexmedetomidine alone and in combination with dexamethasone significantly reduced PONV with similar antiemetic efficacies in female patients during the first 24 hours after breast surgery.

Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT 02550795).

Explosive Vomiting Associated with Proximal Colonic Distention during a Difficult Propofol-Assisted Colonoscopy

We present a case of explosive vomiting associated with the extensive manipulation of the proximal colon during a difficult colonoscopy procedure. The cause of vomiting in this case may have been multifactorial; however, proximal colonic distention was the most likely factor because the onset of vomiting coincided with proximal colonic manipulation and happened without any prodromal signs, coughing, and airway obstruction. Propofol, the sedative most commonly administered to the patient during colonoscopy, allows for a deep state of sedation, and consequently extensive colonic distention and scope manipulation. Colonic distention may lead to a higher risk of vomiting. We reviewed the neurocircuitry associated with vomiting and discussed why proximal colonic distention may increase the risk of vomiting. We emphasize vigilance during the manipulation of the proximal colon because vomiting increases the potential for aspiration pneumonitis and pneumonia in patients under deep propofol sedation with attenuated airway responses.