Anesthesia and analgesia
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Mar 1998
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Clinical TrialTropisetron for treating established postoperative nausea and vomiting: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.
Tropisetron can prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) at doses smaller than those used to control chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. In this placebo-controlled study, the efficacy and tolerability of three different doses of tropisetron were compared for the treatment of established PONV after surgical procedures in general anesthesia. Of 1513 patients who satisfied inclusion criteria, 314 experiencing PONV during the first 2 h after recovery from anesthesia were treated with one of three different doses of tropisetron (0.5, 2, or 5 mg) or placebo, administered i.v. as a single dose. Patients were then observed during 24 h for efficacy and tolerability. All three doses of tropisetron were significantly better than placebo in controlling emetic episodes and in reducing the need for rescue treatment. There were no significant differences among the three doses. However, in the subgroup of patients who had previous PONV, and in those randomized for nausea alone, the 2-mg and 5-mg doses controlled emetic episodes better than the 0.5-mg dose. All studied doses of tropisetron were well tolerated and did not affect vital signs. We conclude that a single i.v. administration of tropiestron significantly reduces the recurrence of emetic episodes in patients with established PONV after elective surgery with general anesthesia. Its optimal dose seems to be 2 mg. ⋯ Three hundred-fourteen patients suffering from postoperative nausea and vomiting received different i.v. doses of a new antiemetic drug, tropisetron, to determine the lowest effective dose. We found that a single i.v. administration of tropisetron significantly reduced postoperative nausea and vomiting after elective surgery with general anesthesia.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Mar 1998
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialEconomic considerations of the use of new anesthetics: a comparison of propofol, sevoflurane, desflurane, and isoflurane.
Cost control in anesthesia is no longer an option; it is a necessity. New anesthetics have entered the market, but economic differences in comparison to standard anesthetic regimens are not exactly known. Eighty patients undergoing either subtotal thyroidectomy or laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomly divided into four groups, with 20 patients in each group. Group 1 received propofol 1%/sufentanil, Group 2 received desflurane/sufentanil, Group 3 received sevoflurane/sufentanil, and Group 4 received isoflurane/sufentanil (standard anesthesia) for anesthesia. A fresh gas flow of 1.5-2 L/min and 60% N2O in oxygen was used for maintenance of anesthesia, and atracurium was given for muscle relaxation. Concentrations of volatile anesthetics, propofol, and sufentanil were varied according to the patient's perceived need. Isoflurane, desflurane, and sevoflurane consumption was measured by weighing the vaporizers with a precision weighing machine. Biometric data, time of surgery, and time of anesthesia were similar in the four groups. Times for extubation and stay in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) were significantly longer in the isoflurane group. Use of sufentanil and atracurium did not differ among the groups. Propofol patients required fewer additional drugs in the PACU (e.g., antiemetics), and thus showed the lowest additional costs in the PACU. Total (intra- and postoperative) costs were significantly higher in the propofol group ($30.73 per patient; $0.24 per minute of anesthesia). The costs among the inhalational groups did not differ significantly (approximately $0.15 per minute of anesthesia). We conclude that in today's climate of cost savings, a comprehensive pharmacoeconomic approach is needed. Although propofol-based anesthesia was associated with the highest cost, it is doubtful whether the choice of anesthetic regimen will lower the costs of an anesthesia department. ⋯ Cost analysis of anesthetic techniques is necessary in today's economic climate. Consumption of the new inhaled drugs sevoflurane and desflurane was measured in comparison to a standard anesthetic regimen using isoflurane and an IV technique using propofol. Propofol-based anesthesia was associated with the highest costs, whereas the costs of the new inhaled anesthetics sevoflurane and desflurane did not differ from those of a standard, isoflurane-based anesthesia regimen.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Mar 1998
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialPrevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting with a combination of granisetron and droperidol.
In this randomized, double-blind study, we compared the efficacy and safety of granisetron plus droperidol with each antiemetic alone for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in 150 female patients scheduled for elective major gynecological surgery. Patients were randomly assigned to receive i.v. either granisetron 2.5 mg (Group G), droperidol 1.25 mg (Group D), or granisetron 2.5 mg plus droperidol 1.25 mg (Group GD) immediately before the induction of anesthesia (n = 50 in each group). A standard anesthetic technique and postoperative analgesia were used. Complete response, defined as no PONV and no administration of rescue antiemetic medication during the first 24 h after anesthesia, was 84% in Group G, 54% in Group D, and 96% in Group GD (P = 0.046 versus Group G, P = 0.001 versus Group D). No clinically important adverse effects were observed in any group. In conclusion, the combination of granisetron and droperidol is more effective than each antiemetic alone for complete response in patients undergoing general anesthesia for major gynecological surgery. ⋯ We compared the efficacy of granisetron plus droperidol with each antiemetic alone for the prevention of nausea and vomiting after gynecological surgery. The granisetron/droperidol combination was the most effective against these emetic symptoms.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Mar 1998
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialVomiting after adenotonsillectomy in children: a comparison of ondansetron, dimenhydrinate, and placebo.
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.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Mar 1998
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialFactors that predict the use of positive inotropic drug support after cardiac valve surgery.
Left ventricular dysfunction is common after cardiac surgery and is often treated with positive inotropic drugs (PIDs). We hypothesized that the use of PIDs after cardiac valve surgery would have significant associations with the valvular pathophysiology and surgical procedure, and unlike the case for patients undergoing coronary artery surgery, would be unrelated to duration of cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) or of aortic clamping. One hundred forty-nine consenting patients undergoing cardiac valve surgery were studied. Patients with hepatic or renal failure, or New York Heart Association class IV cardiac symptoms, were excluded. Patients were considered to have received PIDs if they received an infusion of amrinone, dobutamine, epinephrine, or dopamine (> or = 5 microg x kg[-1] x min[-1]). PIDs were received by 78 patients (52%). In a univariate model, older age, history of congestive heart failure, decreasing left ventricular ejection fraction, longer durations of CPB, and concurrent coronary artery surgery significantly increased the likelihood of PID support. There was also significant variation by anesthesiologist in the administration of PIDs. The specific diseased valve and valvular stenosis or insufficiency did not influence the likelihood of receiving PID support. In a multivariable model, age, history of congestive heart failure, decreasing left ventricular ejection fraction, and anesthesiologist were significantly associated with the likelihood of PID support, but duration of CPB and concurrent coronary artery surgery were not. In conclusion, patient age and ventricular function, as well as physician preferences, predicted the need for inotropic drug support; however, neither the specific valvular lesion, nor duration of CPB were strongly predictive in a multivariable model. ⋯ We evaluated factors related to use of positive inotropic drugs after cardiac valve surgery. The likelihood of a patient receiving these drugs increases with advancing age and with more severe preoperative left ventricular dysfunction, but was not influenced by the specific diseased valve or the duration of cardiopulmonary bypass.