Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), postoperative vomiting (POV), post-discharge nausea and vomiting (PDNV), and opioid-induced nausea and vomiting (OINV) continue to be causes of pediatric ...morbidity, delay in discharge, and unplanned hospital admission. Research on the pathophysiology, risk assessment, and therapy for PDNV, OINV and pain therapy options in children has received increased attention. Multimodal pain management with the use of perioperative regional and opioid-sparing analgesia has helped decrease nausea and vomiting. Two common emetogenic surgical procedures in children are adenotonsillectomy and strabismus repair. Although PONV risk factors differ between adults and children, the approach to decrease baseline risk is similar. As PONV and POV are frequent in children, antiemetic prophylaxis should be considered for those at risk. A multimodal approach for antiemetic and pain therapy involves preoperative risk evaluation and stratification, antiemetic prophylaxis, and pain management with opioid-sparing medications and regional anesthesia. Useful antiemetics include dexamethasone and serotonin 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 (5-HT3) receptor antagonists such as ondansetron. Multimodal combination prophylactic therapy using two or three antiemetics from different drug classes and propofol total intravenous anesthesia should be considered for children at high PONV risk. "Enhanced recovery after surgery" protocols include a multimodal approach with preoperative preparation, adequate intravenous fluid hydration, opioid-sparing analgesia, and prophylactic antiemetics. PONV guidelines and management algorithms help provide effective postoperative care for pediatric patients.
New antiemetic drug developments, formulations, guidelines, risk evaluation, and controversies have occurred in the area of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). These developments have helped ...improve our understanding of the prevention and treatment of PONV in the postanesthesia care unit and after discharge home or to the hospital ward. Antiemetic drug research has resulted in the introduction of the second-generation 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 (5-HT3) receptor antagonist palonosetron and the neurokinin-1 (NK-1) receptor antagonist aprepitant, as well as new data on existing antiemetics. The next frontier and need for further nausea and vomiting research and therapy is the area of postdischarge nausea and vomiting after the patient is discharged home from phase II of the ambulatory stepdown unit or to the hospital ward. Antiemetic drug selection depends on efficacy, cost, safety, and ease of dosing. Safety concerns have arisen regarding the side effects of antiemetics, specifically their effect on the ECG with prolongation of the QTc interval by the butyrophenones and the first-generation 5-HT3 receptor antagonist class of antiemetics. The impact of pharmocogenetics on antiemetic drug metabolism and their resulting efficacy has been correlated with genetic makeup affecting drug response. A discussion of ethics in PONV research has been initiated by the meta-analysis of PONV studies. To help guide antiemetic selection and PONV therapy for clinical practitioners, the Society of Ambulatory Anesthesia (SAMBA) PONV consensus guidelines have been introduced and updated.
This consensus statement presents a comprehensive and evidence-based set of guidelines for the care of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in both adult and pediatric populations. The guidelines ...are established by an international panel of experts under the auspices of the American Society of Enhanced Recovery and Society for Ambulatory Anesthesia based on a comprehensive search and review of literature up to September 2019. The guidelines provide recommendation on identifying high-risk patients, managing baseline PONV risks, choices for prophylaxis, and rescue treatment of PONV as well as recommendations for the institutional implementation of a PONV protocol. In addition, the current guidelines focus on the evidence for newer drugs (eg, second-generation 5-hydroxytryptamine 3 5-HT3 receptor antagonists, neurokinin 1 (NK1) receptor antagonists, and dopamine antagonists), discussion regarding the use of general multimodal PONV prophylaxis, and PONV management as part of enhanced recovery pathways. This set of guidelines have been endorsed by 23 professional societies and organizations from different disciplines (Appendix 1).Guidelines currently available include the 3 iterations of the consensus guideline we previously published, which was last updated 6 years ago; a guideline published by American Society of Health System Pharmacists in 1999; a brief discussion on PONV management as part of a comprehensive postoperative care guidelines; focused guidelines published by the Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologists of Canada, the Association of Paediatric Anaesthetists of Great Britain & Ireland and the Association of Perianesthesia Nursing; and several guidelines published in other languages.The current guideline was developed to provide perioperative practitioners with a comprehensive and up-to-date, evidence-based guidance on the risk stratification, prevention, and treatment of PONV in both adults and children. The guideline also provides guidance on the management of PONV within enhanced recovery pathways.The previous consensus guideline was published 6 years ago with a literature search updated to October 2011. Several guidelines, which have been published since, are either limited to a specific populations or do not address all aspects of PONV management. The current guideline was developed based on a systematic review of the literature published up through September 2019. This includes recent studies of newer pharmacological agents such as the second-generation 5-hydroxytryptamine 3 (5-HT3) receptor antagonists, a dopamine antagonist, neurokinin 1 (NK1) receptor antagonists as well as several novel combination therapies. In addition, it also contains an evidence-based discussion on the management of PONV in enhanced recovery pathways. We have also discussed the implementation of a general multimodal PONV prophylaxis in all at-risk surgical patients based on the consensus of the expert panel.
The present guidelines were compiled by a multidisciplinary international panel of individuals with interest and expertise in postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) under the auspices of The ...Society of Ambulatory Anesthesia. The panel critically evaluated the current medical literature on PONV to provide an evidence-based reference tool for the management of adults and children who are undergoing surgery and are at increased risk for PONV. In brief, these guidelines identify risk factors for PONV in adults and children; recommend approaches for reducing baseline risks for PONV; identify the most effective antiemetic monotherapy and combination therapy regimens for PONV prophylaxis; recommend approaches for treatment of PONV when it occurs; and provide an algorithm for the management of individuals at increased risk for PONV.
We designed this multicenter, randomized, double-blind study to assess the efficacy and safety of three doses of palonosetron, compared with placebo, on the incidence and severity of postoperative ...nausea and vomiting (PONV) in inpatients for 72 h after surgery.
Female patients undergoing either elective gynecological or breast surgery were stratified according to two additional PONV risk factors: nonsmoking status and history of PONV and/or motion sickness. Five hundred forty-four patients with one or both of these risk factors were randomized to receive one of the three doses of IV palonosetron (0.025 mg, 0.050 mg, 0.075 mg) or placebo immediately before induction of anesthesia. The primary efficacy end-point was complete response (CR: no emesis and no use of rescue medications) evaluated at the 0-24 and 24-72 h time intervals after surgery.
CR rates for placebo and palonosetron 0.075 mg were 36% and 56% for 0-24 h (P = 0.001), 52% and 70% for 24-72 h (P = 0.002) and 36% and 52% (P = 0.010) for the 0-72 h postoperative interval. Palonosetron 0.075 mg was associated with less intense nausea (e.g., toward "mild" or "none") versus placebo during the 0-24 h (P < 0.001) time interval and significantly delayed median time to emesis (P = 0.002) and treatment failure (P = 0.004). Although CR rates for both the 0.025 mg and 0.050 mg palonosetron doses were not statistically superior to placebo for the 0-24 h or 24-72 h periods, both lower doses reduced nausea severity during the 0-24 h period (P = 0.040 and P = 0.004).
A single 0.075-mg IV dose of palonosetron effectively reduced the severity of nausea and delayed the time to emesis and treatment failure in the inpatient surgical setting; lower doses were not as effective.
The management of elderly patients can be challenging for anesthesiologists for many reasons, including altered pharmacokinetics and dynamics. This study compared the efficacy, safety, and ...pharmacokinetics of sugammadex for moderate rocuronium-induced neuromuscular blockade reversal in adult (aged 18-64 yr) versus elderly adult (aged 65 yr or older) patients.
This phase 3a, multicenter, parallel-group, comparative, open-label study enrolled 162 patients aged 18 yr and older, American Society of Anesthesiologists class 1-3, scheduled for surgery with general anesthesia and requiring neuromuscular blockade. After anesthesia induction, patients received rocuronium, 0.6 mg/kg, before tracheal intubation, with maintenance doses of 0.15 mg/kg as required. At the end of surgery, patients received sugammadex, 2.0 mg/kg, at reappearance of the second twitch of the train-of-four (TOF) for reversal. The primary efficacy variable was time from sugammadex administration to recovery of the TOF ratio to 0.9 or greater. Pharmacokinetics and safety were also evaluated.
Overall, 150 patients were treated and had at least one postbaseline efficacy assessment; 48 were aged 18-64 yr (adult), 62 were aged 65-74 yr (elderly), and 40 were aged 75 yr or older (old-elderly). The geometric mean time (95% confidence interval) from sugammadex administration to recovery of the TOF ratio to 0.9 increased with age, from 2.3 (2.0-2.6) min (adults) to 2.9 (2.7-3.2) min (elderly/old-elderly groups combined). Recovery of the TOF ratio to 0.9 was estimated to be 0.7 min faster in adults compared with patients aged 65 yr or older (P = 0.022). Sugammadex was well tolerated by all patients.
Sugammadex facilitates rapid reversal from moderate rocuronium-induced neuromuscular blockade in adults of all ages.
About one in four patients suffers from postoperative nausea and vomiting. Fortunately, risk scores have been developed to better manage this outcome in hospitalized patients, but there is currently ...no risk score for postdischarge nausea and vomiting (PDNV) in ambulatory surgical patients.
We conducted a prospective multicenter study of 2,170 adults undergoing general anesthesia at ambulatory surgery centers in the United States from 2007 to 2008. PDNV was assessed from discharge until the end of the second postoperative day. Logistic regression analysis was applied to a development dataset and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was calculated in a validation dataset.
The overall incidence of PDNV was 37%. Logistic regression analysis of the development dataset (n=1,913) identified five independent predictors (odds ratio; 95% CI): female gender (1.54; 1.22 to 1.94), age less than 50 yr (2.17; 1.75 to 2.69), history of nausea and/or vomiting after previous anesthesia (1.50; 1.19 to 1.88), opioid administration in the postanesthesia care unit (1.93; 1.53 to 2.43), and nausea in the postanesthesia care unit (3.14; 2.44-4.04). In the validation dataset (n=257), zero, one, two, three, four, and five of these factors were associated with a PDNV incidence of 7%, 20%, 28%, 53%, 60%, and 89%, respectively, and an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.72 (0.69 to 0.73).
PDNV affects a substantial number of patients after ambulatory surgery. We developed and validated a simplified risk score to identify patients who would benefit from long-acting prophylactic antiemetics at discharge from the ambulatory care center.
Sedation practices for pediatric burn patients during dressing changes vary between institutions and providers. To better understand the current trends in pediatric sedation practice, a survey was ...conducted among the members of the American Burn Association (ABA). Questions asked about nonoperating room sedation and analgesia practices for burn patients (ages 0-17) having dressing changes in the intensive care unit, inpatient unit, and outpatient clinics. ABA members providing sedation for pediatric patients undergoing burn dressing changes are diverse. Physician respondents included surgeons, critical care intensivists, and anesthesiologists. Others included physician assistants, nurse anesthetists, nurse practitioners, and sedation credentialed nurses. Opioids for pain control were prescribed by 100% of respondents, but use of adjuvant nonopioid analgesics was utilized <50% of the time. Benzodiazepines and ketamine were prescribed more than twice as often as other sedatives. Many noted that up to 50% of children did not have adequately controlled anxiety and pain with initial sedation plans, and escalation of care was needed to complete dressing changes. Self-reported adverse events were infrequent. In outpatient settings, benzodiazepines, ketamine, oral opioids, and topical lidocaine were used frequently, as were nonpharmacologic methods of distraction and comfort. Sedation in pediatric burn patients is challenging. Responses highlighted areas for improvement regarding pain control during dressing changes and increasing use of multimodal analgesia. Commonly used medications including opioids, benzodiazepine, and ketamine are well established in the treatment of burn patients, as are nonpharmacologic methods. A collaborative effort among institutions is needed to formulate practice guidelines for sedation during burn dressing changes.
Postoperative nausea and vomiting causes distress for patients and can prolong care requirements. Consensus guidelines recommend use of multiple antiemetics from different mechanistic classes as ...prophylaxis in patients at high risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting. The prophylactic efficacy of the dopamine D2/D3 antagonist amisulpride in combination with other antiemetics was investigated.
This double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, international, multicenter trial was conducted in 1,147 adult surgical patients having three or four postoperative nausea and vomiting risk factors. Patients were randomized to receive either intravenous amisulpride (5 mg) or matching placebo at induction of general anesthesia, in addition to one standard, nondopaminergic antiemetic, most commonly ondansetron or dexamethasone. Vomiting/retching, nausea, and use of rescue medication were recorded for 24 h after wound closure. The primary endpoint was complete response, defined as no emesis or rescue medication use in the 24-h postoperative period.
Complete response occurred in 330 of 572 (57.7%) of the amisulpride group and 268 of 575 (46.6%) of the control group (difference 11.1 percentage points; 95% CI, 5.3 to 16.8; P < 0.001). The incidences of emesis (13.8% vs. 20.0%, P = 0.003), any nausea (50.0% vs. 58.3%, P = 0.002), significant nausea (37.1% vs. 47.7%, P < 0.001), and rescue medication use (40.9% vs. 49.4%, P = 0.002) were significantly lower in the amisulpride group. Adverse events and laboratory and electrocardiogram abnormalities occurred no more frequently with amisulpride than with placebo.
Intravenous amisulpride was safe and effective as prophylaxis of postoperative nausea and vomiting when given in combination with an antiemetic from another class to adult patients at high risk for suffering postoperative nausea and vomiting undergoing elective surgery under inhalational general anesthesia.
An online visual overview is available for this article at http://links.lww.com/ALN/B727.
PDF
