A factorial trial of six interventions for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting. [Postoperative vomiting]. A randomized, double-blinded comparison of ondansetron, droperidol, and placebo for prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting after supratentorial craniotomy. The prevention of emesis in plastic surgery: a randomized, prospective study. Postoperative analgesia and antiemetic efficacy after intrathecal neostigmine in patients undergoing abdominal hysterectomy during spinal anesthesia. Tropisetron vs ondansetron for prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Preoperative transdermal scopolamine does not reduce the level of nausea and frequency of vomiting after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Randomized, double-blinded comparison of tropisetron and placebo for prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting after supratentorial craniotomy. Effect and placebo effect of acupressure (P6) on nausea and vomiting after outpatient gynaecological surgery. Substance P (Neurokinin-1) antagonist prevents postoperative vomiting after abdominal hysterectomy procedures. [The prevention of postoperative vomiting following strabismus surgery in children]. Prophylactic intravenous ondansetron in patients undergoing cataract extraction under general anesthesia. Comparative efficacy of acustimulation (ReliefBand) versus ondansetron (Zofran) in combination with droperidol for preventing nausea and vomiting. Vomiting after ophthalmic surgery. Effects of intra-operative antiemetics and postoperative oral fluid restriction. Prevention of post-operative nausea and vomiting following laparoscopic surgery--ephedrine vs propofol. Effect of intramuscular clebopride on postoperative nausea and vomiting. Randomized, placebo-controlled trial of combination antiemetic prophylaxis for day-case gynaecological laparoscopic surgery. Antiemetic prophylaxis in cardiac surgery: comparison of metoclopramide and ondansetron. Antiemetic efficacy of ondansetron in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Efficacy of ondansetron for prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting after outpatient ear surgery under local anesthesia. [Prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting with single and repeat administration of ondansetron--review of the literature on different administration forms]. Droperidol-supplemented anaesthesia decreases post-operative nausea and vomiting but impairs post-operative mood and well-being. Prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting after laparoscopic gynaecological surgery. Combined antiemetic treatment with tropisetron and metoclopramide vs. metoclopramide alone. Oral ondansetron decreases vomiting after tonsillectomy in children. Ondansetron for prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting following minor oral surgery: a double-blind randomized study. Comparison of ondansetron and droperidol in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting after laparoscopic surgery in women. A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. [Clebopride in premedication in ambulatory interventions in general anesthesia]. Effect of prophylactic ondansetron on postoperative nausea and vomiting after elective craniotomy. Ondansetron disintegrating tablets of 8 mg twice a day for 3 days did not reduce the incidence of nausea or vomiting after laparoscopic surgery. Neostigmine 50 microg kg(-1) with glycopyrrolate increases postoperative nausea in women after laparoscopic gynaecological surgery. Antiemetic efficacy of prophylactic dimenhydrinate (Dramamine) vs ondansetron (Zofran): a randomized, prospective trial inpatients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Comparison of ondansetron and placebo for preventing postoperative nausea and emesis in gastrointestinal tract surgery: a multicenter randomized controlled trial. The effect of anaesthetic technique on postoperative nausea and vomiting after day-case gynaecological laparoscopy. Effects of ondansetron in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in children. Prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting after intrathecal morphine for Cesarean section: a randomized comparison of dexamethasone, droperidol, and a combination. Effect of antagonizing residual neuromuscular block by neostigmine and atropine on postoperative vomiting. Postoperative analgesia and antiemetic efficacy after subarachnoid neostigmine in orthopedic surgery. Prophylactic anti-emetic efficacy of ondansetron in laparoscopic cholecystectomy under total intravenous anaesthesia. A randomised, double-blind comparison with droperidol, metoclopramide and placebo. Antiemetic efficacy of prophylactic ondansetron in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Do anticholinergic agents affect the occurrence of postanaesthetic nausea? [Prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting with ondansetron: a prospective, randomized, double-blind study in 90 patients]. The effect of dexamethasone on side effects after coronary revascularization procedures. The effect of preoperative ondansetron on the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing outpatient dentoalveolar surgery and general anesthesia. [Transdermal scopolamine for prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting. No clinically relevant result in spite of reduced postoperative vomiting in general surgical and gynecologic patients]. [Prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting by ondansetron]. Postoperative nausea and vomiting after breast surgery: efficacy of prophylactic ondansetron and droperidol in a randomized placebo-controlled study. Antiemetic prophylaxis for office-based surgery: are the 5-HT3 receptor antagonists beneficial? Ondansetron/promethazine combination or promethazine alone reduces nausea and vomiting after middle ear surgery. [Prophylaxis of nausea and vomiting after thyroid surgery: comparison of oral and intravenous dolasetron with intravenous droperidol and placebo]. Comparison of anti-emetic effects of ondansetron, metoclopromide or a combination of both in children undergoing surgery for strabismus. Acupressure for intrathecal narcotic-induced nausea and vomiting after caesarean section. Vomiting after adenotonsillectomy in children: a comparison of ondansetron, dimenhydrinate, and placebo. Ondansetron for the prevention and treatment of nausea and vomiting following pediatric strabismus surgery. A comparison of the effects of droperidol and the combination of droperidol and ondansetron on postoperative nausea and vomiting for patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Preoperative transdermal hyoscine for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting. The addition of antiemetics to the morphine solution in patient controlled analgesia syringes used by children after an appendicectomy does not reduce the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting. Effect of acupressure on postoperative nausea and vomiting in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. A randomized controlled trial of the antiemetic effect of three doses of ondansetron after strabismus surgery in children. Metoclopramide versus ondansetron in prophylaxis of nausea and vomiting for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Postoperative nausea and vomiting after Faden operation. Menstruation increases the risk of nausea and vomiting after laparoscopy. A prospective randomized study. Efficacy of ondansetron in prophylaxis of postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients following infratentorial surgery: a placebo-controlled prospective double-blind study. Incidence and severity of postoperative nausea and vomiting are similar after metoclopramide 20 mg and ondansetron 8 mg given by the end of laparoscopic cholecystectomies. Anti-emetic efficacy of tropisetron and metoclopramide. Prophylactic antiemetic therapy with ondansetron, tropisetron, granisetron and metoclopramide in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized, double-blind comparison with placebo. Superior prolonged antiemetic prophylaxis with a four-drug multimodal regimen - comparison with propofol or placebo. Acupressure and ondansetron for postoperative nausea and vomiting after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Dolasetron decreases postoperative nausea and vomiting after breast surgery. Prevention of vomiting after strabismus surgery in children: dexamethasone alone versus dexamethasone plus low-dose ondansetron. A randomized, double-blind comparison of ondansetron versus placebo for prevention of nausea and vomiting after infratentorial craniotomy. Ondansetron decreases postoperative vomiting in pediatric patients undergoing tonsillectomy and adenoidectomy. Tropisetron reduces vomiting after tonsillectomy in children. Antiemetic effects of granisetron on postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients with and without motion sickness. The antiemetic efficacy of prophylactic granisetron in gynecologic surgery. Dexamethasone in combination with dolasetron for prophylaxis in the ambulatory setting: effect on outcome after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Comparison of ondansetron, metoclopramide, and placebo in the prevention of postoperative emesis in children undergoing ophthalmic surgery. Antiemetic prophylaxis for strabismus surgery. Nausea and vomiting after strabismus surgery in preschool children. The dose-response relationship of ondansetron in preventing postoperative emesis in pediatric patients undergoing ambulatory surgery. Open placebo controlled comparison of the antiemetic effect of droperidol, metoclopramide or a combination of both in pediatric strabismus surgery. A comparison of three antiemetic combinations for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting. Ondansetron versus placebo for prophylaxis of nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing ambulatory laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Prophylaxis of nausea and vomiting after laparoscopic cholecystectomy with ramosetron: randomised controlled trial. Post-laparoscopic vomiting in females versus males: comparison of prophylactic antiemetic action of ondansetron versus metoclopramide. Transdermal scopolamine decreases nausea and vomiting following cesarean section in patients receiving epidural morphine. [Evaluation of the administration time of ondansetron, a preventive for postoperative nausea and vomiting: prospective, randomized, double-blind study in 120 patients]. Granisetron reduces the incidence and severity of nausea and vomiting after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. [Ondansetron as prophylaxis for postoperative nausea and vomiting. A prospective randomized double-blind comparative study with droperidol]. A double-blind, placebo-controlled pilot study examining the effectiveness of intravenous ondansetron in the prevention of postoperative nausea and emesis. The effect of dexamethasone upon patient-controlled analgesia-related nausea and vomiting. A randomized, double-blind pilot study examining the use of intravenous ondansetron in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in female inpatients. Ondansetron decreases emesis after tonsillectomy in children. Prevention of nausea and vomiting with ramosetron after total hip replacement. Prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting using ondansetron, a new, selective, 5-HT3 receptor antagonist. Comparison of the efficacy of 2 mg versus 5 mg tropisetron in the management of post-operative nausea and vomiting. [Antiemetic prophylaxis after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: comparative study of dehydrobenzperidol, metoclopramide, ondansetron and placebo]. Reduction of postoperative nausea and vomiting with granisetron. Effect of a small dose of droperidol on nausea, vomiting and recovery after outpatient enflurane anaesthesia. [Prophylaxis of Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting FollowingGynaecological Laparoscopy]. Nausea and vomiting after cardiac surgery.
Untreated, one third of patients who undergo surgery will have postoperative nausea and vomiting. Although many trials have been conducted, the relative benefits of prophylactic antiemetic interventions given alone or in combination remain unknown.
                We enrolled 5199 patients at high risk for postoperative nausea and vomiting in a randomized, controlled trial of factorial design that was powered to evaluate interactions among as many as three antiemetic interventions. Of these patients, 4123 were randomly assigned to 1 of 64 possible combinations of six prophylactic interventions: 4 mg of ondansetron or no ondansetron; 4 mg of dexamethasone or no dexamethasone; 1.25 mg of droperidol or no droperidol; propofol or a volatile anesthetic; nitrogen or nitrous oxide; and remifentanil or fentanyl. The remaining patients were randomly assigned with respect to the first four interventions. The primary outcome was nausea and vomiting within 24 hours after surgery, which was evaluated blindly.
                Ondansetron, dexamethasone, and droperidol each reduced the risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting by about 26 percent. Propofol reduced the risk by 19 percent, and nitrogen by 12 percent; the risk reduction with both of these agents (i.e., total intravenous anesthesia) was thus similar to that observed with each of the antiemetics. All the interventions acted independently of one another and independently of the patients' baseline risk. Consequently, the relative risks associated with the combined interventions could be estimated by multiplying the relative risks associated with each intervention. Absolute risk reduction, though, was a critical function of patients' baseline risk.
                Because antiemetic interventions are similarly effective and act independently, the safest or least expensive should be used first. Prophylaxis is rarely warranted in low-risk patients, moderate-risk patients may benefit from a single intervention, and multiple interventions should be reserved for high-risk patients.
                Copyright 2004 Massachusetts Medical Society Nausea and vomiting following general anaesthesia are among the most frequent adverse reactions causing complications, the relief of which is an absolute demand. 5-HT3 receptor antagonists, such as ondansetron, belonging to the latest class of antiemetics were launched more than a decade ago.
                Efficacy and tolerability of ondansetron injection in prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting were investigated in a prospective, randomised, double-blind, placebo controlled, three-armed clinical study in 148 patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Moreover the authors also investigated the effect of timing of dosing, i.e. whether the administration of antiemetic drug before starting anaesthesia has any advantage comparing its use at the end of operation.
                While using a standard surgical and anaesthesia method vomiting after laparoscopic cholecystectomy occurred in a frequency of 44.7% of the patients in the placebo group, whereas the figures decreased significantly after administration of 4 mg ondansetron at the end (28.9%) or before (25.5%) anaesthesia. Inclusively the frequency of severe cases decreased from 19.2% of control group up to 8.9% and 4.3% in the active groups, respectively.
                Intravenous administration of 4 mg ondansetron effectively reduces vomiting occurring in more than 40% of patients after laparoscopic cholecystectomy, especially the frequency of severe cases, and mainly if administered before operation. The preparation is safe; no clinical or laboratory adverse reactions, complications have been observed in the studied patients. Nausea or vomiting occurs frequently after craniotomy. Because of the need for frequent postoperative neurological assessment, an effective antiemetic with minimal sedative side effects is needed. Therefore, we compared ondansetron to droperidol in a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study. A total of 60 adults requiring elective supratentorial craniotomy received standardized IV anesthesia with 4 mg of ondansetron, 0.625 mg of droperidol, or placebo at skin closure. The incidence of postoperative nausea, emesis, pain and sedation scores, and rescue antiemetic use were recorded at 0, 0.5, 1, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 48 h. All groups were demographically similar. Differences existed for cumulative 8, 12, and 24 h incidences of nausea (24 h, P = 0.03) and emesis (24 h, P = 0.04). Within 4 h, when maximal effect could be expected from treatment, 20% of the ondansetron group, 25% of the droperidol group and 50% of the placebo group received rescue antiemetic (P = 0.12). No differences in pain (P = 0.82) or sedation (P = 0.74) scores were detected. Both ondansetron and droperidol prevent nausea; however, only droperidol reduces emesis after supratentorial craniotomy. The dose of droperidol used was not more sedating than ondansetron. Sustained reduction in nausea and emesis over 24 h indicates a preemptive benefit of prophylactic antiemetic in this surgical population. Implications: Nausea and vomiting after brain surgery are particularly troubling, because effective treatment may cause sedation, making postoperative neurological assessment difficult. Our study shows that both ondansetron and droperidol are effective in reducing nausea, and that droperidol is particularly effective in reducing vomiting. Neither drug caused more sedation than placebo. Perhaps the most unpleasant experience following outpatient plastic surgery procedures is postoperative nausea and vomiting. Postoperative nausea and vomiting often results in delayed recovery time and unintended admission, and it can be a contributing factor to the formation of hematoma following rhytidectomy. Ondansetron (Zofran) has proven benefit in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting if given before general anesthesia in a variety of surgical procedures. Its utility in cases performed under conscious sedation has not been determined. The purpose of this study was (1) to test the ability of prophylactic ondansetron to prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting in plastic surgery cases performed under conscious sedation, and (2) to determine relative risk factors for postoperative nausea and vomiting and a selection policy for the administration of antiemetic prophylaxis. This was a prospective, randomized, double-blind study. One hundred twenty patients were enrolled after giving informed consent. Patients received a single dose of either placebo or ondansetron (4 mg intravenously) before administration of sedation. Sedation administration followed a standardized institutional protocol, using midazolam and fentanyl. Data were recorded from a series of three questionnaires: preoperatively, immediately postoperatively, and at the time of the first office return. Data were confirmed by means of telephone interview, chart analysis, and nursing documentation. Multivariate analysis was conducted. Nausea and emesis occurred with an overall frequency of 33 percent and 22 percent, respectively. Postoperative nausea and vomiting was associated with statistically longer recovery periods. The incidence of emesis was statistically higher among women, among those undergoing facial rejuvenation, and among those with a history of opioid-induced emesis or postoperative nausea and vomiting following a previous operation (p < 0.05). The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting paralleled increases in case duration; the incidence of emesis was zero in cases less than 90 minutes in duration. Ondansetron significantly reduced the incidence of emesis overall (placebo, 30 percent; ondansetron, 13 percent; p < 0.05). Postoperative perception of nausea was significantly lower among those who had received ondansetron (p < 0.05). These results confirm the efficacy of ondansetron for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in plastic surgery cases under conscious sedation. In those who are at increased risk, prophylaxis should be considered. Such risks include female gender, facial rejuvenation procedures, and a patient history of opioid-induced emesis or postoperative nausea and vomiting following a prior operation. The zero incidence of emesis in cases less than 90 minutes does not support the routine use of prophylaxis in such cases. Patient satisfaction in plastic surgery is derived from the overall subjective experience of the event as much as by the final result. By remaining attentive to patient concerns and optimizing perioperative care, we can improve the subjective experience for our patients. Postoperative analgesia and antiemetic efficacy after intrathecal neostigmine were investigated in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of 100 patients undergoing abdominal hysterectomy.
                The patients were assigned to one of five groups (n = 20), and received intravenous prior to the spinal block the antiemetic test drug (except propofol) and 0.05 mg/kg midazolam. The control group (group C), the neostigmine group (group N), and the propofol group (group P) received saline as the test drug. The droperidol group (group D) received 0.5 mg intravenous droperidol, and the metoclopramide group (group M) 10 mg intravenous metoclopramide. Group P was single-blinded and had an intravenous continuous propofol infusion (2-4 mg/kg/h) turned on 10 minutes after the spinal injection. The intrathecal drugs administered were 20 mg hyperbaric bupivacaine (0.5%) associated with either 100 microg neostigmine or saline (for group C). Nausea, emetic episodes, and the need for rescue medication were recorded for the first 24 hours postoperative and scored by the Visual Analog Scale (VAS).
                Time-to-first-rescue medication and rescue medications in 24 hours were similar among the groups (P = .2917 and P = .8780, respectively). Intrathecal 100 microg neostigmine was associated with a high incidence of nausea and vomiting perioperative, leading to a high consumption of antiemetics (P < .002). None of the antiemetic test drugs were effective in preventing nausea and vomiting after 100 microg neostigmine.
                Intrathecal neostigmine (100 microg) was ineffective for postoperative analgesia after abdominal hysterectomy due to side effects of nausea and vomiting. Postoperative nausea and vomiting are observed in increased frequency after laparoscopic surgery. This study was performed in order to compare the efficacy of two 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 (5-HT3) receptor antagonists, ondansetron and tropisetron, in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
                Using a randomized, double-blind study design, 87 ASA I and II patients scheduled for laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomly assigned to receive 4 mg ondansetron (Group A, n = 29), 5 mg tropisetron (Group B, n = 31), or placebo (Group C, n = 27) intravenously (IV) before induction of anesthesia. The end points evaluated were frequency of nausea, nausea intensity rated on a scale from 1 (mild) to 5 (most severe), frequency of vomiting, and need for rescue antiemetics. These parameters were measured immediately after surgery (0 h), at 3 h, 6 h, and 12 h postoperatively.
                The frequency of nausea was significantly higher in group A (31.2%) compared to group B (14%) at 12 h postoperatively (p <0.01). However, patients of group A had significantly lower nausea scores at 3 h postoperatively compared to group B. Postoperative vomiting occurred in 13.8% of patients in group A and 9.6% of patients in group B throughout the whole study period (p = n.s.). The need for rescue antiemetics was similar between groups A and B. Both groups were superior to placebo concerning all studied parameters.
                Our results show that ondansetron may be more effective in controlling nausea intensity during the first 3 h after laparoscopic cholecystectomy, while tropisetron has a longer-acting activity, with a major impact on nausea frequency at 12 h postoperatively. To determine the efficacy of scopolamine administered transdermally before laparoscopic cholecystectomy as a means of reducing postoperative nausea and vomiting.
                A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.
                A tertiary-care, university-affiliated hospital.
                A volunteer sample of 125 men and women between 20 and 60 years of age scheduled to undergo elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Expectant or nursing mothers were excluded, and 35 patients were excluded from the final analysis because of protocol violations. Forty-three patients received scopolamine and 47 patients received a placebo.
                A skin patch (scopolamine or placebo) was applied behind the right ear on the evening before operation and maintained for at least 24 hours postoperatively.
                The postoperative level of nausea assessed by the patient on a visual analogue scale, the frequency of vomiting and the frequency of antiemetic use.
                There was no significant difference in the level of nausea or in the frequency of emesis or use of antiemetics in the first 24 hours postoperatively between the control and study groups. Furthermore, there was no difference in the overall frequency of side effects. However, visual blurring was experienced by six patients in the study group compared with one in the control group (p = 0.082).
                Scopolamine administered transdermally before laparoscopic cholecystectomy does not reduce the frequency or level of nausea and vomiting postoperatively. This prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blinded study was designed to evaluate the efficacy of tropisetron in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting after elective supratentorial craniotomy in adult patients. We studied 65 ASA physical status I-III patients aged 18 to 76 years who were undergoing elective craniotomy for resection of various supratentorial tumors. Patients were divided into two groups and received either 2 mg of tropisetron (group T) or saline placebo (group P) intravenously at the time of dural closure. A standard general anesthetic technique was used. Episodes of nausea and vomiting and the need for rescue antiemetic medication were recorded during 24 hours postoperatively. Demographic data, duration of surgery and anesthesia, and sedation scores were comparable in both groups. Nausea occurred in 30% of group T patients and in 46.7% of group P patients (P >.05). The incidence of emetic episodes was 26.7% and 56.7% in the two groups (P <.05). Rescue antiemetic medication was needed in 26.7% and 60% of the patients (P <.05). Administration of a single dose of tropisetron (2 mg intravenously) given at the time of dural closure was effective in reducing postoperative nausea and vomiting after elective craniotomy for supratentorial tumor resection in adult patients. Acupuncture and acupressure have previously been reported to possess antiemetic effect. We wanted to investigate the "true" and placebo effect of acupressure in prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV).
                Sixty women undergoing outpatient minor gynaecological surgery were entered into a double-blind and randomised study. One group received acupressure with bilateral stimulation of P6 (A), a second group received bilateral placebo stimulation (P) and a third group received no acupressure wrist band and served as a reference group (R). PONV was evaluated as number of patients with complete response (no PONV), nausea only or vomiting. In addition, the need for rescue antiemetic medication and nausea after 24 h was registered.
                Complete response was obtained in 11, 11 and 9 patients in groups, A, P and R, respectively. Nine, 7 and 6 patients had nausea before discharge home, and 1, 1 and 8 patients were nauseated (8 vs 1 patient: P < 0.05) 24 h after operation in A, P and R groups, respectively. When compared to placebo acupressure (2 patients vomited and 5 needed rescue), significantly (P < 0.05) fewer needed rescue antiemetic medication after acupressure at P6 (no vomiting or rescue medication). When compared to the observation group (5 vomited and 4 needed rescue antiemetics), significantly fewer vomited after acupressure (P < 0.05)
                In patients undergoing brief gynaecological surgery, placebo effect of acupressure decreased nausea after 24 h but vomiting and need of rescue antiemetics was reduced only by acupressure with the correct P6 point stimulation. The safety and antiemetic efficacy of CP-122,721, a novel neurokinin-1 antagonist, was evaluated when administered alone or in combination with ondansetron.
                Using a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study design, CP-122,721 was initially compared with placebo and subsequently to ondansetron alone and in combination for prophylaxis against postoperative nausea and vomiting in 243 women undergoing abdominal hysterectomy. In the dose-ranging studies (n = 86), patients received either CP-122,721 100 mg (vs. placebo) or 200 mg (vs. placebo) orally 60-90 min before induction of anesthesia. In the interaction study (n = 157), patients received CP-122,721 200 mg or placebo 60-90 min before induction of anesthesia, and ondansetron 4 mg or saline 2 ml intravenously 15-30 min before the end of surgery. Patients assessed their level of nausea and pain on arrival in the postanesthesia care unit and at 0.5-, 1-, 1.5-, 2-, 4-, 8-, 12-, and 24-h intervals postoperatively. Emetic episodes, need for rescue antiemetic-antinausea medication, postoperative complications, and patient satisfaction were recorded.
                In the initial dose-ranging study, only 10% of the patients experienced emesis within the first 8 h after surgery with CP-122,721 200 mg compared with 50% in the placebo group. CP-122,721 200 mg also decreased the need for rescue medication (25% vs. 48%). CP-122,721 100 mg was less effective than 200 mg in decreasing the incidence of repeated episodes of emesis. In the interaction study, 6% of the patients receiving CP-122,721 200 mg orally experienced emesis less than 2 h after surgery compared with 17% with ondansetron alone. With combined therapy, only 2% experienced emesis. In addition, the median times for 75% of patients to remain free from postoperative nausea and vomiting were 82, 75, and 362 min in the ondansetron, CP-122,721, and combination groups, respectively.
                Oral CP-122,721 200 mg decreased emetic episodes compared with ondansetron (4 mg intravenously) during the first 24 h after gynecologic surgery; however, there was no difference in patient satisfaction. Children recovering from anaesthesia for strabismus surgery are particularly prone to nausea and vomiting as a result of intraoperative vagus irritation. Besides being disturbing to the patient, vomiting can be dangerous during emergence from anesthesia and can result in delayed discharge. Droperidol is a powerful antiemetic drug that has been shown to reduce the incidence and severity of postoperative nausea and vomiting in pediatric strabismus patients, although the best timing for administration is not clear. MATERIAL AND METHODS. We compared three randomized groups totalling 61 patients. Droperidol 0.075 mg/kg i.v. was given either at induction of anesthesia after intubation (n = 20) or during the last muscle suture (n = 21). The third group received no antiemetic treatment. The patients' ages ranged from 3 to 14 years (mean 5.9 +/- 2.84 years). There was no difference in age or sex between the three groups. Anesthesia was standardized with rectal midazolam premedication, atropine, thiopental, succinylcholine, O2/N2O = 1:2, enflurane, intubation, and a gastric tube. RESULTS. Nausea, retching, or vomiting occurred in 2/20 children (10%) given droperidol preoperatively, 4/21 children (19%) with droperidol during the operation, and 9/20 children (45%) with no antiemetic treatment. The difference between groups I and III was significant (p less than 0.05). Comparison of groups II and III and groups I and II showed no statistical significance. Operation time was similar in each group and there was no delay in time of extubation. In each group 1 case of hypotension occurred. No child showed extrapyramidal symptoms. The lower incidence of vomiting in all study groups compared to the literature is thought to be due to three factors: (1) emptying the stomach at the end of the operation by a gastric tube, which is removed before extubation; (2) avoidance of opioids; (3) surgical procedure being done by a very experienced surgeon in 57/61 children (12 vomiting versus 45 not vomiting) in contrast to 3/4 children vomiting postoperatively after surgery by a less experienced surgeon. CONCLUSIONS. We recommend preoperative droperidol 75 micrograms/kg i.v. as the best prophylaxis of postoperative emesis without severe side effects in pediatric strabismus surgery. During the past decade the demand for outpatient surgery has grown rapidly. Postoperative nausea and vomiting is one of the more common undesirable consequences of surgery, which may significantly delay the patient's discharge from the ambulatory surgery center. None of the currently used antiemetic drugs is considered totally effective in abolishing nausea or vomiting. The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of ondansetron, a highly selective 5-hydroxytryptamine subtype-3 receptor antagonist, with that of metoclopramide for the prevention of postoperative emesis in patients undergoing cataract surgery. The incidence of postoperative nausea was significantly less in the ondansetron group than that in the metoclopramide group (p = 0.046). Although the incidence of vomiting was clinically less frequent in the ondansetron group, there were no significant differences between both treatment groups. To our knowledge, this is the first study to demonstrate that ondansetron is effective to prevent postoperative emesis after extracapsular cataract extraction. 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.
                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.
                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.
                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. The usefulness of intra-operative antiemetics and postoperative oral fluid restriction in the prevention of vomiting following anaesthesia for ophthalmic surgery, was studied in 200 patients. They were allocated into four groups of 50 and given either saline (as control), droperidol, metoclopramide or prochlorperazine. Oral intake was restricted postoperatively in half of the patients of each group. Anaesthesia comprised morphine and atropine premedication and a halothane, nitrous oxide and oxygen spontaneous breathing technique. No significant beneficial effects resulted from intra-operative antiemetics; vomiting incidences of 26% after saline and droperidol, 28% after metoclopramide and 14% after prochlorperazine were observed. Younger patients and females vomited most frequently. Restriction of oral fluids did not decrease the incidence of vomiting but demonstrated that approximately half of those patients who vomit do so with their first postoperative oral intake. Vomiting was observed more frequently after non intra-ocular surgery than after intra-ocular surgery (37% cf. 16%, p less than 0.01) and postoperative analgesics were required by more non intra-ocular patients than by intra-ocular patients (25% cf. 5%, p less than 0.001). Squint patients vomited most frequently (48%) and most frequently required postoperative analgesia (35%). Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) are relatively common troublesome distressing symptoms. The incidence is reported to be as high as 20-51%. Ninety adult ASA I and II patients scheduled for laparoscopic gynecological or surgical interventions, were randomly and equally assigned to one of the three groups in the immediate postoperative period: Group 1 received 0.1 ml.kg(-1) normal saline intravenously, while Group 2 received 0.5 mg.kg(-1) ephedrine intramuscularly and Group 3 received 0.25 mg.kg(-1) propofol intravenously as preventive antiemetic therapy. Sixty-six, 33 and 50 percent of patients experienced nausea and vomiting syndrome in Group 1, 2 and 3 respectively. Both ephedrine and propofol proved to have antiemetic properties. Ephedrine treated group of patient had significant less emetic score than propofol. No significant hemodynamic changes were recorded in both groups. The antiemetic effect of clebopride, a new derivative of the orthopramide group, was compared with that of placebo in 298 women undergoing elective surgery. A group of 150 patients received premedication of 1 mg/kg of meperidine, administered intramuscularly (IM), and a group of 148 patients received premedication of 10 mg of diazepam IM. All patients received 0.5 mg of atropine IM. Anesthesia was induced with thiopental and maintained with halogenated N2O/O2. In a double-blind procedure, clebopride (2 mg) or placebo was injected IM at the end of anesthesia and whenever a patient had a second episode of vomiting. Clebopride appeared to be better than placebo in the prevention of nausea (P less than or equal to 0.05) and vomiting (P less than or equal to 0.001) during the 12-hour observation period. The frequency of side effects was virtually the same in patients given clebopride and patients given placebo. In a randomized, double-blind trial, we compared i.v. ondansetron 4 mg (control), i.v. ondansetron 4 mg and cyclizine 50 mg (combination) and i.v. saline 0.9% (placebo), given after induction of standardized anaesthesia, for the prevention of nausea and vomiting (PONV) after day-case gynaecological laparoscopic surgery. Compared with placebo, fewer patients in the control group vomited (9/20 versus 11/59, P = 0.02) or needed rescue antiemetic (7/20 versus 9/59, P = 0.06) before discharge. Compared with the control, fewer patients in the combination group (n = 60) vomited (11/59 versus 2/60, P = 0.01) or needed rescue antiemetic (29/59 versus 2/60, P = 0.03) before discharge. The incidence of vomiting in the combination group was less than 5% overall. Compared with the control, the combination group had a significantly lower incidence (P = 0.001) and severity (P < 0.001) of nausea after discharge and more patients with no PONV at any time during the study (15/59 versus 27/60, P = 0.03). Unlike the placebo and control groups, no patient receiving combination prophylaxis was admitted overnight for PONV management. We have compared the effectiveness of ondansetron (115 patients) and metoclopramide (101 patients) for prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing cardiac surgery involving cardiopulmonary bypass. In a prospective, randomized, controlled, double-blind study, patients received oral ondansetron 16 mg or oral metoclopramide 10 mg, 1-2 h before surgery. Anaesthesia was not standardized. Assessments of the severity of nausea and occurrence of vomiting were made at intervals after extubation and until discharge from the intensive care, or for a total of 24 h. Compared with the metoclopramide group, the ondansetron group had a higher incidence of nausea (49.6% vs 33.7%; P < 0.05) and vomiting (42.6% vs 24.8%; P < 0.01). There was no difference between groups in the number of patients who accepted postoperative antiemetics (ondansetron 43.4% vs metoclopramide 32.6%) and there was no difference in the incidence of symptoms of moderate or severe nausea. to assess the effectiveness of ondansetron in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting after elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy, and the effect of this anesthetic on hospital stay.
                this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was done in the General Surgery Service of the Getafe University Hospital. Patients who were scheduled for laparoscopic cholecystectomy to treat uncomplicated cholelithiasis, and who had an ASA status of I-II, were recruited. Before surgery the patients received either ondansetron 4 mg or placebo intravenously. This study was approved by the local ethics committee.
                56 patients were included, 29 in the ondansetron group and 27 in the placebo group. In the latter, 4 patients were later excluded because of conversion to open surgery. Postoperative nausea and emetic episodes were experienced by 7% of the patients in the ondansetron group and 47% in the placebo group (p = 0.0007). Oral intake started 7 h after surgery in the ondansetron group and 11 h after surgery in the placebo group (p = 0.04), with a mean difference of 4 h. Hospital stay was 30 h and 48 h respectively (p = 0.01), with a mean difference of 18 h.
                ondansetron given prior to surgery at a dose of 4 mg prevents postoperative nausea and vomiting after laparoscopic cholecystectomy, and reduces hospital stay. To assess the efficacy and safety of intravenous ondansetron (4 mg) for the prevention of nausea and vomiting after middle ear surgery under local anesthesia.
                The study was conducted by Division of Otorhinolaryngology in Prince of Wales Hospital, which is a tertiary referral center and teaching hospital for The Chinese University of Hong Kong.
                A double-blind randomized controlled trial.
                Fifty-eight Chinese patients undergoing tympanoplasty under local anesthesia from July 1995 to June 1997 were recruited. The mean age of patients was 42.8 years (range 18-71 years).
                Patients were randomly allocated to receive a single dose of intravenous ondansetron (4 mg) (n = 29) or placebo (n = 29) immediately before surgery.
                Patients were assessed for severity and frequency of postoperative nausea and vomiting at the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 8th, and 24th hours after middle ear surgery.
                Female patients showed a higher prevalence of postoperative nausea and vomiting. Twenty-eight percent of the patients experienced postoperative nausea, of whom 14% also experienced vomiting. Although the ondansetron group demonstrated a lower prevalence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) (24% nausea and 10% vomiting) than the placebo group (31% nausea and 17% vomiting), significant reduction in postoperative vomiting only occurred in the first postoperative hour (p = 0.038). No complications or adverse side effects were found to be associated with the use of ondansetron.
                Single-dose ondansetron (4 mg) given intravenously preoperatively significantly reduces postoperative vomiting in patients after tympanoplasty under local anesthesia and causes no adverse effects. Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is still a common perioperative complication and ondansetron has proved to be an effective antiemetic substance in its prevention. The antiemetic effect of single and repetitive application was evaluated in this study. Fifty-one female patients who underwent gynaecological surgical procedures took part in a random double-blind study. Before the start of anaesthesia, 21 patients (group 1) received either a placebo (six patients), 8 mg ondansetron orally (seven patients) or 16 mg orally (eight patients). The remaining 30 patients (group 2), split into subgroups of ten, were given the same preoperative medication as group 1 plus further doses of the same strength 8 and 16 hours after the first intake of the study medication. Metoclopramide was given intravenously if patients had more than one emetic episode or if they asked for it. Nausea and vomiting were documented up to 24 hours after finishing anaesthesia. Metoclopramide had only to be given to patients who had received a placebo. Nausea was felt by 57% (4/7) of the patients after a single dose of 8 mg ondansetron and by 40% (4/10) of the patients after three doses of 8 mg. One patient (14%, 1/7) with a single dose and two patients (20%, 2/10) with a repetitive dose of 8 mg ondansetron vomited. Following a single dose of 16 mg ondansetron, no patient (0/8) had to vomit and 25% (2/8) of the patients had nausea. There were no complications reported by the patients. Ondansetron was shown to be a well-tolerated antiemetic and seems to have a higher reductive effect on PONV when given in a single dose and not repetitively. The prophylaxis of vomiting seems to be more effective than the reduction of nausea. Follow-up studies will have to clarify our findings. Post-operative nausea and vomiting is distressing for patients and can cause dissatisfaction and impaired well-being in the post-operative period. This study examined the question whether the reduced incidence of post-operative nausea and vomiting inevitably translates into improved clinical status and well-being. In this context high doses of droperidol were investigated. On the one hand, droperidol is known to be a powerful anti-emetic, but on the other hand there is concern about psychological effects, both in the pre- and the post-operative period. In this prospective randomized double-blinded study, droperidol (5-7.5 mg) was compared with midazolam (5-7.5 mg) used to supplement fentanyl-N2O based anaesthesia, with respect to post-operative mood and well-being using a psychological questionnaire (Bf-S-test). Furthermore, the incidence of post-operative nausea and vomiting was recorded. Out of 160 patients undergoing thyroidectomy and laparoscopic cholecystectomy, data from 150 patients were analysed. The administration of droperidol significantly lowered the incidence of post-operative nausea and vomiting from 77.8% to 55.1% compared with midazolam (P = 0.0059; chi 2-test). Although post-operative nausea and vomiting is an independent risk factor for post-operative discomfort and bad mood, patients receiving droperidol showed impaired well-being 6 h after surgery. Well-being scores returned to pre-operative base-line values and did not differ between the two groups 24 and 48 h post-operatively. The reduced incidence of post-operative nausea and vomiting achieved with high dose droperidol does not equate with increased post-operative well-being. It is an important point at issue to decide whether smaller doses of droperidol that are commonly used for anti-emetic therapy are free of these side effects. Female patients undergoing gynaecological procedures, especially laparoscopically, are at high risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting. No available antiemetic is entirely effective. This double-blinded randomized trial examines the efficacy and safety of tropisetron and metoclopramide in combination and compares the results with metoclopramide alone in laparoscopic gynaecological surgery.
                One hundred and twenty female patients scheduled for minor gynaecological laparoscopy, aged 27-43 years, were randomly allocated to receive pretreatment with metoclopramide 10 mg intravenously (n=57) or tropisetron 5 mg with metoclopramide 5 mg (n=63).
                Fewer patients in the combined treatment group experienced postoperative nausea and vomiting (14% vs. 37%, P=0.008) or needed rescue antiemetic treatment (3% vs. 16%, P=0.038). No significant adverse events were observed.
                The combination of the antiemetics was superior, which is probably explained by the fact that the two drugs have different sites of action, thus preventing emesis by blocking different pathways. Vomiting is a common, unpleasant aftermath of tonsillectomy in children. Intraoperative intravenous ondansetron (OND) reduces vomiting after this operation. Our double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized investigation studied the effect of the oral form of OND on vomiting after outpatient tonsillectomy in children. We studied 233 healthy children age 2-14 yr undergoing elective tonsillectomy. Subjects were given placebo (PLAC) or OND 0.1 mg.kg-1 rounded off to the nearest 2 mg one hr before surgery. Anaesthesia was induced with either propofol or halothane/N2O. Vecuronium 0.1 mg.kg-1 was administered at the discretion of the anaesthetist. Anaesthesia was maintained with halothane/N2O, 50 micrograms.kg-1 midazolam iv and 1-1.5 mg.kg-1 codeine im. At the end of surgery, residual neuromuscular blockade was reversed with neostigmine and atropine. All episodes of in-hospital emesis were recorded by nursing staff. Rescue antiemetics in the hospital were 1 mg.kg-1 dimenhydrinate iv for vomiting x 2 and 50 micrograms.kg-1 droperidol iv for vomiting x 4. Parents kept a diary of emesis after discharge. Postoperative pain was treated with morphine, codeine and/or acetaminophen. The two groups were similar with respect to demographic data, induction technique and anaesthesia time. Oral OND (n = 109) reduced postoperative emesis from 54% to 39%, P < 0.05. This effect was most dramatic in-hospital, where 10% of the OND-patients and 30% of the PLAC-group vomited, P < 0.05. The OND-subjects required fewer rescue antiemetics, 7% vs 17%, P < 0.05. In conclusion, oral ondansetron decreased the incidence of vomiting after outpatient tonsillectomy in children. The efficacy and safety of ondansetron in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting following minor oral surgery was evaluated in a prospective randomized double-blind study. Of a total of seventy-seven patients, randomly 38 had 4 mg of ondansetron and 39 had normal saline as placebo intravenously immediately prior to induction of anaesthesia. A standard general anaesthetic with thiopentone, suxamethonium, fentanyl, nitrous oxide and isoflurane was employed. Postoperatively nausea was assessed verbally and on a visual analog scale at 1, 4 and 24 hours from the time of awakening. Episodes of vomiting were recorded. Eight patients (21.1%) in the ondansetron group compared to 19 (48.7%) in the placebo group had nausea (P < 0.05) and 1 (2.6%) in the ondansetron group compared with 9 (23.1%) in the placebo group vomited (P < 0.05). Patients who vomited twice or more and the number who required a rescue antiemetic were significantly fewer in the ondansetron group (P < 0.05). Cardiovascular parameters were stable and showed no significant difference in the two groups. There were no significant adverse effects that could be directly attributable to ondansetron. Women undergoing laparoscopic surgery are susceptible to postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). Ondansetron and droperidol are useful antiemetics. This study was designed to ascertain primarily the relative difference in efficacy of ondansetron and droperidol and secondarily between these drugs and placebo in the prevention of PONV after laparoscopic surgery.
                The prophylactic antiemetic efficacy of ondansetron and droperidol was compared in a prospective, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of 439 female inpatients scheduled for laparoscopic surgery. During induction of standardised general anaesthesia the patients received intravenously either ondansetron 8 mg (n=195), droperidol 1.25 mg (n=193) or placebo (n=51). The occurrence of nausea, vomiting, side-effects and the need for rescue antiemetic medication were recorded for 24 h postoperatively.
                The proportion of patients with nausea was 48%, 50% and 67% in the ondansetron, droperidol and placebo groups, respectively; with a significant difference when both ondansetron (P=0.02) and droperidol (P=0.04) were compared with placebo. Vomiting occurred in 18%, 26% and 37% of the patients in the three groups, respectively (P=0.05 between ondansetron and droperidol, P=0.004 between ondansetron and placebo, P=0.16 between droperidol and placebo). The proportion of patients given rescue medication was 34%, 28% and 49%, respectively (P=0.23 for ondansetron and droperidol, P=0.07 for ondansetron and placebo, P=0.007 for droperidol and placebo). During early recovery the patients treated with ondansetron were significantly more alert than after droperidol. Serious side-effects were not observed. Headache was significantly more common after ondansetron than after droperidol treatment.
                The efficacy of prophylactic ondansetron and droperidol in reducing postoperative nausea associated with laparoscopic surgery in female inpatients was similar, but ondansetron appeared to be slightly more efficient than droperidol in preventing vomiting. Ondansetron and droperidol were both significantly better than placebo in the prophylaxis of PONV. The authors examine the antiemetic effects of 1 mg clebopride administered iv after surgery, vs a placebo, by making a double blind randomized study on two groups of 40 women comparable by age and weight. The 2 groups of outpatients, admitted for short gynecological surgery, underwent diagnostic uterine curettage. They were anaesthetized with a cocktail of 2.5 mcg/kg fentanyl and 0.25 mg/kg ketamine, on spontaneous respiration. Nausea, vomiting and the other side effects were evaluated 3-6 hours after surgery. Statistically, clebopride proved more effective than placebo against nausea and vomiting (P ranging between 0.05-0.01), with no relevant side effects. This prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study was designed to evaluate the efficacy of ondansetron, a 5-HT3 antagonist, in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) after elective craniotomy in adult patients. The authors also tried to discover certain predictors for postcraniotomy nausea and vomiting. We studied 170 ASA physical status I and II patients, aged 15 to 70 years, undergoing elective craniotomy for resecting various intracranial tumors and vascular lesions. A standardized anesthesia technique and postoperative analgesia were used for all patients. Patients were divided into two groups and received either saline placebo (Group 1) or ondansetron 4 mg (Group 2) intravenously at the time of dural closure. Patients were extubated at the end of surgery and episodes of nausea and vomiting were noted for 24 hours postoperatively in the neurosurgical intensive care unit. Demographic data, duration of surgery, and anesthesia and analgesic requirements were comparable in both groups. Overall, a 24-hour incidence of postoperative emesis was significantly reduced in patients who received ondansetron compared with those who received a saline placebo (39% in Group 1 and 11% in Group 2, P = .001). There was a significant reduction in the frequency of emetic episodes and rescue antiemetic requirement in patients treated with ondansetron; however, ondansetron did not significantly reduce the incidence of nausea alone (14% in Group 2 vs 5% in Group 1, P = .065). Prophylactic ondansetron had a favorable influence on PONV outcome measures such as patient satisfaction and number needed to prevent emesis (3.5). Side effects were similar in both groups. We conclude that ondansetron 4 mg given at the time of dural closure is safe and effective in preventing emetic episodes after elective craniotomy in adult patients. Although many antiemetic drugs are available for intravenous use in the hospital setting, few are available after patient discharge. Consequently, nausea and vomiting are frequent complaints from patients at home after ambulatory surgery. We tested the hypothesis that the new 8 mg ondansetron disintegrating tablets will decrease the rate of nausea and vomiting at home after laparoscopic surgery.
                Ninety-six patients were studied in a randomized double-blind study. Starting the first evening after operation and continuing every 12 h for 3 days, patients received either placebo or ondansetron 8 mg disintegrating tablets orally. The patients returned a questionnaire about postoperative nausea and vomiting, other side-effects, e.g. dizziness, headache, nightmare, anxiety and pain, as well as their overall satisfaction at 24 and 72 h after completion of surgery.
                The rates of nausea and vomiting were similar in the two groups, both during the first 24 h (28 versus 48%, placebo and ondansetron, respectively (ns) and during the 24-72 h (21 versus 35% (ns)). The incidence rate of vomiting was 8% (placebo) versus 12% (ondansetron) during the first 24 h (ns) and 9 versus 13% respectively in the 24-72 h (ns). No difference between groups was observed in overall satisfaction, incidence of postoperative pain or other side-effects.
                The use of ondansetron disintegrating tablets of 8 mg twice a day for 3 days did not reduce the incidence of nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing outpatient laparoscopic surgery. Neostigmine, used for reversal of neuromuscular block, has been implicated in the development of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). The use of mivacurium, which does not require neostigmine reversal due to its metabolism by plasma cholinesterase, has made it possible to study the effect of neostigmine on PONV in a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled manner.
                Ninety healthy women scheduled for laparoscopic gynaecological surgery were randomly allocated to two groups in a double-blind manner. One group was given neostigmine (50 microg kg(-1)) and glycopyrrolate (10 microg kg(-1)) (group NG), the other NaCl i.v. as placebo (group P) at the end of surgery when all the patients were spontaneously reversed to at least 75% of full muscle power. The risk of PONV was reduced by using low doses of opioids and ondansetron prophylaxis. All the patients were monitored and assessed for 24 h with regard to pain, nausea, vomiting and overall satisfaction.
                There was a statistically significant difference (P=0.03) in the occurrence of nausea during the first 6 h postoperatively between NG group (30%) and P group (11%), resulting in the more extensive use of antiemetic drugs in the NG group (28%) than in P group (7%) (P=0.01) in this period. There was no difference between the groups in the frequency of vomiting; seven nauseated patients had vomiting, four in group NG, three in group P. Total number of patients with PONV during the observation period of 24 h, usage of antiemetic rescue medication and overall patient satisfaction did not differ significantly between the groups.
                The results suggest that antagonism of neuromuscular block with a high dose of neostigmine increases postoperative nausea and the use of antiemetic drugs during the first 6 h after administration. The prophylactic administration of dimenhydrinate (Dramamine) is as effective as the use of ondansetron (Zofran) in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in patients undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. A prospective double-blind randomized study was performed in a tertiary care referral center.
                For this study, 128 American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) physical statuses I, II, and III patients were randomly assigned to receive either ondansetron 4 mg intravenously (IV) at $17 per dose (group 1) or dimenhydrinate 50 mg IV at $2.50 per dose (group 2) before induction of anesthesia. The end points evaluated were frequency of PONV, need for rescue antiemetics, need for overnight hospitalization secondary to persistent nausea and vomiting, and frequency PONV 24 h after discharge.
                Chi-square tests and student's t-test were used to determine the significance of differences among groups. Of the 128 patients enrolled in this study, 20 were excluded: 15 patients received an additional antiemetic preoperative; 4 were converted to open cholecystectomies; and 1 procedure was aborted due to carcinomatosis. Of the 108 remaining participants, 50 received ondansetron (group 1) and 58 received dimenhydrinate (group 2). Both groups were well matched for demographics including gender, ASA class, and history of motion sickness. The need for rescue antiemetics occurred in 34% of group 1 and 29% of Group 2 (p = 0.376), postoperative vomiting in 6% of group 1 and 12% of group 2 (p = 0.228), and postoperative nausea in 42% of group 1 and 34% of group 2 (p = 0.422). One group 1 patient and two group 2 patients required overnight hospitalization for persistent nausea, a difference that was not significant. Rates of PONV 24 h after discharge were similar between groups 1 and 2 (10% vs 14%, p = 0.397 and 2% vs 5%, p = 0.375, respectively).
                Prophylactic administration of dimenhydrinate is as effective as the use of ondansetron in preventing PONV in patients undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Dimenhydrinate is the preferred drug because it is less expensive. With more than 500, 000 laparoscopic cholecystectomies performed in the United States each year, the potential drug cost savings from the prophylactic administration of dimenhydrinate instead of ondansetron exceed $7.25 million per year. Nausea and emesis are undesirable events that may cause discomfort and suffering in the postoperative period. This study was carried out to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ondansetron for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing gastrointestinal tract surgery.
                Using a randomized double-blind study design, 408 surgical patients (163 male and 245 female) receiving general endotracheal anesthesia were studied at five medical centers in Bangkok. Ondansetron (4 mg) or placebo was administered prior to induction of anesthesia. Episodes of nausea and vomiting, adverse events and laboratory tests (complete blood count and liver function test) were evaluated during 24 hours after study drug administration.
                The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting in the placebo group (42.7 and 35.2%) were significantly higher than the ondansetron group (23.9 and 15.4%). However, no significant differences occurred in the incidence of adverse events or changes in laboratory tests in the ondansetron group compared to the placebo group.
                Ondansetron 4 mg given intravenously before surgery is safe and effective for preventing postoperative nausea and emesis following gastrointestinal tract surgery. 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. Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a commonly observed adverse effect of general anesthesia. Recently, ondansetron, a new serotonin3 (5-hydroxytryptamine3) receptor antagonist was shown to be effective in the prophylaxis and prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in children and adults as well as of PONV in adults. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the capacity of ondansetron to prevent PONV in pediatric patients.
                Two hundred children (132 boys and 68 girls) 2-10 yr of age received general inhalational anesthesia for surgical procedures (the extremities; ear, nose, and throat; inguinal hernia and phimosis; and dentistry) of an expected duration of less than 90 min. This study was divided into two phases: prophylaxis and rescue treatment. For prophylaxis, patients were randomly assigned to two groups: one group received an intravenous injection of 0.1 mg/kg ondansetron, and the other group received a placebo before surgical incision under double-blind conditions. For rescue treatment, only placebo patients were included; as a rescue medication they received an intravenous injection of 0.1 mg/kg ondansetron or 0.02 mg/kg droperidol according to a prestudy randomization under double-blind conditions. Incidence and severity of PONV (PONV score 0 = no nausea and no retching; 1 = complaining of sickness and retching; 2 = vomiting one or two time in 30 min; 3 = vomiting more than two times in 30 min) was recorded over a 4-h period in the postanesthesia care unit. Within 72 h of the procedure, a follow-up nurse interviewed the parents for late-onset nausea in the children.
                With regard to prophylaxis, 10% of patients receiving ondansetron had PONV during the 4-h observation period versus 40% of those receiving placebo (P < 0.001). The incidence of vomiting alone (PONV score > or = 2) was 5% and 25%, respectively (P < 0.001). There were no significant differences between ondansetron and droperidol in the treatment of PONV. However, at the end of the 4-h period, ondansetron patients were less sedated than were patients who had received droperidol (P < 0.01). Interviews with parents could be performed for 143 of 200 children (76 ondansetron and 67 placebo). Twenty-four children (15 ondansetron and 9 placebo) showed late-onset PONV after the 4-h observation period but within 24 h of the procedure (19.7% vs. 13.4%; P not significant).
                Ondansetron is effective in the prevention of PONV in pediatric patients for the first 4 h after general anesthesia. Lower sedation scores with ondansetron compared with droperidol may be an advantage, especially in ambulatory surgery. However, the incidence of late-onset PONV (> 4-24 h) was not influenced by prophylactic treatment with one dose of ondansetron preoperatively. Intrathecal morphine provides good analgesia after cesarean delivery but the side effects include nausea and vomiting. Low-dose droperidol (0.625 mg) combined with dexamethasone 4 mg is postulated to have an additive antiemetic effect with less side effects. We therefore compared single doses of dexamethasone and droperidol alone with a low-dose combination of the two, to prevent spinal morphine-induced nausea and vomiting after cesarean section.
                In a double-blind study, 120 women undergoing elective cesarean section under spinal anesthesia (using 0.5% bupivacaine 10 mg and morphine 0.2 mg) were allocated randomly to receive dexamethasone 8 mg, droperidol 1.25 mg, dexamethasone 4 mg and droperidol 0.625 mg, or placebo, before the end of surgery. The incidences of nausea and vomiting, sedative score, pain score, and side effects were recorded.
                The incidence of nausea and vomiting within 6 h postoperatively was lower and incidence of no nausea and vomiting for 24 h postoperatively was significantly higher for the combination group compared to the placebo group and the dexamethasone only group. Sedation scores within 3 h postoperatively and incidence of restlessness for the combination group were significantly lower than in the droperidol only group.
                An additive antiemetic effect and no significant side effects were shown for the combination of dexamethasone 4 mg and droperidol 0.625 mg. This combination was more effective than either dexamethasone 8 mg or droperidol 1.25 mg alone in preventing nausea and vomiting after spinal anesthesia using 0.5% bupivacaine and morphine 0.2 mg. Eighty patients undergoing outpatient surgery under general anaesthesia were allocated randomly to two groups: in group A residual neuromuscular block was antagonized with a mixture of neostigmine 1.5 mg and atropine 0.5 mg; in group B spontaneous recovery was allowed. The patients were assessed after operation in hospital and 24 h after discharge. We found a significant difference (P < 0.05) in requirements for antiemetic therapy with a smaller need in the group which received neostigmine (in group A four of 40 patients received an antiemetic compared with 12 in group B). There was no significant difference in frequency of nausea or vomiting between the two groups. The incidence of postoperative nausea was 14 in group A and 18 in group B and the number of patients with postoperative vomiting was 10 in group A and 15 in group B. The efficacy of operatively administered spinal neostigmine to provide analgesia and that of different antiemetics to prevent neostigmine-related nausea and vomiting were evaluated in patients undergoing tibial or ankle reconstruction.
                One hundred patients were randomized to five groups (n = 20). The intravenous antiemetic test drug (except propofol) was given as premedication in the holding room, after intravenous midazolam, 0.05 mg/kg. The subarachnoid drugs administered were 20 mg bupivacaine (0.5%) in conjunction with 100 micrograms neostigmine, except for the saline group (S group), which received bupivacaine and saline. The S group, the neostigmine group (N group), and the propofol group (P group) received saline as the intravenous test drug. The droperidol group (D group) received intravenous droperidol 0.5 mg, and the metoclopramide group (M group) received intravenous metoclopramide 10 mg. The P group had a continuous intravenous propofol infusion (2-4 mg/kg/hr), started 10 minutes after the spinal injection. Nausea, emetic episodes, and the need for analgesic (disclofenac) or antiemetic medication were recorded for the first 24 hours following surgery and scored by a 10-cm visual analog scale (VAS).
                Subarachnoid neostigmine 100 micrograms did not affect subarachnoid bupivacaine analgesia as measured by time to first rescue analgesic in most patients, but it decreased the overall 24-hour visual analog scale (VAS) scores and the need for postoperative analgesics in 24 hours (P < .001). The incidence of intraoperative nausea and vomiting was higher in the N, D, and M groups than in the S group (P < .001). Following surgery, the 3-hour VAS assessment for emesis was higher for the N, P, and M groups than for the S group (P < .05). The overall 24-hour assessment was similar among groups.
                Subarachnoid neostigmine reduced postoperative pain scores and analgesic requirements. Whether it prolonged the duration of action of diclofenac or enhanced the mechanisms involved in spinal analgesia cannot be determined from these data. Although propofol and droperidol appeared to be more effective during and after surgery, respectively, all neostigmine groups were associated with a high consumption of antiemetics. The prophylactic anti-emetic efficacy and safety of pre-operative intravenous ondansetron was evaluated in a randomised, double-blind, comparison with droperidol, metoclopramide and placebo in 160 ASA grade 1 and 2 patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy under total intravenous anaesthesia. The patients were randomly allocated to receive ondansetron (4 mg), droperidol (1.25 mg), metoclopramide (10 mg) or placebo given as a single intravenous dose immediately before induction of a standardised general anaesthetic. There were no significant differences between the four study groups with regard to the demographic and anaesthetic data, postoperative analgesia, postoperative sedation scores, duration of postoperative hospital stay and incidence of adverse events. The incidence of nausea and vomiting was significantly lower (p < 0.05) between 1 h and 4 h after surgery in the ondansetron group compared with the droperidol, metoclopramide and placebo groups. The incidence of nausea was similar in the four groups in the other study periods: 0-1 h and 4-24 h. The incidence of vomiting was lower in the ondansetron, droperidol and metoclopramide groups than in the placebo group between 1 and 4 h but was the same between 4 and 24 h. As a result of the lower incidence of nausea and vomiting between 1 h and 4 h in the ondansetron group, the overall incidence of nausea and vomiting was lower during the first 24 h after surgery in this group than in the other three groups. The antiemetic efficacy of ondansetron given prophylactically was investigated in a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of 63 patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The patients received intravenously prior to anaesthesia either ondansetron 4 mg or placebo. The same standardised general anaesthetic technique was used. Nausea, emetic episodes and the need for rescue medication were recorded for 24 h postoperatively. Nausea was experienced by 64% of the patients in the ondansetron group and 56% in the placebo group, and emetic episodes occurred in 45% and 50% of the patients in the two groups, respectively. The proportions of patients given rescue antiemetic medication were 45% and 44%, respectively. No clinically important adverse events were observed. In conclusion, ondansetron given prior to anaesthesia in a dosage of 4 mg did not prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. In order to establish if anticholinergic drugs might influence postoperative nausea and vomiting, 100 ASA I-II adult patients scheduled for minor orthopaedic procedures, varicose vein stripping or inguinal herniorraphy were randomised to receive, in a double-blind fashion, either a premedicant and a reversal dose of 0.003 and 0.0075 mg/kg of glycopyrrolate or 0.006 and 0.015 mg/kg of atropine, respectively. Nitrous oxide, after thiopentone induction was used for anaesthesia with fentanyl and diazepam as supplements and pancuronium for relaxation. In the recovery room, up to 2 h after surgery, 28% of the patients in the glycopyrrolate group and 8% in the atropine group experienced nausea (P = 0.017). Thereafter, the patients complained of nausea at decreased and equal frequencies in both groups. The incidence of vomiting was not statistically significantly different. Droperidol was needed, to control persistent emesis, three times more often in the glycopyrrolate than in the atropine group. It is concluded that substitution of glycopyrrolate for atropine increases the likelihood of postoperative nausea, and continued use of atropine should be considered in patients at risk of postoperative emesis. Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) are among the most common complications in surgical patients. In this prospective, double blind, parallel group study we compare the prophylactic antiemetic efficacy of ondansetron versus placebo in 90 patients undergoing general balanced anaesthesia. The patients were stratified according to the kind of surgery and randomly allocated to three treatment groups: 30 patients (Group A) received ondansetron 4 mg i.v. 1 hour before the induction of anaesthesia and placebo 1 hour before the end of surgery; 30 patients (Group B) received placebo 1 hour before the end of anaesthesia and ondansetron 4 mg i.v. 1 hour before the end of surgery; 30 patients (Group C-control group) received placebo in both the administrations. Data were analyzed by Student t test and chi 2 test; significance was taken at p < 0.05. The three groups proved comparable with respect to demographic characteristics, duration of anaesthesia and fentanyl consumption. Analysis of the results showed that PONV had a significantly lower incidence in treated patients (Groups A and B) than in the control group patients (Group C): postoperative nausea occurred in 13%, 30% and 67% of patients in Group A, B and C respectively and it was associated with vomiting in 3%, 7% and 57% of patients in Group A, B and C respectively. Although the patients in Group A showed a lower incidence of PONV in comparison to the patients in Group B, such differences proved to be not statistically significant. No adverse effects in relation to drug administration were observed. We conclude that ondansetron 4 mg i.v. is safe and effective in preventing PONV in the surgical patients, particularly when administered before the induction of anaesthesia. Corticosteroids decrease side effects after noncardiac elective surgery. We designed this randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study to test the hypothesis that standard doses of dexamethasone (4 mg x2) would reduce postoperative nausea, vomiting, and pain, decrease the incidence of atrial fibrillation (AF), and improve appetite after cardiac surgery, thereby facilitating the recovery process. A total of 300 patients undergoing coronary revascularization surgery were enrolled in this clinical study. The anesthetic management was standardized in all patients. Dexamethasone (4 mg/mL) or saline (1 mL) was administered after the induction of anesthesia and a second dose of the same study drug was given on the morning after surgery. The incidence of AF was determined by analyzing the first 72 h of continuously recorded electrocardiogram records after cardiac surgery. The patients were assessed at 24- and 48-h intervals after surgery, as well as at the time of hospital discharge, to determine the incidence and severity of postoperative side effects (e.g., nausea, vomiting, pain) and patient satisfaction scores. Dexamethasone significantly reduced the need for antiemetic rescue medication on the first postoperative day (30% versus 42%), and the incidences of nausea (15% versus 26%) and vomiting (5% versus 16%) on the second postoperative day (P < 0.05). In addition, dexamethasone significantly reduced the percentage of patients with a depressed appetite on the second postoperative day. However, the corticosteroid failed to decrease the incidence of AF (27% versus 32%) or the total dosage of opioid analgesic medication administered in the postoperative period. We conclude that dexamethasone (8 mg in divided doses) was beneficial in reducing emetic symptoms and improving appetite after cardiac surgery. However, this dose of the corticosteroid does not seem to have antiarrhythmic or analgesic-sparing properties.
                Dexamethasone (8 mg IV) was beneficial in reducing emetic symptoms and increasing appetite after cardiac surgery. However, this dose of the corticosteroid failed to decrease postoperative pain or the incidence of new-onset atrial fibrillation. The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate the efficacy of ondansetron in controlling postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) when used prophylactically in patients undergoing routine dentoalveolar surgery performed under general anesthesia.
                This was a prospective, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled evaluation. Fifty adult ASA I or II patients, requiring routine dentoalveolar surgery performed under general anesthesia, without a prior history of PONV, were randomly assigned to the experimental or control groups. Ondansetron (2.0 mL = 4.0 mg) or normal saline (2.0 mL) were administered intravenously before surgery. Age, gender, type of surgery, duration of surgery, anesthetic dosages, and PONV were evaluated. PONV was evaluated at time 0 (end of anesthesia) and at 30 and 60 minutes postoperatively. Nausea was evaluated using a visual analog scale (1, not nauseous; 5, about to vomit). Vomiting was assessed as a yes or no response. At 20 to 28 hours postoperatively, PONV was evaluated via a telephone call as a yes or no response, along with the number of episodes of nausea, vomiting, or both. Means and standard deviations were calculated for age, surgery, and anesthetics, and differences were assessed using an independent samples t-test. Differences for gender between the control and experimental groups were tested by a nonparametric chi-squared test. Differences between groups for nausea and vomiting were tested with a continuity correction chi-squared test. Differences were considered significant for a P < .05.
                No significant differences (P < .05) were found between the PONV groups for gender, duration of procedure, or anesthetic dosages. Statistically significant differences were noted in age and the type of surgical procedures performed. No statistically significant differences (P < .05) were noted between groups for nausea or vomiting.
                Based on the results of this study, PONV occurred in approximately 20% of patients (20% for nausea, 8% for vomiting). With the types of anesthetic agents and techniques used in this investigation, there were no significant differences between ondansetron and placebo for prophylaxis against PONV. In a prospective double-blind trial, transdermal scopolamine (TS) was compared to placebo (P) in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) within a 48-h interval. After stratification for gender and surgical procedure, patients were randomly chosen to receive either TS or placebo.
                Of 304 surgical and gynaecological patients included in this study, the data of 263 patients were evaluated (48 thyroidectomies, 15 open, and 36 laparoscopic cholecystectomies, 41 open, and 36 laparoscopic hernia repairs, 37 hysterectomies, and 50 gynaecological laparoscopies). The two groups were comparable with regard to biometrical data and duration of anaesthesia and surgery. Although anaesthesia was not standardized, there was no difference in anaesthesia techniques, drug dosage or perioperative management. Patients were evaluated once preoperatively and 2, 6, 10, 24, and 48 h postoperatively using a 100-mm visual analogue scale (VAS) for "nausea", "pain", "dry mouth", "sedation", and "blurred vision". Episodes of vomiting or retching and the need for additional antimetics (0.03 mg.kg-1 metoclopramide i.v., followed by 1 mg.kg-1 dimenhydrinat i.v., if necessary) were recorded.
                TS significantly reduced the incidence of postoperative vomiting within the first 48 h postoperatively [TS: 47 patients (36.2%) with 125 cumulative episodes vs P: 70 patients (52.6%) with 209 cumulative episodes]. Analysing the five observation intervals seperately, this difference could only be demonstrated 0-2 h and 6-10 h postoperatively. In patients suffering from emetic sequelae, TS did not reduce the frequency of vomiting significantly (mean frequency: TS: 2.7 vs P: 3.0). TS also had no significant effect on the requirement of additional antiemetics [TS:. 81 times in 46 (35.7%) patients vs P: 116 times in 58 (44.3%) patients]. Nausea as rated by the VAS was not significantly different between the two groups at any time during the postoperative observation. No relevant side-effects occurred, although there was a trend toward higher ratings of "dry mouth" in the TS group, reaching statistical significance 10 h after operation.
                The routine administration of TS for gynaecological and surgical patients cannot be recommended because of the lack of effect on postoperative nausea and only marginal benefit concerning postoperative vomiting. This study was carried out to assess the efficacy of oral ondansetron, a new 5HT3 receptor antagonist, in patients undergoing thyroid surgery. It included 60 patients, randomly assigned to two groups, and receiving orally, 1 h before induction of anaesthesia, either 8 mg of ondansetron (n = 29) or a placebo (n = 30). One patient was excluded. The same anaesthetic protocol, consisting of 3 to 5 micrograms.kg-1 of fentanyl, 4 to 6 mg.kg-1 of thiopentone, and 0.5 mg.kg-1 of atracurium, was used in all. Anaesthesia was maintained with 50% nitrous oxide in oxygen with 0.8 to 1% endtidal concentration of isoflurane and additional boluses of 0.1 mg of fentanyl as required. The incidence and intensity of nausea, graded mild, moderate or severe, and the incidence of vomiting were recorded postoperatively. During the first twelve hours after surgery, 40% of patients in the placebo group had nausea (16.7% mild, 20% moderate and 6.7% severe), and 50% vomited. In the ondansetron group, nausea and vomiting occurred in 13.8% and 20.4% of patients respectively. The 4 patients in the latter group complained of major nausea. The differences between the groups were statistically significant: p = 0.025 for nausea and p = 0.042 for vomiting. It is concluded that oral ondansetron, 8 mg taken orally 1 h before surgery, significantly reduces the incidence of nausea and vomiting during the first twelve postoperative hours. As it is easy to use and has no side-effects, it might be of interest in day-case surgery patients, despite its high cost. Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a common adverse phenomenon following breast surgery. The efficacy of ondansetron and droperidol in preventing post-operative nausea and vomiting in women undergoing breast surgery was compared in this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Altogether 207 women were randomly assigned to receive either a single intravenous dose of droperidol (1.25 mg) (n = 69), ondansetron (8 mg) (n = 67) or saline (n = 71) immediately after induction of general anaesthesia with thiopental, fentanyl, atracurium, nitrous oxide in oxygen and isoflurane. Complaints of nausea, vomiting and requests for rescue antiemetics were recorded during a 24-h period postoperatively. During the initial 2 h in the postanaesthesia care unit, the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting was 15%, 6% and 12% in the placebo, droperidol and ondansetron groups, respectively (NS). The incidence of post-operative nausea and vomiting during the first 24 h was 61%, 48% and 45% in the placebo, droperidol and ondansetron treatment groups, respectively (NS). Postoperative analgesic requirements and the length of stay in the post-anaesthesia care unit were equal in all three treatment groups. It is concluded that the intravenous pretreatment with single doses of ondansetron or droperidol did not substantially prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting after breast surgery. Office-based surgery has become increasingly popular because of its cost-saving potential. However, the occurrence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) can delay patient discharge. Prophylaxis using a combination of antiemetic drugs has been suggested as an effective strategy for minimizing PONV. The authors designed this randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study to assess the efficacy of ondansetron and dolasetron when administered in combination with droperidol and dexamethasone for routine antiemetic prophylaxis against PONV in the office-based surgery setting.
                Following institutional review board approval, 135 consenting outpatients with American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I-III who were undergoing superficial surgical procedures lasting 20-40 min were randomly assigned to one of three antiemetic treatment groups. Propofol was administered for induction of anesthesia, followed by 2-4% desflurane with 67% nitrous oxide in oxygen. Desflurane was subsequently adjusted to maintain a clinically adequate depth of anesthesia with an electroencephalographic Bispectral Index value between 50 and 60. All patients received 0.625 mg intravenous droperidol and 4 mg intravenous dexamethasone after induction of anesthesia. The study medication, containing normal saline (control), 12.5 mg intravenous dolasetron, or 4 mg intravenous ondansetron, was administered prior to the end of surgery. All patients received local anesthetics at the incisional site and 30 mg intravenous ketolorac to minimize postoperative pain. Recovery profiles, incidence of PONV, requirement for rescue antiemetic drugs, complete response rates, and patient satisfaction were assessed.
                The recovery times to patient orientation, oral intake, ambulation, and actual discharge did not differ among the three groups. The incidence of PONV, nausea scores, and requirement for rescue antiemetics were also similar in all three groups during the 24-h study period. In addition, the complete response rates to the prophylactic antiemetics (96-98%) and percentages of very satisfied patients (93-98%) were equally high in all three groups. However, the antiemetic drug acquisition costs were US $2.50, $15.50, and $18.50 in the control, dolasetron, and ondansetron groups, respectively.
                The addition of dolasetron (12.5 mg) or ondansetron (4 mg) failed to improve the antiemetic efficacy of droperidol (0.625 mg intravenous) and dexamethasone (4 mg intravenous) when they were used for routine prophylaxis in the office-based surgery setting. To determine the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting when a combination of ondansetron and promethazine is given prophylactically, and to ascertain the effect of postoperative nausea and vomiting on recovery room duration and patient satisfaction.
                Prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study.
                University-affiliated tertiary-care hospital.
                87 ASA physical status I and II adult patients scheduled for middle ear surgery.
                Patients were randomly assigned to receive one of the following interventions intravenously: ondansetron 4 mg (Group 1), promethazine 25 mg (Group 2), ondansetron 2 mg plus promethazine 12.5 mg (Group 3, combination), or placebo (Group 4).
                Independent, study blinded observers recorded complaints of nausea and number of episodes of vomiting for 24 hours following the patient's first response to commands. All patients were contacted the day after discharge to inquire about nausea and vomiting. The awakening time, postanesthesia care unit and day surgery unit durations, opioid use, and side effects were recorded. At the end of the 24-hour period, the study blinded observers asked patients for an overall assessment of their global anesthesia experience using an 11-point scale. During the 24-hour period, the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting was reduced from 74% (placebo) to 39% (promethazine; p = 0.03) and 29% (combination; p = 0.003). Compared with placebo, the severity of vomiting was significantly less in the combination group (p = 0.04). The number of very satisfied patients correlated negatively with the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (p < 0.0001) and with the severity of vomiting (p = 0.003).
                The prophylactic use of an antiemetic with middle ear surgery may reduce postoperative nausea and vomiting over 24 hours, and the ondansetron/promethazine combination or promethazine alone are cost-effective choices. Finally, the combination reduced significantly the severity of vomiting. Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) are among the most common complications in operative medicine. Especially thyroid surgery is frequently associated with PONV. It was the aim of this study to determine the efficacy of oral and intravenous dolasetron in comparison to intravenous droperidol (DHB) and placebo in the prevention of PONV.
                93 female and 43 male patients undergoing thyroid surgery were stratified according to gender and then randomised to receive double-blind one of four antiemetic regimes: 50 mg dolasetron given orally 45 minutes prior to induction of anaesthesia (group I), 12.5 mg dolasetron given intravenously during induction of anaesthesia (group II), 1.25 mg DHB given intravenously during induction of anaesthesia (group III) or placebo (group IV). General anaesthesia and preoperative management of the patients were standardised: premedication with chloracepate-dipotassium, induction with thiopentone, sufentanil and rocuronium, maintenance with N2O/O2, sevoflurane and repetitive doses of sufentanil and rocuronium, postoperative analgesia with metamizol and piritramide, antiemetic rescue-treatment with dimenhydrinate, metoclopramide and triflupromazine. Number of emetic episodes, the need for additional antiemetics and adverse events were recorded for 24 hours. Efficacy was measured by "complete-response" (CR = 0 emetic episodes or 1 emetic episode after 4 hours and no rescue-treatment) and "total-response" (TR = complete response plus no nausea, i.e., < 5 mm VAS rating of patients maximum nausea).
                Men: Only Dolasetron given intravenously reduced nausea and vomiting significantly, Dolasetron given orally reduced nausea, but not vomiting, DHB had no significant effects: CR 72.7% (group I), 100% (group II), 80% (group III), 63.6% (group IV); TR 72.7% (group I), 81.8% (group II), 50% (group III), 36.4% (group IV). Women: In all three treatment groups significantly less patients suffered from PONV compared to the placebo group (p < 0.05). There were no differences between the treatment groups: CR 58.3% (group I), 45.8% (group II), 52.2% (group III), 18.1% (group IV); TR 37.5% (group I), 33.3% (group II), 39.1% (group III), 13.6% (group IV). There were no adverse events in any group.
                Our results confirm the expected high incidence of PONV after thyroid surgery, especially in female patients. Single doses of oral and intravenous dolasetron and intravenous droperidol reduced PONV effectively in female patients undergoing thyroid surgery. Dolasetron seems to be the more effective substance in male patients. Both substances can be administered safely and are well tolerated. This prospective, randomized and double-blinded study was designed to evaluate the anti-emetic efficacy of a combination of ondansetron and metoclopramide in 100 ASA physical status I and II children of either sex and 1-15 years of age undergoing elective surgery for strabismus. A standardized anaesthetic technique and post-operative analgesia were used for all the children. Children were divided into four groups. They received saline, metoclopromide 250 micrograms kg-1, ondansetron 150 micrograms kg-1 or a combination of metoclopramide 150 micrograms kg-1 and ondansetron 100 micrograms kg-1 intravenously immediately after the insertion of an intravenous cannulae. There were no differences between the groups in their age, gender, weight, duration of surgery, number of muscles subjected to surgery or intravenous fluids received. In the first 24 post-operative hours, 18 (72%) patients in the placebo group, 15 (60%) patients in the metoclopramide group, 10 (40%) patients in the ondansetron group and 11 (44%) patients in the combination group had nausea or vomiting. The overall incidence of post-operative nausea and vomiting was significantly (P < 0.05) lower in the combination group and in the ondansetron group compared with the placebo group. Nine (36%) patients in both the placebo and the metoclopramide groups and one (4%) patient in the ondansetron group required rescue anti-emetic treatment. None of the patients in the combination group required rescue anti-emetic and this was significantly less (P < 0.01) when compared with the placebo and the metoclopramide groups. Recovery and sedation scores were comparable in all the four groups. A combination of metoclopramide 150 micrograms kg-1 and ondansetron 100 micrograms kg-1 administered prior to surgery was not found to be more effective than ondansetron 150 micrograms kg-1 alone for the prophylaxis of nausea and vomiting following surgical repair of strabismus in paediatric patients. In this randomized double-blind trial we investigated the effect of acupressure on the incidence of nausea and vomiting after caesarean section under spinal anaesthesia with added intrathecal morphine. Parturients wore either acupressure or placebo wristbands during surgery and postoperatively for at least 10 h. There was no significant difference overall between the two groups in the incidence of intra- or postoperative nausea or vomiting/retching. Demand for antiemetic medication was also similar in the two groups. However, in the sub-group of parturients who gave a previous history of postoperative nausea or vomiting, there was a statistically significant reduction in both postoperative nausea and vomiting/retching in the acupressure group. Further investigations are needed to see whether acupressure may be an effective non-pharmacological, non-invasive treatment for a common problem in this sub-group of patients. We compared the effectiveness of ondansetron, dimenhydrinate, and placebo for the prevention of postoperative vomiting in children after adenotonsillectomy. In a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study, 74 children, 2-10 yr of age scheduled for adenotonsillectomy as outpatients were given a single i.v. dose of ondansetron (0.1 mg/kg, n = 26), dimenhydrinate (0.5 mg/kg, n = 25), or placebo (saline, n = 23) at induction of anesthesia. The incidence of retching and vomiting (POV) and side effects observed 24 h after surgery were recorded. Demographic data were similar among the three groups. The 24-h incidence of POV was 42%, 79%, and 82% in the ondansetron, dimenhydrinate, and placebo groups, respectively (ondansetron compared with dimenhydrinate [P < 0.02] or placebo [P < 0.01]). The study was stopped after two children vomited large volumes of bloody fluid 9 and 22 h after surgery without previous signs of occult bleeding. Both children had received ondansetron. We conclude that ondansetron is superior to dimenhydrinate or placebo for the prevention of POV after adenotonsillectomy in children. Antiemetics may mask the signs of bleeding after adenotonsillectomy.
                I.v. ondansetron (0.1 mg/kg) is more effective than both dimenhydrinate and placebo in preventing vomiting after adenotonsillectomy in healthy children. However, antiemetics may also mask the presence of blood in the stomach by preventing vomiting, and this should be appreciated when adenotonsillectomy is performed on an outpatient basis. Neither droperidol nor ondansetron has been proven completely effective, and there are conflicting data comparing the efficacy of the two agents. The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy, safety and cost of a combination of ondansetron administered intravenously in the operating room followed by oral ondansetron treatment at home with the more commonly used treatment of intravenous droperidol therapy and oral dimenhydrinate therapy, for the prevention and treatment of postoperative nausea and vomiting in children undergoing strabismus surgery.
                Double-blind randomized clinical trial with parallel comparison groups. All patients aged 6 months to 18 years who underwent strabismus surgery at a pediatric hospital in Montreal between Nov. 13, 2000, and June 12, 2001, were included. The exclusion criteria were nausea or vomiting, or use of antiemetics or narcotics in the 24 hours preceding surgery, and past history of hepatic, gastric or renal disease. The outcome measures were frequency of nausea and vomiting, severity of nausea and adverse effects in hospital, during transportation home and during the first 24 hours at home. Data were obtained through nursing notes and through a telephone interview conducted 24 to 48 hours after discharge.
                Of the 208 eligible patients, 172 were randomly assigned to the study groups (88 to the ondansetron group and 84 to the droperidol/dimenhydrinate group). We found no statistically significant difference in the incidence of nausea and vomiting in hospital or at home between the two groups (25.3% vs. 31.6%, p = 0.371). There was a significant difference between the two groups in the rate of vomiting during transportation home (3.6% vs. 12.6%, p = 0.044). The incidence of severe nausea was 14.4% with ondansetron and 15.4% with droperidol, a nonsignificant difference (p = 1.00). No significant difference was observed between the two groups in the incidence of any nausea (p = 0.434) or adverse effects (p = 0.220). We calculated that the combination of droperidol and dimenhydrinate was seven times less costly than the ondansetron regimen.
                In this study, the efficacy and safety of intravenous administration of droperidol followed by oral use of dimenhydrinate did not differ from that of intravenous followed by oral use of ondansetron in children undergoing strabismus surgery. Since treatment with ondansetron is much more costly than the combination of droperidol and dimenhydrinate, at this time the use of ondansetron in the prevention and treatment of vomiting and nausea in this population may not be beneficial on a cost basis if all other variables are considered. To compare the prophylactic antiemetic efficacy of the combination of ondansetron and droperidol with that of droperidol alone in patients undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
                Randomized, double-blind controlled trial. University affiliated teaching hospital after induction of standardized general anesthesia.
                64 ASA physical status I or II patients aged 18 to 80 years, undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
                Following induction of general anesthesia, patients received either droperidol 1.25 mg intravenously (IV; n = 30; Group D) or the combination of droperidol 1.25 mg IV and ondansetron 4 mg IV (n = 34; Group D+O).
                Number and severity of nausea episodes, number of emetic episodes, total analgesic consumption, and rescue antiemetic administration were assessed at 1, 3, and 24 hours after admission to the recovery room. Data were analyzed using Fisher's Exact test and unpaired Student's t-test; a p-value <0.05 was considered significant.
                The proportions of patients who experienced nausea (70% and 53% for D and D+O groups, respectively) and vomiting (30% and 19% for D and D+O groups, respectively) were similar in the two groups. The frequency of moderate and severe nausea (requiring administration of antiemetic) was less in group D + O (7%) compared with group D (19%; p < 0.05).
                Patients who received the combination of droperidol and ondansetron experienced less severe nausea compared with patients who received droperidol alone.
                Copyright 2002 by Elsevier Science Inc. In a randomised, double-blind study, a transdermal patch containing either hyoscine or placebo was applied post-auricularly in 190 adult patients under 65 year old, seven to twelve hours prior to their undergoing minor orthopaedic or plastic surgery under thiopentone/nitrous oxide/halothane general anaesthesia. In the first 24 hours after surgery 34% of patients vomited. The incidence of nausea (31% vs 54%; P less than 0.01) and the number of episodes of vomiting (66 vs 125; P less than 0.05) during the first 24 hours were significantly less with hyoscine than with placebo. The hyoscine group required fewer doses of antiemetic than the placebo group (12 vs 27; P less than 0.05). Side-effects were mild, the only difference between the two groups being the frequency of dry mouth immediately preoperatively. No differences were seen in the second 24 hours after surgery. We conclude that transdermal hyoscine is moderately effective in reducing the occurrence of postoperative nausea and vomiting following minor surgery. We studied the effect of intraoperative ondansetron 0.1 mg x kg(-1) or droperidol 0.01 mg.kg-1, followed by the same dose of the antiemetic agent added to the morphine solution during patient controlled analgesia (PCA) on the incidence of nausea and vomiting in children following an appendicectomy.
                Sixty children, aged 5-13 years, were recruited and randomly allocated to receive no prophylactic antiemetic, the control group (group C), ondansetron (group O) or droperidol (group D). The PCA pump was programmed to deliver a bolus dose of 20 microg x kg(-1) of morphine.with a 5-min lockout period and a background infusion of 4 microg x kg(-1) x h(-1).
                Postoperatively, the three groups were compared for nausea, vomiting and sedation scores for 24 h. The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting was 33% for group C, 44% for group O and 41% for group D. There was no increase in sedation scores in the droperidol group.
                We were unable to show any significant benefit from the prophylactic administration of ondansetron or droperidol to children using morphine PCA devices following appendicectomy in the doses we employed. To evaluate the effectiveness of acupressure applied at meridian P6 point for prevention of nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
                A randomized double blind study was performed in 50 ASA I and II patients scheduled for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Patients were divided into two groups; control and placebo. In the control group acupressure was applied at P6 point half an hour before surgery while in the placebo group the acupressure band was tied on meridian P6 point but the plastic bead was placed on the dosum of right forearm away from meridian P6 point. Patients were assessed for nausea and vomiting for six hours after surgery. Anaesthetic technique and postoperative analgesia were standardized for all patients.
                Results showed that the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting was 36% in the treatment group and 40% in placebo group, which is statistically insignificant.
                Application of acupressure at P6 point half an hour before induction of anaesthesia does not significantly alter the incidence of postoperative nausea and/or vomiting within 6 hours after surgery. One hundred and thirty-one healthy children, aged 31-152 months, undergoing strabismus surgery under general anaesthesia, were randomly allocated to one of four groups: group A received 0.04 mg.kg-1 ( identical with 1 mg.m-2) of ondansetron, group B 0.1 mg.kg-1 ( identical with 2.5 mg.m-2), group C 0.2 mg.kg-1 ( identical with 5 mg.m-2) and group D placebo, given intravenously following induction of anaesthesia. Morphine 0.15 mg.kg-1 was given intravenously, intraoperatively, to provide postoperative analgesia. Hourly records of emetic episodes were made for 24 h.
                A considerably higher proportion of children suffered emesis in the placebo group compared to the active treatment groups taken together, during the first 8 h of postoperative care (76% vs. 45%, P=0.002). During the first 8 h, only 25% of those in treatment group C suffered emesis, the number-needed-to-treat was 3. There was a statistically significant decrease in the chance of vomiting with increasing dose of ondansetron (P=0.03). By 24 h, the difference in the rate of emesis was less marked but still statistically significant (90% vs. 69%, P=0.03).
                Overall, children given ondansetron had less than one-half the risk of vomiting compared to those given placebo (hazard ratio 0.46, 95% confidence interval 0.29-0.74). The mean number of emetic episodes declined from 2.73 in the placebo group to 1.92 in treatment group C. There was no difference in the incidence of side-effects between groups. Postoperative nausea and vomiting are significant problems in laparoscopic surgery. This double-blind, randomized, prospective trial compares the prophylactic use of metoclopramide, ondansetron, and placebo for the treatment of postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing outpatient laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
                Two hundred thirty-two patients aged 18 to 73 years were randomized into three groups. Patients received intravenously 10 mg of metoclopramide, 4 mg of ondansetron, or placebo in a double-blinded manner prior to surgery.
                The incidence of nausea was 32% for metoclopramide, 45% for ondansetron, and 44% for placebo in the postanesthesia care unit or day surgery, which was not statistically significant. The incidence of vomiting was 8% for metoclopramide, 4% for ondansetron, and 22% for placebo in the postanesthesia care unit or day surgery. These differences were statistically significant when comparing both drugs to placebo but not when comparing both drugs to each other.
                Prophylactic administration of metoclopramide or ondansetron significantly reduces the incidence of postoperative vomiting for laparoscopic cholecystectomy, but neither drug was found to be significantly more effective than the other. Metoclopramide is a more cost-effective treatment. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the antiemetic effect of prophylactic dimenhydrinate application prior to Faden operation and to compare the incidence of PONV between bimedial Faden operation (BMF) and horizontal recess-resect procedure (R&R).
                Ninety-nine children (4-10 years) scheduled for BMF were included in this prospective double-blind study. Midazolam (0.5 mg/kg body weight, BW) was administered orally for premedication 30 min before induction of anesthesia. Additionally, children weighing >/=23 kg received either dimenhydrinate suppositories or placebo. The placebo group was compared with 148 children who underwent R&R surgery without antiemetic prophylaxis during the same period. Anesthesia was induced with thiopentone (5-10 mg/kg BW) and vecuronium (0.1 mg/kg BW) bromide and maintained with halothane (1-2 vol%) in N(2)O/O(2) (65/35 vol%). Age, height, weight, and incidence of oculocardiac reflex were documented. PONV was classified into "no vomiting", "vomiting without therapy", and "vomiting requiring rescue medication". In the latter case dimenhydrinate was given again. The chi-square test was used for statistical analysis.
                Forty-eight patients received placebo, while 51 received dimenhydrinate. No differences between any groups were observed concerning age, height, weight, and incidence of oculocardiac reflex. Compared to R&R surgery, PONV requiring rescue medication occurred significantly more frequently after BMF (45% vs 23% after R&R). PONV after BMF was significantly less severe in the dimenhydrinate group than in the placebo group. The total incidence of PONV after BMF, however, was not significantly reduced.
                The high incidence of PONV after BMF can be explained by the greater invasiveness of BMF than R&R surgery. PONV requiring antiemetic rescue medication can be reduced by preoperative administration of dimenhydrinate suppositories. Several factors may influence the incidences of postoperative nausea and vomiting. In women, one of these factors may be the timing of their surgery in relation to their menstrual cycle. The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of menstruation and efficacy of the antiemetic droperidol on postoperative nausea and vomiting.
                In a prospective randomized double-blind clinical trial, 100 female patients who were scheduled for laparoscopic tubal sterilization were stratified on the basis of the date of their last menses into menstrual (days 1-8) and nonmenstrual (days 9-28) groups. Patients in both groups were then randomized to receive placebo or 10, 20, or 30 micrograms/kg droperidol before induction of anesthesia, and data were obtained for 24 h after completion of their surgery.
                Nausea and vomiting were reported in 55 patients, and the risk was 2.92 times greater in the menstrual group (71.4%) than in the nonmenstrual group (46.2%; (P = .013). Droperidol (30 micrograms/kg) reduced the incidence of vomiting from 47.1% (placebo) to 13.3% in the nonmenstrual group (P = .045) but had no effect in the menstrual group. Five prognostic variables (menstrual stratum, droperidol, age 30 yr or younger, weight 65 kg or less, and history of nausea and vomiting) for postoperative nausea and vomiting were tested by stepwise logistic regression. Menstrual stratum was the only variable identified as a significant (P = .017) predictor, having a percent probability equal to 2.21.
                The risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting is increased in women undergoing laparoscopic tubal sterilization during the first 8 days of their menstrual cycle, and droperidol up to 30 micrograms/kg is not as effective in these patients. In a prospective double blind placebo-controlled study, 45 patients scheduled for infratentorial surgery were randomly allocated into two groups. Five patients were later excluded from the study because of various reasons. Out of 40 analyzable patients, 20 received IV Ondansetron (4 mg), whereas the other 20 received the matching placebo approximately 1 hour before the skin closure. After conclusion of surgery and tracheal extubation, all patients were monitored in the recovery room for post operative nausea and vomiting (PONV) for 48 hours. The incidence of PONV within the first 24 hours was found to be 50% and 10% in the placebo and ondansetron groups, respectively (p<0.05). After 24 hours, however, both groups were comparable in relation to the incidence of emesis. Rescue antiemetic (RAE) was required in nine (45%) patients in the placebo group and in two (10%) patients in the Ondansetron group (p<0.05). A significantly higher number of patients remained sedated postoperatively in the Ondansetron group than in the placebo group (p<0.05). One patient in the Ondansetron group had protracted diarrhea for 48 hours postoperatively. These results indicate that administration of IV Ondansetron (4 mg) 1 hour before skin closure effectively reduces PONV after infratentorial surgery, and does not have significant adverse effects. Ondansetron has a well documented antiemetic prophylactic effect, whereas in most studies of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), metoclopramide is less efficacious. This can be attributed to the short-lasting effect of metoclopramide when a low dose is given at the beginning of surgery. We wanted to test a 20-mg dose of metoclopramide given at the end of surgery, using ondansetron 8 mg as a reference.
                122 patients scheduled for elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy under general anesthesia were studied in a randomized, double-blind study design. At the end of the procedure, the patients received either metoclopramide 20 mg or ondansetron 8 mg intravenously. The patients were observed for 24 h for PONV, pain, side-effects and need for rescue antiemetic medication.
                No significant differences in the incidence of PONV or need for rescue antiemetic treatment was observed in the 0-24 h postoperative study period. The overall incidence of PONV was 43% in the ondansetron group and 47% in the metoclopramide group. The ondansetron patients had a significantly higher incidence of moderate or strong pain during the postoperative observation period (61% vs. 35% in the metoclopramide group) (P < 0.05). No significant differences in side-effects between the groups were observed.
                Metoclopramide 20 mg i.v. given at the end of laparoscopic cholecystectomy resulted in a similar incidence of PONV compared with ondansetron 8 mg. The patients receiving metoclopramide had less pain than the patients receiving ondansetron. Post-operative vomiting, especially in ambulatory surgical patients, remains a troublesome problem. This placebo-controlled, randomized, prospective double-blind trial was designed to evaluate the efficacy of two prophylactic anti-emetic regimens on post-operative vomiting in 1-day thyroid surgery. Altogether 60 elective surgical patients were followed for 4 h post-operatively. All patients were American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status of I or II and aged between 22 and 60 years: group 1 was saline control; in groups 2 and 3, metoclopramide (0.2 mg/kg) or tropisetron (5 mg) was administered, respectively, as an intravenous single dose during induction. Patients were pre-medicated. A standardized anaesthetic technique consisting of thiopentone-succinylcholine for induction and fentanyl-nitrous oxide-halothane-pancuronium for maintenance of anaesthesia was used. A 'rescue' anti-emetic was provided in case of continued vomiting or at the patient's request. Anti-emetic inefficacy was defined as request for rescue anti-emetic and/or vomiting episode during the first 4 h post-operation. The number of patients vomiting was 12/20 (60%), 10/20 (50%) and 1/20 (5%) within the first 2 h post-operation in groups 1, 2 and 3, respectively (P > 0.05 for groups 1 and 2; P < 0.01 for groups 2 and 3; P < 0.001 for groups 1 and 3). In group 2, three patients required rescue medication during the first 2 h post-operation, but no significant difference was observed between groups 2 and 3 (P > 0.05). None of the cases in any of the groups needed any rescue medication during post-operative 2-4 h. It is concluded that tropisetron is a highly effective anti-emetic drug in the prophylaxis of post-operative vomiting. Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a distressing adverse effect of general anaesthesia. The aim of the current study was to compare the antiemetic activity of different 5-hydroxytryptamine3 receptor antagonists with that of metoclopramide and placebo.
                In a prospective, randomized, double-blind study we have compared the antiemetic activity of the prophylactic administration of ondansetron 4 mg, tropisetron 5 mg and granisetron 3 mg with that of metoclopramide 10 mg and placebo in 132 patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. All study drugs and placebo were given as a short iv infusion ten minutes before the induction of anaesthesia. Perioperative anaesthetic care was standardized in all patients. Nausea and vomiting were assessed by direct questioning of the patient at 1, 4, 9, 12, 18 and 24 hr after recovery from anaesthesia. If patients experienced nausea and/or vomiting, rescue antiemetic treatment (metoclopramide 10 mg iv) was administered.
                For the 24-hr recovery period after surgery, the percentages of emesis-free patients were 65.5%, 52%, 48%, 29.2% and 27.6% in the ondansetron, granisetron, tropisetron, metoclopramide and placebo groups, respectively. Prophylactic antiemetic treatment with ondansetron resulted in a lower incidence (P = 0.02) of PONV than with metoclopramide or placebo. The times at which rescue antiemetic was first received were longer (P < 0.01) in ondansetron group than in the placebo and metoclopramide groups. There were no statistical differences between ondansetron, tropisetron and granisetron groups.
                Ondansetron, when given prophylactically resulted in a significantly lower incidence of PONV than metoclopramide and placebo. Metoclopramide was ineffective. The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of a low-dose propofol infusion with a four-drug multimodal regimen for prophylaxis of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV).
                : PONV was studied in two patient groups with a known high incidence. Through a stratified randomization, 60 patients undergoing breast surgery and 120 patients undergoing abdominal surgery were randomized to three groups of equal size: the propofol group (P), the multidrug group (M) and the control group (C). All patients received general anesthesia, induction with propofol and maintenance with sevoflurane. After induction, patients in the P group received a continuous infusion of propofol 1 mg/kg/h during the operation and the first 4 postoperative h. Patients in the M group received dexamethasone 4 mg and three antiemetics, ondansetron 4 mg, droperidol 1.25 mg and metoclopramide 10 mg i.v. In the control group no prophylaxis was given. Nausea and pain were evaluated by incidence and a visual analog scale (0-10 cm). All emetic episodes were noted by the staff during the first 4 h and by the patients during the next 20 h.
                The overall incidence of PONV during the first 24 h postoperatively was significantly lower in the M group (24%) than in the P group (49%) (P<0.01) or the C group (70%) (P<0.001). The incidence of PONV increased significantly both in patients undergoing breast surgery and abdominal surgery after termination of propofol. The number of patients who vomited was significantly lower in the M group, both in breast surgery patients (5%) and abdominal surgery patients (3%) compared to patients in the propofol groups (breast 16% NS; abdominal 29%, P<0.05) and in the control groups (breast 37%, P<0.01; abdominal 29%, P<0.01).
                The incidence of PONV is very high in patients undergoing breast and abdominal surgery. In the present study antiemetic prophylaxis with a combination of droperidol, ondansetron, metoclopramide and dexamethasone was more effective in preventing PONV, especially vomiting, than a postoperative low-dose infusion of propofol, which had a short lasting effect. To compare the efficacy of acupressure wrist bands and ondansetron for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV).
                One hundred and fifty ASA I-II, patients undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy were included in a randomized, prospective, double-blind and placebo-controlled study. Patients were divided into three groups of 50. Group I was the control; Group II received ondansetron 4 mg iv just prior to induction of anesthesia; in Group III acupressure wristbands were applied at the P6 points. Acupressure wrist bands were placed inappropriately in Groups I and II. The acupressure wrist bands were applied 30 min prior to induction of anesthesia and removed six hours following surgery. Anesthesia was standardized. PONV were evaluated separately as none, mild, moderate or severe within six hours of patients' arrival in the postanesthesia care unit and then at 24 hr after surgery by a blinded observer. If patients vomited more than once, they were given 4 mg ondansetron iv as the rescue antiemetic. Results were analyzed by Z test. A P value of < 0.05 was taken as significant.
                The incidence of PONV and the requirement of rescue medication were significantly lower in both the acupressure and ondansetron groups during the first six hours.
                Acupressure at P6 causes a significant reduction in the incidence of PONV and the requirement for rescue medication in the first six hours following laparoscopic cholecystectomy, similar to that of ondansetron 4 mg iv. In a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial, we compared the efficacy of dolasetron, dexamethasone, and metoclopramide in a preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in women undergoing breast surgery. Patients were allocated randomly to one of four groups (20 patients each): group A received 12.5 mg dolasetron, group B received 8 mg dexamethasone, group C received 20 mg metoclopramide, and group D received placebo intravenously. If patients complained of retching or vomiting or if patients demanded an antiemetic, 1.25 mg droperidol was administered intravenously. To quantify postoperative nausea and vomiting, the following score was used: 0 = no nausea, 1 = nausea, 2 = retching, 3 = single vomiting, 4 = multiple vomiting. Dolasetron and dexamethasone reduced the postoperative nausea and vomiting score significantly (p < 0.02 versus metoclopramide; p < 0.0001 versus placebo). Metoclopramide also reduced the postoperative nausea and vomiting score (p < 0.02 versus placebo). Fisher's exact test showed a significant reduction of vomiting in the dolasetron and dexamethasone groups compared with metoclopramide-treated patients (p < 0.007) and placebo-treated patients (p < 0.000006) and a significantly lower rate of nausea in comparison to the placebo group (p < 0.009). There were no significant differences between the metoclopramide and the placebo groups (using Fisher's exact test). The use of postoperative droperidol was significantly lower in both the dolasetron group (p < 0.04 versus metoclopramide; p < 0.0001 versus placebo) and dexamethasone group (p < 0.04 versus metoclopramide; p < 0.0001 versus placebo), as well as in the metoclopramide group (p < 0.02 versus placebo). Intravenous dolasetron and dexamethasone were equally effective and both are more effective than metoclopramide for preventing vomiting after breast surgery. Also both were significantly superior to either metoclopramide or placebo for postoperative nausea and vomiting and the need for droperidol rescue. Postoperative vomiting is a common complication after strabismus surgery. The combination of dexamethasone and ondansetron decreases vomiting after strabismus surgery, while dexamethasone alone decreases vomiting after tonsillectomy in children. We compared the effect of dexamethasone alone to ondansetron plus dexamethasone on postoperative vomiting among children undergoing strabismus surgery.
                Healthy children, aged 2-14 years, who were undergoing strabismus surgery were entered into this randomized, blocked and stratified study. Patients were administered 0.5 mg.kg(-1) midazolam p.o., 20-30 min preoperatively when indicated. The patients had an intravenous induction with 2.5-3.5 mg.kg(-1) propofol or an inhalation induction of anaesthesia with halothane and N2O. All patients were given 20 microg.kg(-1) atropine i.v. Study drugs were administered in a double-blind fashion. Both groups received 150 microg.kg(-1) dexamethasone i.v. Group D patients received placebo and group OD received 50 microg.kg(-1) of ondansetron i.v. Anaesthesia was maintained with halothane and N2O. Postoperative fluid, vomiting and pain management were standardized. Patients were followed for 24 h. We studied 193 patients with 111 patients in the OD group. Demographic data were similar.
                The overall incidence of vomiting was 23%; in group D and 5%; in group OD (P < 0.001). Each episode of vomiting increased the in-hospital length of stay by 29 min (P < 0.001).
                There was a remarkably low incidence of postoperative vomiting of 5%; with the combination of dexamethasone plus a low-dose of ondansetron which more effectively decreased vomiting after strabismus surgery in children when compared with dexamethasone alone. Ondansetron was compared with placebo for nausea and vomiting prophylaxis after fentanyl/isoflurane/relaxant anesthesia and infratentorial craniotomy. Eight milligrams intravenous ondansetron or vehicle was administered at skin closure. Nausea, emesis, and antiemetic use were recorded at 0, 0.5, 1, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 48 hours. There were no significant intergroup differences for nausea incidence at any interval, but cumulatively the placebo group was 3.2 times more likely to develop nausea during the first 12 hours (P = .04). Nausea incidence was bimodal in both groups, peaking during the first 1 to 4 hours. A nadir occurred at 8 to 12 hours, but nausea increased during the next 36 hours. By 48 hours, approximately 40% of patients in both groups were still nauseated. Reduced vomiting frequency was seen with ondansetron at 4, 8, 12, and 24 hours (P < .05). Despite rescue antiemetics, emesis occurred in an irregular pattern with episodes still observed in 35% of placebo patients at 48 hours. For ondansetron, emesis was infrequent for the first 12 hours but then a persistent increase was observed (48 hours, 22%). The incidence of rescue antiemetic use was 65% for both groups. There was no effect of gender. Nausea and vomiting are frequent and protracted after infratentorial craniotomy. Administration of single-dose ondansetron (8 mg intravenously) at wound closure was partially effective in reducing acute nausea and vomiting but had little delayed benefit. Scheduled prophylactic administration of antiemetic therapy during the first 48 hours after infratentorial craniotomy should be evaluated for efficacy and safety. One of the most frequently performed pediatric surgical procedures is tonsillectomy and adenoidectomy. Nausea and vomiting and the inability to tolerate oral fluids lead to unplanned hospitalizations. Despite treatment with metoclopramide and droperidol, nausea and vomiting continue to be high after this procedure. We designed this investigation to compare currently utilized antiemetics to ondansetron, a new serotonin antagonist, in hopes of decreasing the occurrence of nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing tonsillectomy and adenoidectomy. This prospective, randomized, double-blinded clinical trial compared ondansetron, droperidol, and placebo administered at the induction of general anesthesia and the incidence of vomiting postoperatively. One-hundred sixty-five children between the ages of 2 and 12 years undergoing ambulatory adenotonsillectomy were enrolled and completed this investigation. The primary outcome measure was the elimination of vomiting during the 24-h investigative period following surgery. Both ondansetron and droperidol significantly lowered the incidence of postoperative emesis after tonsillectomy and adenoidectomy (P < 0.012) compared to placebo. Ondansetron was significantly more effective than droperidol in reducing emesis after discharge (P < 0.025). Both ondansetron and droperidol are effective in decreasing emesis when given before surgical incision in pediatric patients undergoing tonsillectomy and adenoidectomy. Ondansetron's antiemetic effect persists for up to 24 h following surgery with significant reductions in emesis. Ondansetron's effectiveness in eliminating vomiting without sedation or other side effects suggests that it should be considered as part of the standard management in pediatric patients undergoing tonsillectomy and adenoidectomy. Nausea and vomiting are common after adenotonsillectomy. Tropisetron is a new, long-acting serotonin antagonist that is an effective antiemetic in adults. Its effect on postoperative nausea and vomiting in children is unknown. We carried out a randomized, double-blind study of the effects of a single i.v. dose of tropisetron on vomiting after tonsillectomy with or without adenoidectomy in children. Forty-eight children undergoing tonsillectomy or adenotonsillectomy received at induction of anaesthesia either tropisetron 0.1 mg kg-1 or placebo. The incidence of vomiting was recorded for the first 24 h after surgery by nursing staff and then by parents after discharge from hospital. Children received metoclopramide 0.15 mg kg-1 as a rescue antiemetic. We found that tropisetron reduced the overall incidence of emetic episodes after surgery (29% compared with 65% in control group; P = 0.019) and the incidence of severe vomiting (0% compared with 52% in control group; P < 0.001). We conclude that tropisetron is an effective antiemetic for children undergoing tonsillectomy. This randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study was to evaluate the effects of granisetron, a selective 5-hydroxytryptamine type 3 receptor antagonist, for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in 110 patients with (n = 50) and without (n = 60) a history of motion sickness undergoing general anaesthesia for major gynaecological surgery.
                The patients received a single dose of either granisetron (40 micrograms.kg-1) or placebo (saline) iv over 2-5 min immediately before induction of anaesthesia. Postoperatively, during the first 24 hr after anaesthesia, the frequencies of nausea and vomiting were recorded.
                Except for a positive history of motion sickness, the treatment groups were similar for patient characteristics, types of surgery, anaesthetics administered and opioids given. Postoperatively, the frequency of nausea was 44% and 16% after administration of placebo and granisetron in patients with motion sickness, and was 30% and 7% in patients without it, respectively; the corresponding frequencies of vomiting were 28%, 8%, 13% and 3%. The incidence of adverse events postoperatively were not different among the groups.
                These results suggest that preoperative prophylactic administration of granisetron is effective and safe for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients with motion sickness as well as in patients without it. Postoperative nausea and vomiting are common after recovery from anesthesia. We examined the prophylactic effect of granisetron on postoperative nausea and vomiting in 120 female patients (ASA physical status I) undergoing gynecologic surgery. They were randomly allocated to one of three groups (n = 40 for each): saline (as a control), granisetron 20 micrograms/kg, and granisetron 40 micrograms/kg. Saline or granisetron was given intravenously (IV) over 5 min approximately 30 min before the end of anesthesia. Nausea, vomiting, and safety assessments were performed during the 24-h recovery period. For the 24-h period after surgery, the number of emesis-free patients was significantly larger in the granisetron groups than in the control group (83%, 78%, and 20% of patients receiving granisetron 20 micrograms/kg and 40 micrograms/kg, and saline, respectively). Granisetron at both doses also was superior to the control for the prevention of nausea over the 24-h study period (nausea visual analog scales at 24-h postsurgery: 49 mm, 17 mm, and 18 mm in the control, granisetron 20 micrograms/kg, and granisetron 40 micrograms/kg groups, respectively). Fewer patients received "rescue" antiemetics in the granisetron groups than in the control group (10%, 10%, and 43% of patients in granisetron 20 micrograms/kg and 40 micrograms/kg, and the control groups, respectively). The adverse events in the granisetron groups were similar to those in the control group. The administration of granisetron had no significant effect on vital signs or clinical laboratory test profiles. Granisetron given at 20 or 40 micrograms/kg i.v. during anesthesia appears to be a simple, effective, and safe method for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting. 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.
                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.
                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).
                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. A common and distressing adverse effect following general anesthesia is nausea and vomiting. Pediatric ophthalmic surgery is associated with a high (50%-80%) incidence of postoperative emesis. Vomiting postoperatively may cause a prolonged hospital stay, and if it is persistent, may lead to unanticipated hospital admission after ambulatory surgery. The purpose of the present study was to compare the effectiveness of prophylactic antiemetic treatment with ondansetron, metoclopramide, and placebo in a study population of pediatric patients scheduled to undergo ophthalmic surgery. One hundred and one patients were included in this double-blinded study. The incidence of emesis and adverse effects were observed in the postanesthesia care unit and documented for 24 hours postoperatively. Analysis of variance showed that ondansetron significantly decreased (P = .05) the incidence of emesis in the postanesthesia care unit and during the first 24 hours postoperatively (P = .049). Additionally, parents of children in the ondansetron group reported a high degree (94%) of satisfaction with the experience. Droperidol can reduce the high incidence of vomiting after pediatric strabismus surgery; however, its use may be associated with sedation, delayed hospital discharge, dysphoria and extrapyramidal signs. Midazolam, a short-acting benzodiazepine with antiemetic properties, has few side effects and may be a suitable alternative. We prospectively compared the antiemetic effect of these two drugs in 393 healthy children aged 18 months to 14 years undergoing outpatient strabismus surgery. The children were randomly assigned to receive midazolam hydrochloride (50 micrograms/kg) (199 patients) or droperidol (50 micrograms/kg) (194 children). The incidence rates of vomiting in the two groups were 45% and 37% respectively, a nonsignificant difference. The incidence of vomiting was not affected by the duration of anesthesia, but the number of muscles repaired was a significant predictor of postoperative vomiting (p < 0.001). The incidence of nausea and vomiting after strabismus surgery was studied in 64 children aged one to six years. Incidence was determined in the post-anaesthesia recovery room (PARR), in the same day surgery (SDS) unit, and at home on days one and two after the operation. After induction of anaesthesia, the children received an intravenous injection of droperidol (50 micrograms . kg-1) or saline in a double-blind randomized fashion, and an intravenous injection of glycopyrrolate (7.5 micrograms . kg-1) or atropine (10 micrograms . kg-1) in an open randomized fashion. The incidence of emetic symptoms was highest in the SDS unit and at home on day one. Droperidol slightly but significantly delayed awakening and was not, at least in this particular age group, associated with any difference in postoperative sickness. Despite theoretical advantages, glycopyrrolate offered no significant benefit over atropine as far as postoperative emesis was concerned. Postoperative nausea and vomiting is a distressing anesthetic complication that may delay discharge after ambulatory surgery. Effective prophylaxis for postoperative nausea and vomiting can be achieved in adults with lower doses of ondansetron, a 5-hydroxytryptamine subtype 3 receptor antagonist, compared with chemotherapy-induced emesis. However, the doses of ondansetron used in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in children are based on data from chemotherapy-induced emesis. The dose-related efficacy of intravenous ondansetron in the prophylaxis of postoperative emesis in the pediatric outpatient population was determined.
                In a double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled study, 130 patients (mean age 5.7 +/- 3.4 yr) received placebo, 10, 50, or 100 micrograms/kg ondansetron during a standardized anesthetic. Episodes of postoperative vomiting or retching were recorded.
                Intravenous ondansetron in a dose of 50 micrograms/kg was more effective than placebo or a dose of 10 micrograms/kg in controlling the incidence and frequency of emesis in the hospital and during the first 24 postoperative hours. Increasing the dose of ondansetron to 100 micrograms/kg intravenously did not significantly reduce the incidence or frequency of emesis compared to 50 micrograms/kg intravenously.
                Intravenous ondansetron in a dose of 50 micrograms/kg is as effective as larger doses for the prophylaxis of emesis in children undergoing surgical procedures known to be associated with an increased risk for postoperative nausea and vomiting. In children, strabismus surgery is frequently followed by vomiting. The present study compares the antiemetic effects of droperidol (10 micrograms/kg) and/or metoclopramide (0.1 mg/kg) in 104 children undergoing strabismus surgery. The patients were randomly divided into four groups. Group I (n = 28) received placebo (saline), Group II (n = 26) droperidol 10 micrograms/kg, Group III (n = 25) metoclopramide 0.1 mg/kg and Group IV (n = 25) droperidol 10 micrograms/kg and metoclopramide 0.1 mg/kg. Droperidol was given just after induction and metoclopramide at the end of surgery, just before recovery. The technique of anesthesia involved an anticholinergic premedication, IV fentanyl (2 micrograms/kg), controlled ventilation using isoflurance and N2O in oxygen and systematic gastric emptying before extubation. Vomiting, retching and nausea were noted at 5 different moments: in the Post Anesthetic Care Unit, when arriving on the ward (= after carriage by lift), during the first hour following the return in the ward, from the 6th to the 12th postoperative hour and on the morning of day 1. There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of vomiting among these four groups. Moreover, the incidence of vomiting in the placebo group was much lower (17.9% in the recovery room, 3.6% at return in the ward, 25% during the first hour, 7.1% from 6 to 12 hours and 3.6% the next day) than that reported in previous studies. We think that this could result from the additive effects of some aspects of the technique of anesthesia described and discussed in this paper. In this study we compared the efficacy and safety of three antiemetic combinations in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). Ninety ASA status I-II women, aged 18-65 yr, undergoing general anesthesia for major gynecological surgery, were included in a prospective, randomized, double-blinded study. A standardized anesthetic technique and postoperative analgesia (intrathecal morphine plus IV patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) with morphine) were used in all patients. Patients were randomly assigned to receive ondansetron 4 mg plus droperidol 1.25 mg after the induction of anesthesia and droperidol 1.25 mg 12 h later (Group 1, n = 30), dexamethasone 8 mg plus droperidol 1.25 mg after the induction of anesthesia and droperidol 1.25 mg 12 h later (Group 2, n = 30), or ondansetron 4 mg plus dexamethasone 8 mg after the induction of anesthesia and placebo 12 h later (Group 3, n = 30). A complete response, defined as no PONV in 48 h, occurred in 80% of patients in Group 1, 70% in Group 3, and 40% in Group 2 (P = 0.004 versus Groups 1 and 3). The incidences of side effects and other variables that could modify the incidence of PONV were similar among groups. In conclusion, ondansetron, in combination with droperidol or dexamethasone, is more effective than dexamethasone in combination with droperidol in women undergoing general anesthesia for major gynecological surgery with intrathecal morphine plus IV PCA with morphine for postoperative analgesia.
                The combination of ondansetron plus dexamethasone or droperidol was significantly better than the combination of dexamethasone plus droperidol in the prophylaxis of postoperative nausea and vomiting in women undergoing general anesthesia for major gynecological surgery, with intrathecal and IV morphine (patient-controlled analgesia) for management of postoperative pain. Postoperative nausea and vomiting is a common problem in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of ondansetron given at the induction of anesthesia in patients scheduled for ambulatory LC.
                A total of 84 patients undergoing ambulatory LC were enrolled in a randomized, prospective, double-blinded study in which the subjects received either placebo or 4 mg ondansetron intravenously at induction of anesthesia. A nausea scoring system was employed utilizing a 5-point linear scale, with 1 point given for no nausea and a maximum of 5 points for an episode of emesis. Each patient received a total of four scores postoperatively.
                The patients receiving placebo had significantly more episodes of nausea (53 versus 32; P <0.009) and emesis (11 versus 2; P <0.02), higher mean total nausea scores (7.2 versus 5.4; P <0.006), and need for additional postoperative antiemetics (23 versus 14; P <0.05) than those receiving ondansetron.
                In patients undergoing ambulatory laparoscopic cholecystectomy, ondansetron at induction was highly effective in decreasing postoperative nausea and vomiting and should become the standard. To evaluate the efficacy and safety of ramosetron (a 5-hydroxytryptamine type 3 receptor antagonist) for the prevention of nausea and vomiting after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
                Prospective, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.
                University and university-affiliated hospitals, Japan.
                100 patients, 65 women and 35 men, who had laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
                Patients were given either placebo or ramosetron at 3 different doses (0.15 mg, 0.3 mg, 0.6 mg) intravenously at the completion of operation. The general anaesthetic technique and postoperative analgesia were standard.
                Vomiting and safety were assessed for 0 to 24 hours and 24 to 48 hours after anaesthesia.
                The number of patients who had a complete response (no nausea, no retching, no vomiting) during 0 to 24 hours after anaesthesia was 15/25 with placebo, 17/25 with ramosetron 0.15 mg, 23/25 with ramosetron 0.3 mg, and 23/25 with ramosetron 0.6 mg; The corresponding numbers from 24 to 48 hours were 16, 17, 23, and 23. No serious adverse events were observed in any of the groups.
                Ramosetron 0.3 mg was the minimum effective dose for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting during 0 to 48 hours after anaesthesia in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The incidence of postoperative vomiting in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy is compared in females versus males. The report also compares the prophylactic action of ondansetron versus metoclopramide.
                A total of 85 American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) I and II patients were enrolled in the study. Patients were divided into two groups according to sex: Group I 53 females, and Group II 32 males. After anaesthetic induction, subjects received intravenously either 4 mg ondansetron or 10 mg metoclopramide.
                The incidence of vomiting as well as the frequency of emetic episodes over 24 hours were analyzed in each group using X2 analysis. Data analysis revealed a significantly higher incidence (P < 0.05) of postoperative emesis in females 10:53 (18.9%) as compared to males 0:32 (0%). In the male group, no patient vomited postoperatively, whether prophylactic ondansetron or metoclopramide was used. While the incidence of emesis in the female group was lower (P < 0.05) in the ondansetron group (17.6%) than the metoclopramide group (29.6%).
                These results may indicate prophylactic antiemetic therapy in female patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy; ondansetron appears to be superior to metoclopramide. The authors evaluated the antiemetic properties of transdermal scopolamine (TDS) in healthy patients undergoing elective cesarean section and receiving epidural morphine for postoperative analgesia. Prior to administration of anesthesia, 203 patients had either TDS or a placebo study patch applied behind one ear. All patients were hydrated with lactated Ringer's solution iv and given 2.0% lidocaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine epidurally for surgical anesthesia. Following delivery of the infant, 4 mg of morphine sulphate was injected through the epidural catheter. After the operation patients were evaluated by "blinded" observers at 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 24, and 48 h for nausea, vomiting, retching, pain relief, itching, and adverse effects. In addition, medications received were noted. No differences were found between the groups in terms of severity or incidence of pain, or requests for analgesic or antipruritic medication. Although there was no difference between the groups in the first 2 h, patients with TDS had significantly less nausea, vomiting, and retching than patients in the placebo group in each time interval between 2 and 10 h. Additionally, the TDS group required less antiemetic medication. There was no difference in the frequency of retching or vomiting between groups. Side effects were minimal and equal in both groups. The authors conclude that TDS results in a decreased incidence of nausea and vomiting in patients who have delivered by cesarean section and received epidural morphine. TDS appears safe for continuous antiemetic administration. To investigate the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) depending on the administration time of ondansetron.
                In this prospective, double-blind, parallel-group study we compared the prevention of PONV with ondansetron at two administration times versus placebo in 120 patients undergoing balanced general anaesthesia. The patients were stratified according to the type of surgery and randomly allocated to three treatment groups: 40 patients (Group A) received ondansetron 4 mg i.v. 10 min before the induction of anaesthesia and placebo 10 min before the end of surgery; 40 (Group B) received placebo 10 min before the induction of anaesthesia and ondansetron 4 mg i.v. 10 min before the end of surgery; and 40 (Group C) received placebo at both of the administrations. Data were analysed by Student's t-test and chi-square test; significance was taken at P < 0.05.
                The analyses of the results showed a significantly lower incidence of PONV in treated patients (Groups A and B) than in the control group (Group C): postoperative nausea occurred in 12.5%, 27.5%, and 65% of patients in Groups A, B, and C, respectively, and was associated with vomiting in Group A in 2.5% Group B in 5%, and Group C in 55% of patients. Although the patients in Group A showed a lower incidence of PONV in comparison to those in Group B, the difference was not statistically significant.
                The incidence of PONV was significantly lower in the groups with administration of 4 mg ondansetron. Ondansetron is therefore safe and affective in preventing PONV in surgical patients. The administration time does not influence the occurrence of PONV. Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) are commonly observed undesirable consequences of laparoscopic cholecystectomy. This study was undertaken to compare granisetron, a selective 5-hydroxytryptamine type 3 receptor antagonist, with droperidol for reducing the incidence and severity of PONV after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
                Eighty patients, aged 25-65 yr, scheduled for elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy were enrolled in a randomized, double-blinded investigation and assigned to one of three treatment regimens: placebo (saline), 1.25 mg droperidol (approximately 25 micrograms.kg-1) or 3 mg granisetron (approximately 60 micrograms.kg-1). The study drugs were administered iv immediately before the induction of anaesthesia. A standard general anaesthetic technique was employed throughout. Nausea, vomiting and safety assessments were performed continuously during the first 24 hr after anaesthesia.
                The incidence of PONV was 46% with placebo, 41% with droperidol and 15% with granisetron (P < 0.05; overall chi 2 test). Four patients who had received placebo and two who had received droperidol required another rescue antiemetic, compared with none who had received granisetron (P < 0.05). Adverse events postoperatively were not different among the groups.
                Granisetron is more effective than droperidol and placebo for reducing the incidence and severity of PONV after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Ondansetron, a selective 5-HT3 receptor antagonist, has recently been shown, in a dose of 8 mg, to be superior to 1.25 mg droperidol in preventing postoperative vomiting. There are indications that a dose of 4 mg of ondansetron may be just as effective in reducing postoperative nausea and vomiting as a dose of 8 mg. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and the adverse effects of 4 mg ondansetron in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting compared to droperidol in patients undergoing surgery with inhalation anaesthesia supplemented with alfentanil. METHODS. Following institutional approval, 40 ASA physical status I and II women scheduled for minor gynaecological surgery gave informed consent to participate in this randomized, double-blind comparative study. Five minutes before induction of general anaesthesia, 20 patients received a single intravenous (i.v.) dose of 4 mg of ondansetron and the remaining 20 received 1.25 mg droperidol i.v. Anaesthesia was induced with 2.1-4 mg/kg of thiopental and 0.1 mg of alfentanil i.v. and maintained with 65% nitrous oxide and 1.5%-3% enflurane in oxygen. On pain stimuli another 0.2-0.4 mg of alfentanil was given. Total effective antiemetic response was defined as the absence of nausea and vomiting for 24 h postoperatively. The incidence of nausea, vomiting and the number of patients showing total antiemetic response as well as the incidence of adverse effects were compared with the chi 2 test and P < 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS. Patients were similar with respect to age, height, body weight and total anaesthetic agents received. Duration of anaesthesia and the time until awakening was not significantly different among groups. Postoperatively 7 out of 20 patients given 4 mg of ondansetron and 3 out of 20 patients with droperidol vomited (n.s.). The incidence of nausea was 11 out of 20 in the ondansetron group, and 4 out of 20 in the droperidol group (P < 0.05). Sixteen patients in the droperidol group and 8 patients in the ondansetron group showed a total effective antiemetic response (P < 0.05). Postoperative sedation and well-being scores did not differ significantly among groups. CONCLUSION. Our results show that for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting 4 mg of Ondansetron was inferior to 1.25 mg of droperidol. The drugs were given intravenously prior to general anaesthesia for minor gynaecological surgery with nitrous oxide and enflurane in oxygen supplemented with small boluses of alfentanil. To compare the efficacy and safety profiles of ondansetron and a placebo when infused immediately prior to anesthesia induction for the prevention of postoperative nausea and emesis (vomiting or retching).
                Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel, multicenter pilot study.
                Three U.S. ambulatory surgical facilities.
                One hundred eighty ASA physical status I and II women scheduled to undergo ambulatory gynecologic surgical procedures while receiving general endotracheal anesthesia.
                Ondansetron 8 mg or a placebo (equivalent volume) was given intravenously (IV) prior to anesthesia induction to prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting.
                For the first 24 hours following emergency from anesthesia, patients were monitored in the postanesthesia care unit by a research observer and at home via telephone contact and diary cards. More patients in the ondansetron group (62%) than in the placebo group (40%) were emesis-free over the 24-hour study period (p = 0.005). Ondansetron also was more efficacious than the placebo over the 24-hour study period when a surgery duration of more than 45 minutes was considered in the analyses. For all patients, regardless of surgery duration, there was a low degree of nausea during the course of the study. In all instances, the degree of nausea was slightly lower for ondansetron-treated patients than for placebo-treated patients; however, in no instances were the differences statistically significant. Ondansetron and placebo had similar safety profiles as established by laboratory test results, vital sign monitoring, and adverse event reporting.
                Ondansetron, infused IV before anesthesia induction, appears to be safe and effective when used in the prevention of postoperative nausea and emesis. Ninety female patients were enrolled in this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study to compare the anti-emetic effect of intravenous dexamethasone 8 mg with saline control in preventing patient-controlled analgesia-related nausea and vomiting following major orthopaedic surgery. The prophylactic administration of dexamethasone 8 mg significantly reduced the overall incidence of patient-controlled analgesia-related nausea and vomiting (p<0.001) and the need for rescue anti-emetics (p<0.01). Furthermore, patients who received dexamethasone showed a higher incidence of complete responses (no vomiting or need for rescue anti-emetic for a 24-h postoperative period) than those who received saline (p<0.05). We conclude that dexamethasone 8 mg may be valuable for preventing patient-controlled analgesia-related nausea and vomiting in women undergoing major orthopaedic surgery. To compare the efficacy and safety profiles of intravenous (IV) ondansetron (two 8 mg doses 8 hours apart) and a placebo when used in the prevention of postoperative nausea and emesis (vomiting or retching).
                Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel, multicenter pilot study.
                Four university hospitals in the United States.
                Two hundred seven women scheduled to undergo inpatient surgical procedures during general anesthesia.
                Patients were randomized to receive, in a double-blind fashion, either two 8 mg doses of IV ondansetron or a placebo. The first study drug dose was administered before induction of anesthesia; the second dose was given 8 hours later. Each study drug dose was admixed with normal saline to 20 ml and administered IV over 2 to 5 minutes. Vital signs were monitored immediately before and 1 minute after completion of the study drug infusion.
                For the 24-hour period following operation, 60% of the patients who received ondansetron and 26% of the patients who received the placebo were emesis-free (p < 0.001). Subanalyses based on patients' previous history of general anesthesia indicated that ondansetron was superior to the placebo in preventing emesis regardless of history [66% vs. 33% in patients who had never had general anesthesia or had had no nausea or emesis following previous anesthesia (p = 0.001) and 50% vs. 17% in patients who had nausea or emesis following previous anesthesia (p = 0.005)]. Ondansetron also was superior to the placebo for the prevention of nausea over the 24-hour study period regardless of anesthesia history. Ondansetron was generally well tolerated. The adverse event, vital sign, and clinical laboratory test profiles were similar to those for the placebo. No patient who received ondansetron had untoward changes in central nervous system function, including sedation.
                Prophylactic IV ondansetron appears to be safe and causes a significant reduction in the frequency and severity of postoperative nausea and emesis. We performed a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial to investigate the efficacy and safety of ondansetron in preventing vomiting after tonsillectomy with or without adenoidectomy in children. Sixty children were premedicated with 0.5 mg/kg of oral midazolam and underwent inhaled induction and maintenance of anesthesia with halothane and nitrous oxide. Intravenous morphine 0.075 mg/kg, vecuronium 0.1 mg/kg, and either ondansetron 0.15 mg/kg (maximum = 8 mg), or saline placebo were administered after intravenous catheter placement. All episodes of postoperative vomiting on the day of surgery and the following day were recorded. There were no significant differences between the two groups with regard to age, weight, sex, time to endotracheal intubation, duration of surgery, duration of anesthesia, or number of patients having adenoidectomy. More patients in the ondansetron group received dexamethasone as part of the surgeon's routine protocol (P = 0.03). Twenty-three children (77%) who received ondansetron were emesis-free as opposed to only eight (27%) in the placebo group (P < 0.001). This was especially evident in the number of children who had two or more episodes of vomiting; 17 children (57%) who received placebo had two or more episodes of vomiting as opposed to only two children (7%) who received ondansetron. The incidence of emesis on the day after the surgery did not differ between the two groups. Three children who received ondansetron and one who received placebo complained of abdominal cramping on the night of the surgery. There were no other complaints or complications. Analysis of the 51 children who did not receive dexamethasone revealed similar results.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS) Patients undergoing total joint replacement procedures have a remarkably high incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ramosetron, a serotonin 5-HT(3) receptor antagonist, for the prevention of nausea and vomiting after total hip replacement.
                Prospective, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.
                University-affiliated teaching hospital.
                Eighty patients, aged 35-77 years, 22 male and 58 female, scheduled for total hip replacement.
                Patients received in a randomised, double-blind manner intravenously administered placebo or ramosetron in three different doses (0.15, 0.3 or 0.6mg) at the completion of surgery (n = 20 in each group). A standard general anaesthetic technique and postoperative analgesia were used.
                Emetic episodes were recorded and safety assessments performed over 0 to 24 hours after anaesthesia. The rate of patients experiencing emetic symptoms (nausea, retching, vomiting) over 0 to 24 hours after anaesthesia was 70% with ramosetron 0.15mg (p = 0.5), 25% with ramosetron 0.3mg (p = 0.002) and 20% with ramosetron 0.6mg (p = 0.001), compared with placebo (75%). No clinically important adverse events were observed in any of the groups.
                Prophylactic antiemetic therapy with ramosetron 0.3mg is efficacious against postoperative nausea and vomiting 0 to 24 hours after anaesthesia in patients undergoing total hip replacement. Increasing the dose to 0.6mg provided no further benefit. The effect of ondansetron, a 5-HT3 antagonist, in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting was investigated in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of 84 patients undergoing gynecologic operation and receiving the same general anesthetic. The patients received premedication with either 16 mg oral ondansetron, or a matching placebo. The same medication was given postoperatively 8 h after the first dose. During the first hour after recovery from anesthesia, the frequencies of nausea and vomiting were 52% and 40%, respectively, in patients given placebos. In the ondansetron group nausea and vomiting developed in 17% and 12%, respectively, values significantly different from those with placebos (P less than 0.005). Similar differences were observed throughout the entire 24-h period after recovery, the incidence of nausea and vomiting being 67% and 60%, respectively, in the placebo group and 29% and 26% in the ondansetron treatment group. Ondansetron appears to be a promising antiemetic for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was carried out to investigate the efficacy of 2 mg versus 5 mg tropisetron in the prevention of post-operative nausea and vomiting. Patients between 22 and 64 years old who were undergoing surgery under general anaesthesia and who had been classified according to the American Society of Anesthesiologists criteria with physical status I or II were included in this trial. Sixty female patients were recruited and divided into three groups (n = 20 in each group). Patients in group 1 received saline solution as control, whereas in groups 2 and 3, 2 mg or 5 mg tropisetron, respectively, was administered intravenously as a single dose during the induction of anaesthesia. The number of patients vomiting within the first 2 h following the operation was significantly less in groups 2 and 3 compared with that in group 1 (one of 20 for each of the groups 2 and 3 versus 12 of 20 in group 1). Three patients required rescue anti-emetic medication in each of the groups 2 and 3. In conclusion, 2 mg tropisetron appears to be equally as efficacious as 5 mg in preventing post-operative nausea and vomiting. To compare the efficacy of ondansetron to that of metoclopramide, dehydrobenzperidol and placebo for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) after laparoscopic cholecystectomy in a double-blind random study.
                A total of 100 ASA I, II and III patients undergoing scheduled laparoscopic cholecystectomy were divided into 4 groups according to whether they received one of the following intravenously just prior to anesthetic induction: 1.25 mg dehydrobenzperidol (group D), 10 mg metoclopramide (group M), 4 mg ondansetron (group O) or 2 ml of saline (group P). All received general anesthesia with induction by thiopental, analgesia with fentanyl, muscle relaxation with atracurium and maintenance with oxygen-air and isoflurane. Episodes of nausea and/or vomiting during the first 24 h after surgery were recorded. Treatment was considered effective if no episodes occurred during this period.
                Nine of the 100 patients were excluded from the study. There were no significant differences in demographic variables among the 4 groups. The incidence of PONV was significantly greater in group P than in any of the other groups. There were no significant differences in PONV among groups D, M and O.
                Ondansetron provides safe, effective prophylaxis for PONV after laparoscopic cholecystectomy, but it is not superior to the antiemetic drugs usually used. Its use may be justified in patients in whom dehydrobenzperidol or metoclopramide are contraindicated. The antiemetic effects of granisetron, a selective 5-hydroxy-tryptamine type 3 receptor antagonist, on postoperative nausea and vomiting were studied and compared with placebo and metoclopramide in 60 patients undergoing general anaesthesia for major gynaecological surgery. The patients received a single i.v. dose of either granisetron (3 mg, n = 20) metoclopramide (10 mg, n = 20), or placebo (saline, n = 20) immediately after recovery from anaesthesia. The effects were assessed during the first three and the next 21 hr after recovery from anaesthesia by means of a nausea and vomiting score; 0 = no emetic symptoms, 1 = nausea, 2 = vomiting. The mean scores during 0-3 hr were 0.8, 0.1 and 0.1 after administration of placebo, metoclopramide and granisetron, respectively; the corresponding scores during 3-24 hr were 0.6, 0.5 and 0.1. The scores of the metoclopramide and the granisetron groups were different from the placebo group in the first three hours (P < 0.05). Although there were no differences in the scores during 0-3 hr between the metoclopramide and the granisetron groups, there were differences during 3-24 hr (P < 0.05). It is concluded that granisetron is superior to metoclopramide in the long-term prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting after anaesthesia. Young, healthy outpatients (100) undergoing restorative dentistry and/or oral surgery under enfluranenitrous oxide-oxygen anaesthesia were given 0.014 mg/kg of droperidol or a saline placebo i.v. in a double-blind random fashion 5 min after induction of anaesthesia to prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting. Overall, less patients given droperidol were nauseated (18%) or vomited (7%) in comparison with patients given saline (27% and 11%, respectively). During the first postoperative hour, 4% of patients given droperidol were nauseated and 2% vomited, whereas 16% of patients given saline were nauseated and 6% vomited. Four patients given saline were not discharged from the clinic 1 h after anaesthesia owing to prolonged nausea and vomiting. The time elapsed until the patients were oriented as to time and place after cessation of enflurane and nitrous oxide administration was similar in both groups (mean +/- s.d., 13.5 +/- 4.7 min). Thirty minutes after anaesthesia, the ability to walk on a straight line was significantly (P less than 0.001) worse in patients given droperidol as compared to patients given saline. After 60 min, only one patient given droperidol and four patients who received saline and vomited took side steps or were unable to walk. Psychomotor performance was significantly (P less than 0.05) better in a perceptual speed test both 30 and 60 min after anaesthesia in patients receiving saline as compared to those given droperidol. It is concluded that although droperidol is a less effective antiemetic after outpatient than after inpatient enflurane anaesthesia, small doses of droperidol may be used for outpatients prone to vomiting to prevent delayed discharge from the clinic due to prolonged vomiting. Compared to other procedures, gynaecological laparoscopies are followed rather frequently by postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). Therefore, we investigated the prophylactic antiemetic efficacy of metoclopramide and droperidol under general anaesthesia with isoflurane (part 1). Given the rather unsatisfying results of this monoprophylaxis we examined the effects of a quintuple prophylaxis in this setting (part 2).
                Part 1: Following ethical committee approval and written informed consent 120 patients scheduled for elective gynaecological laparoscopy were allocated prospectively, randomly and observer-blinded to the following groups: group P (placebo): 2 ml NaCl 0.9 %, group D: 2.5 mg droperidol, group M: 10 mg metoclopramide. Part 2: Subsequently 50 patients scheduled for elective gynaecological laparoscopy and bearing a minimum risk of 25 % to experience postoperative vomiting were allocated prospectively and blinded to the observers to a quintuple prophylaxis group: group X: 10 mg metoclopramide, 2.5 mg droperidol, 12.5 mg dolasetron, 62.5 mg dimenhydrinate, 8mg dexamethasone. Part 1 and 2: Anaesthesia was induced with fentanyl, etomidate and succinycholine and maintained with isoflurane/N2O, fentanyl and cisatracurium. The antiemetics were applied intravenously 20 min prior to end of surgery.
                Within the first 24 h postoperatively vomiting occurred more frequently in group P (44 %) compared to group D (21 %, p = 0.046) and group M (33 %, n. s.). Nausea also occurred more frequently in group P (61 %) compared to group D (24 %, p = 0.003) and group M (48 %, n. s.). Intensity of nausea was reduced both in group D and group M compared to group P (p = 0.03). Likewise the requirements for antiemetics as a rescue medication were reduced in group D (p = 0.02) and group M (p = 0.047) compared to group P. In group X no patient suffered from postoperative vomiting, no patient required a rescue antiemetic.
                Whereas droperidol provides a reliable antiemetic effect, the prophylactic effect of metoclopramide is rather uncertain. Therefore, further studies regarding a dose response-relationship for metoclopramide are deemed necessary. Since a monoprophylaxis with droperidol or metoclopramide failed to attain a satisfying PONV-prophylaxis in patients at high risk for PONV, the quintuple antiemetic combination might be an effective and safe solution. We have undertaken a prospective, randomized study to determine the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting during intensive care stay after cardiac surgery, and to study the effect of addition of droperidol to an infusion of morphine used for postoperative analgesia. Data from 398 patients were examined. The use of droperidol reduced complaints of nausea from 92 of 198 (46.5%) to 46 of 200 (23%) and episodes of retching or vomiting from 73 of 198 (36.9%) to 44 of 200 (22%). The number of patients requiring rescue antiemetic medication was also reduced significantly from 100 of 198 (50.5%) of those who did not receive droperidol to 44 of 200 (22%) of those given droperidol. Mean duration of intubation was 4.9 h and was unaffected by the use of droperidol. Droperidol had no effect on mean length of stay in the recovery unit.
Either nausea or vomiting is reported to affect, at most, 80 out of 100 people after surgery. If all 100 of these people are given one of the listed drugs, about 28 would benefit and 72 would not. Nausea and vomiting are usually less common and, therefore, drugs are less useful. For 100 people, of whom 30 would vomit or feel sick after surgery if given placebo, 10 people would benefit from a drug and 90 would not. Between one to five patients out of every 100 people may experience a mild side effect, such as sedation or headache, when given an antiemetic drug. Collaborative research should focus on determining whether antiemetic drugs cause more severe, probably rare, side effects. Further comparison of the antiemetic effect of one drug versus another is not a research priority.