Hyoscine butyl-bromide versus ondansetron for nausea and vomiting during caesarean delivery under spinal anaesthesia. A randomized clinical trial

IF 0.6 Q3 ANESTHESIOLOGY Egyptian Journal of Anaesthesia Pub Date : 2023-08-30 DOI:10.1080/11101849.2023.2253074
M. S. Abbas, Asmaa Shabaan Ahmed, Nawal Abd El-Aziz Gad El-Rab, Ahmed MA Sobh, A. Aboulfotouh
{"title":"Hyoscine butyl-bromide versus ondansetron for nausea and vomiting during caesarean delivery under spinal anaesthesia. A randomized clinical trial","authors":"M. S. Abbas, Asmaa Shabaan Ahmed, Nawal Abd El-Aziz Gad El-Rab, Ahmed MA Sobh, A. Aboulfotouh","doi":"10.1080/11101849.2023.2253074","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Background The unopposed vagal activity with sympathetic block and maternal bradycardia that is likely to occur with phenylephrine infusion might be some causes of intraoperative nausea and vomiting (IONV) during spinal anaesthesia. We aimed at comparing hyoscine butyl-bromide (HBB) and ondansetron in reduction of intraoperative bradycardia and thus IONV in women undergoing caesarean delivery (CD). Methods In a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, women undergoing elective CD were randomly assigned to administer either IV HBB 20 mg, ondansetron 8 mg, or the same volume of 0.9% saline right before spinal anaesthesia. The primary endpoint was the incidence of IONV. Secondary endpoints included intraoperative maternal bradycardia and hypotension and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). Results 55 subjects in each group received the assigned intervention. During the intraoperative period, HBB decreased only the incidence of emesis when compared to the control group (P = 0.046) while ondansetron statistically decreased the incidence of IONV when compared to the control group (P = 0.034). HBB statistically decreased the incidence of intraoperative maternal bradycardia when compared to the controls (1.8% vs 14.5%; OR = 0.1, 95% CI = [0.01, 0.90]; P < 0.039). Compared to the control group, ondansetron was superior to HBB in reducing PONV (P = 0.001 & 0.57), respectively. Conclusions In women scheduled for CD with spinal anaesthesia, prophylactic HBB was as effective as ondansetron in reducing intraoperative emesis, with the added benefit of the less incidence of intraoperative bradycardia than ondansetron. Meanwhile, Ondansetron reduced the incidence of PONV significantly.","PeriodicalId":11437,"journal":{"name":"Egyptian Journal of Anaesthesia","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Egyptian Journal of Anaesthesia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/11101849.2023.2253074","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT Background The unopposed vagal activity with sympathetic block and maternal bradycardia that is likely to occur with phenylephrine infusion might be some causes of intraoperative nausea and vomiting (IONV) during spinal anaesthesia. We aimed at comparing hyoscine butyl-bromide (HBB) and ondansetron in reduction of intraoperative bradycardia and thus IONV in women undergoing caesarean delivery (CD). Methods In a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, women undergoing elective CD were randomly assigned to administer either IV HBB 20 mg, ondansetron 8 mg, or the same volume of 0.9% saline right before spinal anaesthesia. The primary endpoint was the incidence of IONV. Secondary endpoints included intraoperative maternal bradycardia and hypotension and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). Results 55 subjects in each group received the assigned intervention. During the intraoperative period, HBB decreased only the incidence of emesis when compared to the control group (P = 0.046) while ondansetron statistically decreased the incidence of IONV when compared to the control group (P = 0.034). HBB statistically decreased the incidence of intraoperative maternal bradycardia when compared to the controls (1.8% vs 14.5%; OR = 0.1, 95% CI = [0.01, 0.90]; P < 0.039). Compared to the control group, ondansetron was superior to HBB in reducing PONV (P = 0.001 & 0.57), respectively. Conclusions In women scheduled for CD with spinal anaesthesia, prophylactic HBB was as effective as ondansetron in reducing intraoperative emesis, with the added benefit of the less incidence of intraoperative bradycardia than ondansetron. Meanwhile, Ondansetron reduced the incidence of PONV significantly.
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
丁溴海莨菪碱与昂丹司琼对脊柱麻醉下剖宫产恶心呕吐的影响。一项随机临床试验
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
Egyptian Journal of Anaesthesia
Egyptian Journal of Anaesthesia Medicine-Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
78
期刊最新文献
Intrathecal levo-bupivacaine versus hyperbaric bupivacaine for inguinal hernia repairs in ex-preterm infants: A double blinded randomized prospective study Comparison of two different methods as reliable predictors of successful caudal block in children Effect of sevoflurane versus propofol on early cognitive functions in elderly patients after lumbar disc surgery Muscle wasting assessed by ultrasound versus scoring systems as early predictor of outcomes of intensive care unit stay in critically ill patients Posterior quadratus lumborum versus caudal epidural block for perioperative analgesia in pediatric patients undergoing upper abdominal surgeries: Arandomized, double-blind trial
×
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