Antiemetic Efficacy of Palonosetron Compared with the Combination of Ondansetron and Dexamethasone for Prevention of Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Gynaecological Surgery.

Q2 Medicine Romanian journal of anaesthesia and intensive care Pub Date : 2022-09-25 eCollection Date: 2021-07-01 DOI:10.2478/rjaic-2021-0003
Samarjit Dey, Sairem Mangolnganbi Chanu, Priyanka Dev, Manas Borthakur, Habib Md Reazaul Karim, Md Yunus
{"title":"Antiemetic Efficacy of Palonosetron Compared with the Combination of Ondansetron and Dexamethasone for Prevention of Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Gynaecological Surgery.","authors":"Samarjit Dey, Sairem Mangolnganbi Chanu, Priyanka Dev, Manas Borthakur, Habib Md Reazaul Karim, Md Yunus","doi":"10.2478/rjaic-2021-0003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and aims: </strong>For the prevention of PONV, we evaluated the efficacy of palonosetron compared with ondansetron along with dexamethasone in patients undergoing laparoscopic gynaecological surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 84 adults, posted for elective laparoscopic surgeries under general anaesthesia were included in the study. The patients were randomly allocated to two groups (n = 42 each). Immediately after induction, patients in the first group (group I) received 4 mg ondansetron with 8 mg dexamethasone, and patients in the second group (group II) received 0.075 mg palonosetron. Any incidences of nausea and/or vomiting, the requirement of rescue antiemetic, and side effects were recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In group I, 66.67% of the patients had an Apfel score of 2, and 33.33% of the patients had a score of 3. In group II, 85.71% of patients had an Apfel score of 2, and 14.29% of the patients had a score of 3. At 1, 4, and 8 hours, the incidence of PONV was comparable in both groups. At 24 hours there was a significant difference in the incidence of PONV in the group treated with ondansetron with dexamethasone combination (4/42) when compared to the palonosetron group (0/42). The overall incidence of PONV was significantly higher in group I (23.81%: ondansetron and dexamethasone combination) than in group II (7.14%: palonosetron). The need for rescue medication in group I was significantly high. Conclusion: Palonosetron was more efficacious compared to the combination of ondansetron and dexamethasone for preventing PONV for laparoscopic gynaecological surgery.</p>","PeriodicalId":21279,"journal":{"name":"Romanian journal of anaesthesia and intensive care","volume":"28 1","pages":"19-24"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/48/ee/rjaic-28-019.PMC9949011.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Romanian journal of anaesthesia and intensive care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/rjaic-2021-0003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/7/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and aims: For the prevention of PONV, we evaluated the efficacy of palonosetron compared with ondansetron along with dexamethasone in patients undergoing laparoscopic gynaecological surgery.

Methods: A total of 84 adults, posted for elective laparoscopic surgeries under general anaesthesia were included in the study. The patients were randomly allocated to two groups (n = 42 each). Immediately after induction, patients in the first group (group I) received 4 mg ondansetron with 8 mg dexamethasone, and patients in the second group (group II) received 0.075 mg palonosetron. Any incidences of nausea and/or vomiting, the requirement of rescue antiemetic, and side effects were recorded.

Results: In group I, 66.67% of the patients had an Apfel score of 2, and 33.33% of the patients had a score of 3. In group II, 85.71% of patients had an Apfel score of 2, and 14.29% of the patients had a score of 3. At 1, 4, and 8 hours, the incidence of PONV was comparable in both groups. At 24 hours there was a significant difference in the incidence of PONV in the group treated with ondansetron with dexamethasone combination (4/42) when compared to the palonosetron group (0/42). The overall incidence of PONV was significantly higher in group I (23.81%: ondansetron and dexamethasone combination) than in group II (7.14%: palonosetron). The need for rescue medication in group I was significantly high. Conclusion: Palonosetron was more efficacious compared to the combination of ondansetron and dexamethasone for preventing PONV for laparoscopic gynaecological surgery.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
帕洛诺司琼与昂丹司琼和地塞米松复方制剂相比在预防腹腔镜妇科手术患者术后恶心呕吐方面的止吐效果
背景与目的为了预防 PONV,我们评估了帕洛诺司琼与昂丹司琼以及地塞米松对接受腹腔镜妇科手术患者的疗效比较:研究共纳入 84 名在全身麻醉下接受择期腹腔镜手术的成人。患者被随机分配到两组(每组 42 人)。诱导后,第一组(I 组)患者立即服用 4 毫克昂丹司琼和 8 毫克地塞米松,第二组(II 组)患者服用 0.075 毫克帕洛诺司琼。任何恶心和/或呕吐的发生率、止吐药的需求量和副作用均被记录在案:在 I 组中,66.67% 的患者 Apfel 评分为 2 分,33.33% 的患者评分为 3 分;在 II 组中,85.71% 的患者 Apfel 评分为 2 分,14.29% 的患者评分为 3 分。在 1、4 和 8 小时内,两组的 PONV 发生率相当。24 小时后,与帕洛诺司琼组(0/42)相比,使用昂丹司琼与地塞米松复方制剂组(4/42)的 PONV 发生率有显著差异。PONV的总发生率在I组(23.81%:昂丹司琼和地塞米松复方制剂)明显高于II组(7.14%:帕洛诺司琼)。第一组的抢救用药需求明显较高。结论在预防腹腔镜妇科手术 PONV 方面,帕洛诺司琼比昂丹司琼和地塞米松的联合用药更有效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Romanian Journal of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care is the official journal of the Romanian Society of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care and has been published continuously since 1994. It is intended mainly for anaesthesia and intensive care providers, but it is also aimed at specialists in emergency medical care and in pain research and management. The Journal is indexed in Scopus, Embase, PubMed Central as well as the databases of the Romanian Ministry of Education and Research (CNCSIS) B+ category. The Journal publishes two issues per year, the first one in April and the second one in October, and contains original articles, reviews, case reports, letters to the editor, book reviews and commentaries. The Journal is distributed free of charge to the members of the Romanian Society of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care.
期刊最新文献
The Impact of Anaesthesia on Hyperalgesia, Testosterone, Cortisol, C-Reactive Protein, and Glucose Levels After Spine Surgery: Prospective Randomised Controlled Trial A Randomised Controlled Study Comparing Pulse Pressure Variation (PPV) and Pleth Variability Index (PVI) for Goal-Directed Fluid Therapy Intraoperatively in Patients Undergoing Intracranial (Supratentorial ICSOLs) Surgeries. Rectus Sheath Block in Abdominal Surgery: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis. Prevention of Pneumonia due to Ventilator in Critical Patients with U Shape Oral Hygiene Model: A Systematic Review. Pyroglutamic Acidosis - An Underrecognised Entity Associated with Acetaminophen Use.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1