Comparison of Acustimulation and Ondansetron for the Treatment of Established Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting

2002 ◽  
Vol 97 (6) ◽  
pp. 1387-1392 ◽  
Author(s):  
Margarita Coloma ◽  
Paul F. White ◽  
Babatunde O. Ogunnaike ◽  
Scott D. Markowitz ◽  
Philip M. Brown ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Postoperative Nausea ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Complete Response Rate ◽  
Postoperative Nausea And Vomiting ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Nausea And Vomiting ◽  
Combination Group ◽  
Quality Of Recovery

Background This study was designed to evaluate transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulation (acustimulation) using the ReliefBand compared with ondansetron for the treatment of established postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) after outpatient laparoscopic surgery. Methods After the authors obtained institutional review board approval and written informed consent, 268 outpatients were enrolled in this randomized, double-blind, placebo- and sham-controlled study. All patients received antiemetic prophylaxis with metoclopramide, 10 mg intravenously, or droperidol, 0.625 mg intravenously, after induction of anesthesia. A total of 90 patients developed PONV in the recovery units and were randomized to one of three treatment groups: (1) the ondansetron group received 4 mg intravenous ondansetron and a sham ReliefBand; (2) the acustimulation group received 2 ml intravenous saline and a ReliefBand; and (3) the combination group received 4 mg intravenous ondansetron and a ReliefBand. A rescue antiemetic (10 mg intravenous metoclopramide) was administered only if the PONV symptoms persisted for 15 min or longer after initiating the treatment. A blinded observer recorded the recovery times, emetic symptoms, rescue antiemetics, maximum nausea scores, complete response to study treatment, and time to achieve discharge criteria. Postdischarge side effects, as well as patient satisfaction and quality of recovery scores, were assessed at 24 and 72 h after surgery. Results The combination group had a significantly higher complete response rate than the acustimulation group (73% vs.40%, P <0.01). In addition, fewer patients (8 vs. 18) in the combination (vs. acustimulation) group experienced subsequent emetic events (P < 0.03). However, there were no significant differences between the three groups with respect to patient satisfaction and quality of recovery scores. Conclusions Acustimulation with the ReliefBand can be used as an alternative to ondansetron for the treatment of established PONV. However, the use of ondansetron (4 mg intravenously) in combination with the ReliefBand device improved the complete response rate to the acustimulation therapy.

Comparative Efficacy of Acustimulation (ReliefBand®) versus Ondansetron (Zofran®) in Combination with Droperidol for Preventing Nausea and Vomiting

2002 ◽  
Vol 97 (5) ◽  
pp. 1075-1081 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul F. White ◽  
Tijani Issioui ◽  
Jie Hu ◽  
Stephanie B. Jones ◽  
Jayne E. Coleman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Plastic Surgery ◽  
Postoperative Nausea ◽  
Postoperative Nausea And Vomiting ◽  
Normal Diet ◽  
Nausea And Vomiting ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Combination Group ◽  
Quality Of Recovery

Background Antiemetic drugs are costly, are associated with variable efficacy, and can produce unwanted side effects when used for prophylaxis against postoperative nausea and vomiting. This clinical study was designed to compare the efficacy of transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulation using a ReliefBand to ondansetron (Zofran) when utilized alone or in combination for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting after plastic surgery. Methods A single-center, randomized, double-blind, placebo- and sham-controlled study design was conducted to compare three prophylactic antiemetic treatment regimens in 120 outpatients undergoing plastic surgery procedures with routine low-dose droperidol prophylaxis: (1) ondansetron (n = 40), 4 mg intravenous ondansetron and a sham ReliefBand; (2) acustimulation (n = 40), 2 ml intravenous saline and an active ReliefBand; and (3) combination (n = 40), 4 mg intravenous ondansetron and an active ReliefBand. The incidences of postoperative nausea and vomiting, as well as the need for "rescue" antiemetics, were determined at specific time intervals for up to 72 h after surgery. The outcome variables assessed included recovery times, quality of recovery score, time to resumption of normal diet, and patient satisfaction with the prophylactic antiemetic therapy. Results Use of the ReliefBand in combination with ondansetron significantly reduced nausea (20 vs. 50%), vomiting (0 vs. 20%), and the need for rescue antiemetics (10 vs. 37%) compared with ondansetron alone at 24 h after surgery. Furthermore, the ability to resume a normal diet (74 vs. 35%) within 24 h after surgery was significantly improved when the ReliefBand was used to supplement ondansetron (vs. ondansetron alone). Finally, the quality of recovery (90 +/- 10 vs.70 +/- 20) and patient satisfaction (94 +/- 10 vs. 75 +/- 22) scores were significantly higher in the combination group the ondansetron group. There were no significant differences between the ReliefBand and ondansetron when administered as adjuvants to droperidol for antiemetic prophylaxis. Conclusions The ReliefBand compared favorably to ondansetron (4 mg intravenously) when used for prophylaxis against postoperative nausea and vomiting. Furthermore, the acustimulation device enhanced the antiemetic efficacy of ondansetron after plastic surgery.

Dexamethasone in Combination with Dolasetron for Prophylaxis in the Ambulatory Setting

2002 ◽  
Vol 96 (6) ◽  
pp. 1346-1350 ◽  
Author(s):  
Margarita Coloma ◽  
Paul F. White ◽  
Scott D. Markowitz ◽  
Charles W. Whitten ◽  
Amy R. Macaluso ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy ◽  
Postoperative Nausea ◽  
Postoperative Nausea And Vomiting ◽  
Nausea And Vomiting ◽  
Quality Of Recovery ◽  
Dexamethasone Group ◽  
Patient Satisfaction Scores ◽  
Discharge Criteria

Background Postoperative nausea and vomiting after laparoscopic cholecystectomy remains a common problem despite routine antiemetic prophylaxis. Therefore, the authors investigated the effect of administering 4 mg intravenous dexamethasone as an adjunct to a 5-HT3 antagonist (12.5 mg intravenous dolasetron) with respect to patient outcome. Methods Outpatients (N = 140) were enrolled in this prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, institutional review board-approved protocol involving two antiemetic treatment groups. After induction of anesthesia, the control group received 1 ml intravenous saline, whereas the dexamethasone group received 4 mg intravenous dexamethasone. Both groups received 12.5 mg intravenous dolasetron at the time of gallbladder removal. A blinded observer recorded the recovery times, emetic episodes, rescue antiemetics, maximum nausea score, and time to achieve discharge criteria. Postdischarge side effects, as well as patient satisfaction and quality of recovery scores were assessed at 24 h after surgery. Results Although there was no difference in the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting in the early recovery period, the dexamethasone group had a shorter stay in the day-surgery unit (136 +/- 57 vs. 179 +/- 62 min) and more rapidly achieved discharge criteria (161 +/- 32 vs. 209 +/- 39 min). In addition, fewer patients in the dexamethasone group experienced nausea at home within 24 h after discharge (13 vs. 28%, P < 0.05). Finally, the dexamethasone group reported higher quality of recovery and patient satisfaction scores (P < 0.05). Conclusions The authors conclude that the adjunctive use of 4 mg intravenous dexamethasone shortened the time to achieve discharge criteria and improved the quality of recovery and patient satisfaction scores after laparoscopic cholecystectomy procedures in outpatients receiving prophylaxis with 12.5 mg intravenous dolasetron.

scholarly journals Prevention Management of Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting in Ambulatory Setting: How Well are We Identifying Patients with Motion Sickness?

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sheila Capasso
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Motion Sickness ◽  
Postoperative Nausea ◽  
Postoperative Nausea And Vomiting ◽  
Retrospective Chart Review ◽  
Nausea And Vomiting ◽  
Ambulatory Setting ◽  
Effective Prevention ◽  
Quality Of Recovery

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) and postdischarge nausea and vomiting (PDNV) continue to be a serious problem in the ambulatory setting. These symptoms are among the most undesired complications following surgery and can adversely affect the quality of recovery for many patients. Previous research has concluded that the identification of risk factors for PONV/PDNV is a first step in developing effective prevention strategies. The purpose of this study was to examine the incidence of PONV/ PDNV in the ambulatory setting in female clients who were treated with transdermal scopolamine (TDS) for motion sickness as compared to those patients who were not treated with TDS. The study design was a two-group retrospective chart review. Of the group identified with a positive history and not treated with TDS, 54% (n=6) developed PONV /PDNV as compared to 26% (n=3) that were treated. This pilot study provided preliminary support that preoperative identification of PONV/PDNV risk factors and treatment with TDS reduces PONV/PDNV. Standardized, comprehensive risk factor identification in the preoperative period is indicated.

Amisulpride: A New Drug for Management of Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting

2021 ◽  
pp. 106002802098701
Author(s):  
Stacy L. Haber ◽  
April Graybill ◽  
Ani Minasian
Keyword(s):  
Postoperative Nausea ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Postoperative Nausea And Vomiting ◽  
Abdominal Distension ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Nausea And Vomiting ◽  
Dopamine Antagonists ◽  
Dopamine Antagonist ◽  
Additional Information ◽  
Pubmed Search

Objective: To review the pharmacology, efficacy, and safety of amisulpride and determine its role in the management of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). Data Sources: A PubMed search (1946 to November 2020) using the terms amisulpride and APD421 was conducted. Study Selection and Data Extraction: Relevant reports on intravenous amisulpride were included. Data Synthesis: Six clinical trials were evaluated. In 4 trials on the prevention of PONV, a greater percentage of patients who received amisulpride 5 mg compared with placebo experienced a complete response (44%-60% vs 31%-33%, respectively, when used as monotherapy; 58% vs 47%, respectively, when used in combination with another antiemetic). In 2 trials on the treatment of PONV, a significantly greater percentage of patients who received amisulpride 10 mg compared with placebo experienced a complete response (31.4% vs 21.5%, respectively, in patients who had not received prophylaxis; 41.7% vs 28.5%, respectively, in patients who had received prophylaxis). Adverse effects included infusion site pain, chills, hypokalemia, procedural hypotension, and abdominal distension. Relevance to Patient Care and Clinical Practice: Amisulpride is effective for the management of PONV and may be less likely to cause QT prolongation and extrapyramidal symptoms than other dopamine antagonists. Additional information is needed on its use for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting and in children. Conclusions: Amisulpride is an important new option for the multimodal management of PONV in adults, and it may be the preferred dopamine antagonist because of the more favorable safety profile that results from its unique pharmacological properties.

scholarly journals The Effect of Anaesthetic Technique on Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting after Day-case Gynaecological Laparoscopy

2002 ◽  
Vol 30 (2) ◽  
pp. 153-159 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. J. Paech ◽  
B. H. S. Lee ◽  
S. F. Evans
Keyword(s):  
Postoperative Nausea ◽  
Postoperative Nausea And Vomiting ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Nausea And Vomiting ◽  
Day Case ◽  
Post Discharge ◽  
Gynaecological Laparoscopy ◽  
Group I ◽  
Inhalational Anaesthesia ◽  
Admission Group

Gynaecological surgery is of high emetogenic potential and both total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) and prophylactic antiemetic therapy may reduce the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). We studied 144 patients scheduled for day-case gynaecological laparoscopy in a randomized trial comparing balanced inhalational anaesthesia and prophylactic dolasetron (group I+D) with propofol TIVA and dolasetron (group T+D) or TIVA alone (group T). The primary outcome of “complete response” (no vomiting, no treatment for PONV) was not significantly different among groups (34%, 51%, 32%; groups I+D vs T+D vs T, P=0.12). During the first hour after surgery, group I+D had nausea of greater severity (P<0.03). During hospital admission, group T had more vomiting (P<0.03). From discharge until 24 hours postoperatively, 55% of group I+D experience nausea and 38% vomited. The incidence and severity of nausea were significantly lower in the TIVA groups (P<0.04 and < 0.05 respectively). There were no significant differences between groups T+D and T, although comparing all groups the complete response rate was highest and the post-discharge incidence and severity of nausea lowest in group T+D. In conclusion, propofol TIVA, with or without dolasetron, reduced postoperative nausea, but not perioperative vomiting or antiemetic requirement, when compared with inhalational anaesthesia plus dolasetron.

scholarly journals Granisetron versus Granisetron-Dexamethasone for Prevention of Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting in Pediatric Strabismus Surgery: A Randomized Double-Blind Trial

2016 ◽  
Vol 2016 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Renu Sinha ◽  
Dilip Shende ◽  
Souvik Maitra ◽  
Neeraj Kumar ◽  
Bikash Ranjan Ray ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Postoperative Nausea ◽  
Postoperative Nausea And Vomiting ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Strabismus Surgery ◽  
Nausea And Vomiting ◽  
Fisher Exact Test ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Exact Test ◽  
Oculocardiac Reflex ◽  
Significant Difference

Aim.Efficacy of granisetron and combination of granisetron and dexamethasone was evaluated for prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in children undergoing elective strabismus surgery.Methods.A total of 136 children (1–15 years) were included. Children received either granisetron (40 mcg/kg) [group G] or combination of granisetron (40 mcg/kg) and dexamethasone (150 mcg/kg) [group GD]. Intraoperative fentanyl requirement and incidence and severity of oculocardiac reflex were assessed. PONV severity was assessed for first 24 hours and if score was >2, it was treated with metoclopramide. Postoperative analgesia was administered with intravenous fentanyl and ibuprofen.Results.The demographic profile, muscles operated, and fentanyl requirement were comparable. Complete response to PONV in first 24 hours was observed in 75% (51/68) of children in group G and 76.9% (50/65) of children in group GD, which was comparable statistically (p=0.96, Fisher exact test; OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.50, 2.46). Incidence of PONV between 0 and 24 hours was comparable. One child in group G required rescue antiemetic in first 24 hours and none of the children had severe PONV in group GD. There was no significant difference in incidence or severity of oculocardiac reflex.Conclusion.Dexamethasone did not increase efficacy of granisetron for prevention of PONV in elective pediatric strabismus surgery. Registration number of clinical trial wasCTRI/2009/091/001000.

scholarly journals Efficacy of Three Different Prophylactic Treatments for Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting after Vitrectomy: A Randomized Clinical Trial

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 391 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michele Reibaldi ◽  
Matteo Fallico ◽  
Antonio Longo ◽  
Teresio Avitabile ◽  
Marinella Astuto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Postoperative Pain ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Local Anesthesia ◽  
Postoperative Nausea ◽  
Therapy Group ◽  
Combined Therapy ◽  
Postoperative Nausea And Vomiting ◽  
Nausea And Vomiting ◽  
Combination Group

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) after vitreoretinal surgery may potentially be associated with severe complications, such as suprachoroidal hemorrhage. The purpose of the present multicenter clinical trial (NCT02386059) was to assess the efficacy of three different prophylactic treatments for PONV after vitrectomy under local anesthesia. Patients undergoing primary vitrectomy were randomized to the control arm or to one of the treatment arms (4 mg ondansetron, 4 mg dexamethasone, combination of the two drugs). The primary outcome measure was the proportion of complete response (no nausea, no vomiting, no retching, and no use of antiemetic rescue medication) during 24 h after vitrectomy. Secondary outcomes included the severity standardized score of PONV, postoperative pain standardized score, and rate of ocular and non-ocular adverse events. Baseline demographics of the 1287 patients were comparable between the four arms. The combined therapy group showed a statistically significant lower incidence of PONV compared to the placebo and monotherapy (p < 0.001). PONV severity was also reduced in the combination group compared to the others (p < 0.001). Postoperative pain scores and adverse events were comparable among the four groups. Combined therapy with dexamethasone and ondansetron was the most effective treatment for reducing the incidence and severity of PONV in patients undergoing vitrectomy under local anesthesia.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document