Can postoperative nausea and vomiting be predicted?
(9/321)
BACKGROUND: Iletrospective studies fail to identify predictors of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). The authors prospectively studied 17,638 consecutive outpatients who had surgery to identify predictors. METHODS: Data on medical conditions, anesthesia, surgery, and PONV were collected in the post-anesthesia care unit, in the ambulatory surgical unit, and in telephone interviews conducted 24 h after surgery. Multiple logistic regression with backward stepwise elimination was used to develop a predictive model An independent set of patients was used to validate the model RESULTS: Age (younger or older), sex (female or male), smoking status (nonsmokers or smokers), previous PONV, type of anesthesia (general or other), duration of anesthesia (longer or shorter), and type of surgery (plastic, orthopedic shoulder, or other) were independent predictors of PONV. A 10-yr increase in age decreased the likelihood of PONV by 13%. The risk for men was one third that for women. A 30-min increase in the duration of anesthesia increased the likelihood of PONV by 59%. General anesthesia increased the likelihood of PONV 11 times compared with other types of anesthesia. Patients with plastic and orthopedic shoulder surgery had a sixfold increase in the risk for PONV. The model predicted PONV accurately and yielded an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.785+/-0.011 using an independent validation set. CONCLUSIONS: A validated mathematical model is provided to calculate the risk of PONV in outpatients having surgery. Knowing the factors that predict PONV will help anesthesiologists determine which patients will need antiemetic therapy. (+info)
Patient-controlled analgesia: epidural fentanyl and i.v. morphine compared after caesarean section.
(10/321)
We have compared patient-controlled epidural fentanyl (PCEF) and patient-controlled i.v. morphine (PCIM) after Caesarean section in 84 patients, in a randomized, double-blind study. All patients had an epidural and an i.v. patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) device, one of which delivered normal saline. Group PCEF received epidural fentanyl 20 micrograms with a 10-min lockout. Group PCIM received i.v. morphine 1 mg with a 5-min lockout. PCA use was lower for PCEF patients (P = 0.0007). The highest pain score recorded at rest for PCEF patients was median 20 (interquartile range 10-33) mm compared with 32 (14-52) mm for PCIM patients (P = 0.02). The highest pain score recorded on coughing was 31 (21-41) mm with PCEF compared with 56 (30-71) mm for PCIM (P = 0.001). There was less nausea (P = 0.02) and drowsiness (P = 0.0003) with PCEF. There was no difference in the overall incidence and severity of pruritus (P = 0.77). However, pruritus started earlier with PCEF. (+info)
Omitting antagonism of neuromuscular block: effect on postoperative nausea and vomiting and risk of residual paralysis. A systematic review.
(11/321)
We have estimated the effect of omitting antagonism of neuromuscular block on postoperative nausea and vomiting. A systematic search (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Biological Abstracts, Cochrane library, reference lists and hand searching; no language restriction, up to March 1998) was performed for relevant randomized controlled trials. In eight studies (1134 patients), antagonism with neostigmine or edrophonium was compared with spontaneous recovery after general anesthesia with pancuronium, vecuronium, mivacurium or tubocurarine. On combining neostigmine data, there was no evidence of an antiemetic effect when it was omitted. However, the highest incidence of emesis with neostigmine 1.5 mg was lower than the lowest incidence of emesis with 2.5 mg. Numbers-needed-to-treat to prevent emesis by omitting neostigmine compared with using it were consistently negative with 1.5 mg, and consistently positive (3-6) with 2.5 mg. There was a lack of evidence for edrophonium. In two studies, three patients with spontaneous recovery after mivacurium or vecuronium needed rescue anticholinesterase drugs because of clinically relevant muscle weakness (number-needed-to-harm, 30). Omitting neostigmine may have a clinically relevant antiemetic effect when high doses are used. Omitting antagonism, however, introduces a non-negligent risk of residual paralysis even with short-acting neuromuscular blocking agents. (+info)
Acupressure and the prevention of nausea and vomiting after laparoscopy.
(12/321)
The efficacy of currently available antiemetics remains poor. Concern with their side effects and the high cost of the newer drugs has led to renewed interest in non-pharmacological methods of treatment. We have studied the efficacy of acupressure at the P6 point in the prevention of nausea and vomiting after laparoscopy, in a double-blind, randomized, controlled study of acupressure vs placebo. We studied 104 patients undergoing laparoscopy and dye investigation. The anaesthetic technique and postoperative analgesia were standardized. Failure of treatment was defined as the occurrence of nausea and/or vomiting within the first 24 h after anaesthesia. The use of acupressure reduced the incidence of nausea or vomiting from 42% to 19% compared with placebo, with an adjusted risk ratio of 0.24 (95% CI 0.08-0.62; P = 0.005). Other variables were similar between groups. (+info)
Combined field block and i.p. instillation of ropivacaine for pain management after laparoscopic sterilization.
(13/321)
We have studied the effect of ropivacaine for combined port site and mesosalpinx infiltration, and peritoneal instillation on pain, nausea and vomiting after laparoscopic sterilization, in a double-blind, placebo-controlled study in 80 patients. The total dose of ropivacaine was 285 mg. All patients received intra- and postoperative NSAID in fixed doses. Abdominal and shoulder pain, nausea and vomiting were recorded during the first 8 h after operation and in a diary for 3 days. In the ropivacaine group, abdominal pain scores were lower during the first 4 h (P < 0.00001), additional use of morphine was less (P < 0.001) and fewer patients had nausea or vomiting during the first 72 h (five vs 14; P < 0.05). There were no signs of local anaesthetic toxicity. (+info)
A simplified risk score for predicting postoperative nausea and vomiting: conclusions from cross-validations between two centers.
(14/321)
BACKGROUND: Recently, two centers have independently developed a risk score for predicting postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). This study investigated (1) whether risk scores are valid across centers and (2) whether risk scores based on logistic regression coefficients can be simplified without loss of discriminating power. METHODS: Adult patients from two centers (Oulu, Finland: n = 520, and Wuerzburg, Germany: n = 2202) received inhalational anesthesia (without antiemetic prophylaxis) for various types of surgery. PONV was defined as nausea or vomiting within 24 h of surgery. Risk scores to estimate the probability of PONV were obtained by fitting logistic regression models. Simplified risk scores were constructed based on the number of risk factors that were found significant in the logistic regression analyses. Original and simplified scores were cross-validated. A combined data set was created to estimate a potential center effect and to construct a final risk score. The discriminating power of each score was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curves. RESULTS: Risk scores derived from one center were able to predict PONV from the other center (area under the curve = 0.65-0.75). Simplification did not essentially weaken the discriminating power (area under the curve = 0.63-0.73). No center effect could be detected in a combined data set (odds ratio = 1.06, 95% confidence interval = 0.71-1.59). The final score consisted of four predictors: female gender, history of motion sickness (MS) or PONV, nonsmoking, and the use of postoperative opioids. If none, one, two, three, or four of these risk factors were present, the incidences of PONV were 10%, 21%, 39%, 61% and 79%. CONCLUSIONS: The risk scores derived from one center proved valid in the other and could be simplified without significant loss of discriminating power. Therefore, it appears that this risk score has broad applicability in predicting PONV in adult patients undergoing inhalational anesthesia for various types of surgery. For patients with at least two out of these four identified predictors a prophylactic antiemetic strategy should be considered. (+info)
Efficacy of promethazine suppositories dispensed to outpatient surgical patients.
(15/321)
Postoperative nausea and vomiting frequently complicate outpatient anesthesia and surgery. The duration of treatment for this complication must occasionally extend beyond discharge from the hospital. In this study, we evaluated the commonly used anti-emetic promethazine for its efficacy in the post-discharge period. Adult outpatient surgical patients who had excessive postoperative nausea and vomiting in the recovery room, or who were at risk for postoperative nausea and vomiting following discharge were given two promethazine suppositories (25 mg) for home use. All patients were contacted by our recovery room nurses on the first business day after their surgery and questioned as to their use of the suppositories and, if used, their efficacy. We found that 55 percent of patients given promethazine suppositories for home use had nausea and vomiting in the post-discharge period. Of the patients given promethazine, 89 percent used the suppositories. All of these patients reported improvement in their symptoms following use of the suppositories. None reported adverse effects from the promethazine suppositories. In conclusion, we found promethazine suppositories to be an inexpensive and efficacious treatment for nausea and vomiting in adult outpatient surgical patients following discharge from the hospital. Side-effects were minimal, and our patients voiced no complaints about this mode of therapy. We recommend this therapy for treatment of nausea and vomiting after hospital discharge following adult outpatient surgery. (+info)
Supplemental oxygen reduces the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting.
(16/321)
BACKGROUND: Despite new anesthetic drugs and antiemetics, particularly 5-hydroxytryptamines, the incidence of postoperative nausea or vomiting remains between 20% and 70%. The authors tested the hypothesis that supplemental perioperative oxygen administration reduces the incidence of postoperative nausea or vomiting. METHODS: Patients undergoing colon resection were anesthetized with fentanyl and isoflurane. During and for 2 h after surgery they were randomly assigned to (1) 30% oxygen, balance nitrogen (n = 119); or (2) 80% oxygen, balance nitrogen (n = 112). The incidence of nausea or vomiting during the first 24 postoperative hours was evaluated by nurses blinded to group assignment and oxygen concentration. Data were analyzed with unpaired t or Mann-Whitney U tests. Results are presented as means +/- SD; P < 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: Factors known to influence nausea and vomiting were comparable in the two groups. Perioperative oxygen saturation was well within normal limits in each treatment group; saturations the first postoperative morning were comparable in each group. Supplemental oxygen reduced the incidence of postoperative nausea or vomiting from 30% in the patients given 30% oxygen to 17% in those given 80% oxygen (P = 0.027). CONCLUSIONS: Supplemental oxygen reduced the incidence of postoperative nausea or vomiting nearly twofold after colorectal surgery. The mechanism by which oxygen administration reduces the incidence of these postoperative sequelae remains unknown but may be related to subtle intestinal ischemia. Because oxygen is inexpensive and essentially risk-free, supplemental oxygen appears to be an effective method of reducing postoperative nausea and vomiting. (+info)