For Publishers
DiscoveryMetadataPeer reviewHostingPublishing
For Researchers
JoinPublishReviewCollect
Register
Blog
About
Search
Advanced search
My ScienceOpen
Search
For Publishers
For Researchers
Blog
About
25
views
25
references
 Top references
cited by
24
    
0 reviews
 Review
0
comments
 Comment
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      364
      similar
       All similar
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Comparison of dexmedetomidine and dexamethasone for prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting after laparoscopic cholecystectomy

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) are common following laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). Dexamethasone has been reported to reduce PONV. However, there is insufficient evidence regarding the effect of dexmedetomidine in decreasing PONV. This study was designed to compare the effects of a single dose of dexmedetomidine to dexamethasone for reducing PONV after LC.

          Methods

          Eighty-six adult patients scheduled for LC were randomized to receive either single dose 1 µg/kg of dexmedetomidine (Dexmed group, N = 43) or 8 mg dexamethasone (Dexa group, N = 43) before skin incision. During the first 24 h postoperatively, the incidence and severity of PONV were assessed. Pain and sedation scores were assessed on arrival in the recovery room and early postoperatively. Analgesic and antiemetic consumption during the 24 h after surgery were calculated. Intra-operative and postoperative hemodynamics were recorded.

          Results

          Twenty-one percent of the patients in the Dexmed group developed PONV compared to 28% in the Dexa group (P = 0.6). Severity of PONV was similar between the two groups (P = 0.07). Early postoperatively, pain severity was significantly lower in the Dexmed group, but sedation scores were significantly higher. The first analgesic request was significantly delayed in the Dexmed group (P = 0.02). The total amounts of intraoperative fentanyl and postoperative tramadol administered were significantly lower in the Dexmed group. No difference in ondansetron was noted between the two groups. Mean arterial pressure and heart rate were significantly lower in the Dexmed group after administration of dexmedetomidine. No major side effects were reported.

          Conclusions

          Dexmedetomidine reduces the incidence and severity of PONV, similar to dexamethasone. It is superior to dexamethasone in reducing postoperative pain and total analgesic consumption during the first 24 h after LC.

          Related collections

          Most cited references25

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          A simplified risk score for predicting postoperative nausea and vomiting: conclusions from cross-validations between two centers.

          C. C. Apfel, E Läärä, M Koivuranta … (1999)
          Recently, two centers have independently developed a risk score for predicting postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). This study investigated (1) whether risk scores are valid across centers and (2) whether risk scores based on logistic regression coefficients can be simplified without loss of discriminating power. Adult patients from two centers (Oulu, Finland: n = 520, and Wuerzburg, Germany: n = 2202) received inhalational anesthesia (without antiemetic prophylaxis) for various types of surgery. PONV was defined as nausea or vomiting within 24 h of surgery. Risk scores to estimate the probability of PONV were obtained by fitting logistic regression models. Simplified risk scores were constructed based on the number of risk factors that were found significant in the logistic regression analyses. Original and simplified scores were cross-validated. A combined data set was created to estimate a potential center effect and to construct a final risk score. The discriminating power of each score was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curves. Risk scores derived from one center were able to predict PONV from the other center (area under the curve = 0.65-0.75). Simplification did not essentially weaken the discriminating power (area under the curve = 0.63-0.73). No center effect could be detected in a combined data set (odds ratio = 1.06, 95% confidence interval = 0.71-1.59). The final score consisted of four predictors: female gender, history of motion sickness (MS) or PONV, nonsmoking, and the use of postoperative opioids. If none, one, two, three, or four of these risk factors were present, the incidences of PONV were 10%, 21%, 39%, 61% and 79%. The risk scores derived from one center proved valid in the other and could be simplified without significant loss of discriminating power. Therefore, it appears that this risk score has broad applicability in predicting PONV in adult patients undergoing inhalational anesthesia for various types of surgery. For patients with at least two out of these four identified predictors a prophylactic antiemetic strategy should be considered.
          Article 0 comments Cited 336 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Controlled sedation with alphaxalone-alphadolone.

            M A Ramsay, T M Savege, B. R. Simpson … (1974)
            Alphaxalone-alphadolone (Althesin), diluted and administered as a controlled infusion, was used as a sedative for 30 patients in an intensive therapy unit. This technique allowed rapid and accurate control of the level of sedation. It had three particularly useful applications: it provided "light sleep," allowed rapid variation in the level of sedation, and enabled repeated assessment of the central nervous system.Sedation was satisfactory for 86% of the total time, and no serious complications were attributed to the use of the drug. Furthermore, though alphaxalone-alphadolone was given for periods up to 20 days there was no evidence of tachyphylaxis or delay in recovery time.
            Article 0 comments Cited 329 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              A factorial trial of six interventions for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting.

              Christian C. Apfel, Kari Korttila, Mona Abdalla … (2004)
              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
              Article 0 comments Cited 270 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
                Bookmark
                All references

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal ID (nlm-ta): Korean J Anesthesiol
                Journal ID (iso-abbrev): Korean J Anesthesiol
                Journal ID (publisher-id): KJAE
                Title: Korean Journal of Anesthesiology
                Publisher: The Korean Society of Anesthesiologists
                ISSN (Print): 2005-6419
                ISSN (Electronic): 2005-7563
                Publication date (Print): June 2015
                Publication date (Electronic): 28 May 2015
                Volume: 68
                Issue: 3
                Pages: 254-260
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Anesthesia, Faculty of Medicine, Assiut University, Egypt.
                [2 ]Department of Community Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Western Kordofan, Sudan.
                Author notes
                Corresponding author: Mohamed H. Bakri, M.D., Ph.D. Department of Anesthesia, Faculty of Medicine, Assiut University, Assiut 71515, Egypt. Tel: 05030664463, Fax: 0135755150, mhbakri@ 123456gmail.com
                Article
                DOI: 10.4097/kjae.2015.68.3.254
                PMC ID: 4452669
                PubMed ID: 26045928
                SO-VID: b51f6cbf-5dbb-4b6f-96e3-4ff89af7da9a
                Copyright © Copyright © the Korean Society of Anesthesiologists, 2015
                License:

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/), which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                Date received : 24 November 2014
                Date revision received : 17 December 2014
                Date accepted : 02 January 2015
                Categories
                Subject: Clinical Research Article

                ScienceOpen disciplines: Anesthesiology & Pain management
                Keywords: cholecystectomy,dexamethasone,dexmedetomidine,laparoscopy,postoperative nausea and vomiting
                Data availability:
                ScienceOpen disciplines: Anesthesiology & Pain management
                Keywords: cholecystectomy, dexamethasone, dexmedetomidine, laparoscopy, postoperative nausea and vomiting

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content364

                See all similar

                Cited by24

                See all cited by

                Most referenced authors480

                See all reference authors