Methylnaltrexone prevents morphine-induced kaolin intake in the rat

Opioids are frequently used analgesics, and emesis is a common opioid-induced adverse effect. Methylnaltrexone, a peripheral opioid antagonist, has the potential to block the undesired effects of opioids that are mediated by peripheral receptors while sparing the analgesic effect. We used a rat model of simulated emesis or pica to study if methylnaltrexone decreases morphine induced-kaolin consumption. We observed that after morphine administration, kaolin intake increased significantly compared to intake in the vehicle group, and the increase could be attenuated by ondansetron administration. Methylnaltrexone dose-dependently reduced kaolin ingestion induced by morphine. Morphine and methylnaltrexone did not significantly affect food intake and body weight in the experimental animals. Our data suggest that methylnaltrexone has therapeutic value in treating opioid-induced nausea and vomiting.     

An outcome study comparing intravenous sedation with midazolam/fentanyl (conscious sedation) versus propofol infusion (deep sedation) for aesthetic surgery

The purpose of this study was to determine the differences in measurable outcomes following aesthetic procedures performed under intravenous sedation with incremental doses of midazolam and fentanyl and those performed under propofol infusion. The authors' hypothesis was that the differences in these outcome parameters are not significant between these intravenous sedation protocols. All intraoperative and perioperative records of 84 consecutive patients having aesthetic surgery under a conscious sedation protocol using incremental doses of intravenous midazolam and fentanyl were retrospectively reviewed and compared with the records of a second group of 85 patients having aesthetic surgery under a deep sedation regimen based primarily on propofol infusion. All procedures were hospital based and performed by two surgeons. Twenty-eight different parameters were examined by chart review. In addition, a patient questionnaire was used to assess patient satisfaction and patient recall of operative and perioperative pain, anxiety, nausea, and vomiting. Multivariate statistical analysis was conducted. The two sedation groups were similar with regard to aesthetic procedures performed and patient demographics. The mean duration of operative time was statistically equivalent (152 minutes and 153 minutes). In both groups, there were minor adverse intraoperative events reported but no significant complications. Transient hypotension was more common in the propofol infusion group (12.9 percent versus 2.4 percent, p = 0.018), but no patient required intervention beyond reducing the sedative agent or increasing intravenous fluids. The amount of supplemental fentanyl given intraoperatively was significantly higher in the group whose primary agent for sedation was propofol infusion than the group who received midazolam/fentanyl (209 mug and 143 mug, respectively). The overall questionnaire response rate was 80 percent for both groups. The midazolam/fentanyl sedation group had more recall of "unpleasant intraoperative events" (17 percent versus 3 percent, p = 0.007). However, both groups had low recall of intraoperative pain, anxiety, and nausea. The propofol infusion group experienced significantly more nausea in the recovery room (p = 0.002), nausea at the time of discharge (p = 0.009), and nausea the evening after the operation (p = 0.013). Greater than 90 percent of the patients in both groups would have the same anesthetic in the future rather than undergo general anesthesia. Patient safety, outcomes, and satisfaction are similar in plastic surgery procedures performed under sedation protocols using either incremental doses of midazolam and fentanyl or propofol infusion. All operative and postoperative outcomes for pain, anxiety, and vomiting were similar in the two groups except for immediate postoperative nausea, which was higher in the propofol infusion group. The overall satisfaction of patients undergoing plastic surgery procedures under these intravenous sedation protocols appears very high.     

Optimization of conscious sedation in plastic surgery.

The administration of conscious sedation by the plastic surgeon must be safe, efficient, and consistent. In the proper setting, with trained staff and appropriate backup, conscious sedation can allow optimal patient satisfaction with expedient recovery in addition to cost containment. The highly effective local anesthesia afforded by dilute, high-volume ("tumescent") infiltration extends the use of conscious sedation to cases previously performed under general anesthesia or deep sedation. The purpose of this analysis was to identify variables in conscious sedation that affect traditional outcome parameters in ambulatory surgery, particularly the duration of recovery and adverse events such as nausea and emesis. All perioperative and operative records of 300 consecutive patients having plastic surgical procedures under conscious sedation were carefully reviewed. Patients were ASA class I or II by requisite. Conscious sedation followed a standardized administration protocol, using incremental doses of two agents: midazolam (0.25 to 1 mg) and fentanyl (12.5 to 50 mcg). A subset of patients received preoperative oral sedation. Multivariate statistical analysis was conducted using SPSS 8.0 for Windows (SPSS Inc., Chicago, Ill.). Of the 300 patients, same-day discharge was intended for 281. Eight procedure categories were defined. No anesthetic complications occurred. As expected, recovery time was significantly correlated with the duration and type of procedure (p < 0.001) and the total dosage of both intraoperative sedative agents (p < 0.001). Interestingly, a negative correlation with advancing age existed (p < 0.001), likely reflecting the significantly higher intraoperative sedative dosing in younger patients (p < 0.001). When controlled for the effects of procedure duration and intraoperative sedative dosing, two other variables-use of preoperative oral sedation and postoperative nausea/emesis-significantly lengthened recovery time (p = 0.0001 for each). Fifteen unintended admissions occurred secondary to nausea, prolonged drowsiness, or pain control needs. Conscious sedation is an effective anesthetic choice for routine plastic surgical procedures, many of which would commonly be performed under general anesthesia. In our experience with a carefully structured and controlled conscious sedation protocol, the technique has proven to be safe and effective. This analysis of outcome parameters identified two important and potentially avoidable causes of recovery delay following conscious sedation-oral premedication and nausea/emesis. Nausea and emesis were particularly problematic in that they were responsible for 11 of 15 (73 percent) unintended admissions. Preoperative sedation is valuable in certain circumstances, and its use is not discouraged; however, its benefits must be weighed against its unwanted effects, which can include a prolongation of recovery.     

昂丹司琼联合泮托拉唑对宫颈癌同步放化疗所致恶心呕吐的临床疗效

摘要 目的：研究昂丹司琼联合泮托拉唑对宫颈癌同步放化疗所致恶心呕吐的临床疗效。方法：选择2018年1月～2020年1月我院收治的79例宫颈癌患者,均采取同步化疗,将其随机分为两组。对照组在当天化疗前30 min和随后的6 d连续静脉注射昂丹司琼,每次8 mg,1次/d;同时给予地塞米松磷酸钠注射液10 mg,1次/d。观察组在昂丹司琼的基础上静脉注射泮托拉唑,每次40 mg,1次/d,给药的时间与昂丹司琼相同。比较两组宫颈癌患者恶心呕吐的完全缓解率、癌因性疲乏评分和不良反应的发生情况。结果：两组化疗第1、2 d恶心呕吐的完全缓解率比较差异无明显统计学意义(P>0.05),观察组化疗第3、4、5、6 d恶心呕吐的完全缓解率分别为76.92 %、79.49 %、87.18 %、87.18 %,均明显高于对照组(P<0.05);观察组的癌因性疲乏评分为(45.39±7.29)分,明显低于对照组的(67.24±8.36)分(P<0.05);两组的乏力嗜睡、便秘、椎体外系反应、失眠/不安、腹泻、轻度头痛的发生率比较无明显统计学差异(P>0.05)。结论：昂丹司琼联合泮托拉唑对宫颈癌同步放化疗所致恶心呕吐的疗效显著优于单用昂丹司琼治疗,并能明显减轻癌因性疲乏,且安全性高。     

Efficacy of promethazine suppositories dispensed to outpatient surgical patients.

Postoperative nausea and vomiting frequently complicate outpatient anesthesia and surgery. The duration of treatment for this complication must occasionally extend beyond discharge from the hospital. In this study, we evaluated the commonly used anti-emetic promethazine for its efficacy in the post-discharge period. Adult outpatient surgical patients who had excessive postoperative nausea and vomiting in the recovery room, or who were at risk for postoperative nausea and vomiting following discharge were given two promethazine suppositories (25 mg) for home use. All patients were contacted by our recovery room nurses on the first business day after their surgery and questioned as to their use of the suppositories and, if used, their efficacy. We found that 55 percent of patients given promethazine suppositories for home use had nausea and vomiting in the post-discharge period. Of the patients given promethazine, 89 percent used the suppositories. All of these patients reported improvement in their symptoms following use of the suppositories. None reported adverse effects from the promethazine suppositories. In conclusion, we found promethazine suppositories to be an inexpensive and efficacious treatment for nausea and vomiting in adult outpatient surgical patients following discharge from the hospital. Side-effects were minimal, and our patients voiced no complaints about this mode of therapy. We recommend this therapy for treatment of nausea and vomiting after hospital discharge following adult outpatient surgery.     

托烷司琼与帕洛诺司琼用于小儿骨科术后镇痛预防恶心呕吐的效果研究

摘要 目的：比较托烷司琼与帕洛诺司琼用于小儿骨科术后镇痛时预防恶心呕吐的效果。方法：纳入2019年3月到2021年3月在我院进行骨科手术的儿童60例,根据术后镇痛泵中使用止吐药物的不同分为托烷司琼组和帕洛诺司琼组,每组30例,比较两组患儿术前、术后的心率（HR）、平均动脉压（MAP）,在术后48小时内,观察两组患儿恶心呕吐、头晕头痛、皮肤瘙痒以及呼吸抑制等术后并发症。视觉模拟评分法（VAS）评估患儿术后疼痛,Ramsay量表评估患儿术后镇静效果。结果：托烷司琼和帕洛诺司琼组患儿在术前和术后HR和MAP比较均无显著差异（P>0.05）;托烷司琼组和帕洛诺司琼组患儿术后VAS评分、Ramsay评分均随时间延长而降低,且同一时间点两组患儿VAS评分无显著差异（P>0.05）;帕洛诺司琼组术后PONV发生率（20.00 %）高于托烷司琼组（3.33 %）（P<0.05）。帕洛诺司琼组和托烷司琼组患儿出现头晕头痛、皮肤瘙痒以及呼吸抑制例数分别为3/2例、1/0例和1/0例。两组间术后并发症发生率比较无差异（P>0.05）。结论：托烷司琼与帕洛诺司琼对骨科手术后儿童血流动力学、疼痛和镇静效果并无差异,但在预防术后恶心呕吐方面托烷司琼效果优于帕洛诺司琼。     

Anesthetic implications of laparoscopic surgery

Minimally invasive therapy aims to minimize the trauma of any interventional process but still achieve a satisfactory therapeutic result. The development of "critical pathways," rapid mobilization and early feeding have contributed towards the goal of shorter hospital stay. This concept has been extended to include laparoscopic cholecystectomy and hernia repair. Reports have been published confirming the safety of same day discharge for the majority of patients. However, we would caution against overenthusiastic ambulatory laparoscopic cholecystectomy on the rational but unproven assumption that early discharge will lead to occasional delays in diagnosis and management of postoperative complications. Intraoperative complications of laparoscopic surgery are mostly due to traumatic injuries sustained during blind trocar insertion and physiologic changes associated with patient positioning and pneumoperitoneum creation. General anesthesia and controlled ventilation comprise the accepted anesthetic technique to reduce the increase in PaCO2. Investigators have recently documented the cardiorespiratory compromise associated with upper abdominal laparoscopic surgery, and particular emphasis is placed on careful perioperative monitoring of ASA III-IV patients during insufflation. Setting limits on the inflationary pressure is advised in these patients. Anesthesiologists must maintain a high index of suspicion for complications such as gas embolism, extraperitoneal insufflation and surgical emphysema, pneumothorax and pneumomediastinum. Postoperative nausea and vomiting are among the most common and distressing symptoms after laparoscopic surgery. A highly potent and selective 5-HT3 receptor antagonist, ondansetron, has proven to be an effective oral and IV prophylaxis against postoperative emesis in preliminary studies. Opioids remain an important component of the anesthesia technique, although the introduction of newer potent NSAIDs may diminish their use. A preoperative multimodal analgesic regimen involving skin infiltration with local anesthesia. NSAIDs to attenuate peripheral pain and opioids for central pain may reduce postoperative discomfort and expedite patient recovery/discharge. There is no conclusive evidence to demonstrate clinically significant effects of nitrous oxide on surgical conditions during laparoscopic cholecystectomy or on the incidence of postoperative emesis. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy has proven to be a major advance in the treatment of patients with symptomatic gallbladder disease.     

Aprepitant versus ondansetron in preoperative triple-therapy treatment of nausea and vomiting in neurosurgery patients: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting is 50% to 80% after neurosurgery. The common prophylactic treatment for postoperative nausea and vomiting is a triple therapy of droperidol (Inapsine), promethazine (Phenergan) and dexamethasone (Decadron). Newer, more effectives methods of prophylaxis are being investigated. We designed this prospective, double-blind, single center study to compare the efficacy of ondansetron (Zofran) to a neurokinin-1 antagonist, aprepitant (Emend), as a substitute for droperidol, in the prophylactic treatment of postoperative nausea and vomiting after neurosurgery. METHODS: After obtaining institutional review board approval, One hundred-seventy-six patients, 18-85 years of age with ASA I to III, who did not receive anti-emetics 24 hours before surgery and are expected to undergo general anesthesia for neurosurgery lasting longer than two hours were included in this study. After meeting the inclusion and exclusion criteria and providing written informed consent, patients will be randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to one of two treatment groups: aprepitant or ondansetron. Because ondansetron is given intravenously and aprepitant orally, patients will be given an oral or intravenous placebo to maintain the double blind. Patients will receive aprepitant 40 mg PO/placebo within 2 hours prior to induction. At induction, a combination of intravenous dexamethasone 10 mg, promethazine 25 mg and ondansetron 4 mg/placebo will be given. The primary outcome measures are the episodes and severity of nausea and vomiting; administration of rescue antiemetic; and opioid consumption for 120 hours postoperatively. Standard safety assessments will include adverse event reports, physical and laboratory data, awakening time and duration of recovery from anesthesia. Logistic regression will be used to test the efficacy of aprepitant compared to ondansetron with demographic characteristics as potential covariates in the model. For the number of rescue therapy treatments used during the postoperative period, a Wilcoxon rank sum test will be performed. DISCUSSION: The results of this comparative study will potentially identify an improved treatment regimen that will decrease the incidence and severity of postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing neurosurgery. This will serve to enhance patient recovery and overall satisfaction of neurosurgical patients in the immediate postoperative period. Registered at The Ohio State University Biomedical Sciences Institutional Review Board: Protocol Number: 2007H0053 KEYWORDS: aprepitant, postoperative nausea and vomiting, craniotomy, ondansetron. Word Count: 347.     

Safety and efficacy of office-based surgery with monitored anesthesia care/sedation in 4778 consecutive plastic surgery procedures

Office-based surgery has several potential benefits over hospital-based surgery, including cost containment, ease of scheduling, and convenience to both patients and surgeons. Scrutiny of office-based surgery by regulators and state-licensing agencies has increased and must be addressed by improved documentation of safety and efficacy. To evaluate the safety and efficacy of the authors' office-based plastic surgery, a review was undertaken of 3615 consecutive patients undergoing 4778 outpatient plastic surgery procedures under monitored anesthesia care/sedation in a single office. The charts of 3615 consecutive patients who had undergone office-based surgery with monitored anesthesia care/sedation between May of 1995 and May of 2000 were reviewed. In all cases, the anesthesia protocol used included sedation with midazolam, propofol, and a narcotic administered by a board-certified registered nurse anesthetist with local anesthesia provided by the surgeon. Charts were reviewed for patient profile, types of procedures, multiple procedures, duration of anesthesia, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, and complications related to anesthesia. Outcomes measured included death, airway compromise, dyspnea, hypotension, venous thrombosis, pulmonary emboli, protracted nausea and vomiting lasting more than 24 hours, and unplanned hospital admissions. Statistical analyses were performed using the Microsoft Excel program and the SAS package. Results were as follows: 92.3 percent of the patients were female and 7.7 percent were male, with a mean age of 42.7 years (range, 3 to 83 years). Patients underwent aesthetic (95.6 percent) and reconstructive (4.4 percent) plastic surgery procedures. Same-session multiple procedures occurred in 24.8 percent of patients. The vast majority of patients were healthy: 84.3 percent of patients were American Society of Anesthesiologists class I, 15.6 percent were class II, and 0.1 percent were class III. The operations required a mean of 111 minutes. There were no deaths, ventilator requirements, deep venous thromboses, or pulmonary emboli. Complications were as follows: 0.05 percent (n = 2) of patients had dyspnea that resolved, 0.2 percent (n = 6) of patients had protracted nausea and vomiting, and 0.05 percent (n = 2) of patients had unplanned hospital admissions (<24 hours). One patient had an emergent intubation. No prolonged adverse effects were noted. There was a 30-day follow-up minimum. Outpatient surgery is an important aspect of plastic surgery. It was shown that office-based surgery with intravenous sedation, performed by board-certified plastic surgeons and nurse anesthetists, is safe. Appropriate accreditation, safe anesthesia protocols, and proper patient selection constitute the basis for safe and efficacious office-based outpatient plastic surgery.     

舒芬太尼复合吗啡硬膜外术后镇痛的最佳剂量配伍

目的：观察腹式子宫全切术后硬膜外镇痛应用舒芬太尼复合吗啡时两种药物不同剂量的镇痛效果和不良反应,以寻找其最佳剂量配伍。方法：选择90例美国麻醉医师协会（ASA）标准Ⅰ-Ⅱ级、年龄20-60岁拟行腹式子宫全切术的病人,均实施腰硬联合麻醉。随机分成3组,每组30例：Ⅰ组：舒芬太尼10μg＋吗啡2 mg＋氟哌利多1 mg＋1%罗哌卡因20 mg;Ⅱ组：舒芬太尼15μg＋吗啡1.5 mg＋氟哌利多1 mg＋1%罗哌卡因20 mg;Ⅲ组：舒芬太尼20μg＋吗啡1 mg＋氟哌利多1 mg＋1%罗哌卡因20mg。术中监测生命体征,记录术后24小时内的镇痛效果、不良反应及辅助镇痛药物的使用情况。镇痛效果评价采用视觉模拟评分（visual analogue scale,VAS）标准。结果：2组各个时间点VAS评分均明显低于1组（P〈0.05）,在术后6 h,8 h,12 h,18 h,24 h与3组有统计学差异（P〈0.05）,3组在2 h,4 h,6 h的VAS评分低于1组（P〈0.05）;2组恶心评分与3组相比明显较低（P〈0.05）,其他不良反应三组间没有统计学差异;各组患者在术后24h内辅助镇痛药物使用情况比较无统计学差异（P〉0.05）。结论：舒芬太尼15μg复合吗啡1.5 mg用于腹式子宫全切术后硬膜外镇痛效果优于其他常用剂量配伍,镇痛效果平稳确切且不良反应少,具有临床应用价值。     

Does dexamethasone enhance control of acute cisplatin induced emesis by ondansetron?

OBJECTIVE--To determine the contribution of dexamethasone to the efficacy of the 5-hydroxytryptamine antagonist ondansetron in control of cisplatin induced nausea and vomiting. DESIGN--Randomised double blind crossover study. SETTING--Two cancer centres in teaching hospitals, one in the United Kingdom and the other in Germany. SUBJECTS--100 patients (53 men and 47 women) new to cisplatin chemotherapy, 84 of whom completed two consecutive courses of chemotherapy. INTERVENTIONS--Patients were given intravenous dexamethasone (20 mg) or physiological saline with intravenous ondansetron 8 mg before cisplatin, then ondansetron 1 mg/h for 24 hours. Oral ondansetron 8 mg was taken three times daily on days 2-6. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES--Incidence of complete or major control of emesis (0-2 episodes in the 24 hours after chemotherapy). RESULTS--Complete or major control was obtained in 49 out of 71 (69%) of patients after receiving ondansetron plus dexamethasone compared with 40 out of 71 (56%) when they were given ondansetron alone (p = 0.012). This effect was most pronounced in the first 12 hours after chemotherapy. Patients receiving the combination also had significantly less nausea. Of the 53 patients who expressed a preference, 38 (72%) preferred the combination treatment (p = 0.002) to ondansetron alone. The effect of ondansetron on delayed emesis was less pronounced. CONCLUSIONS--Dexamethasone makes a significant contribution to the efficacy of ondansetron in the control of acute platinum induced emesis.     

Denial of effective treatment and poor quality of clinical information in placebo controlled trials of ondansetron for postoperative nausea and vomiting: a review of published trials.

OBJECTIVE--To determine how many patients were deprived of treatment by being given placebo as comparator in trials of ondansetron for postoperative nausea and vomiting. DESIGN--Review of published trials of ondansetron during 1991 to July 1994. SETTING--Medline search in a university department of anaesthesia. SUBJECTS--8806 patients who had been included in 18 indexed placebo controlled trials of ondansetron as prophylaxis against or treatment of postoperative nausea and vomiting. RESULTS--Five studies (1236 patients) had been published by July 1992. All were placebo controlled trials. By July 1994, 8806 patients had been included in 18 indexed placebo controlled studies of prophylaxis or treatment. Only 462 patients had been in studies that compared ondansetron with other drugs, and there were no indexed comparative trials of treatment of nausea and vomiting. Roughly 2180 patients had been given placebo as prophylaxis and 440 had been given placebo when already experiencing postoperative nausea or vomiting. CONCLUSIONS--Around 2620 patients in the reviewed studies were denied existing drugs, which, though not completely effective or without side effects, do bring some relief from postoperative nausea and vomiting. Drug regulatory bodies should collaborate with drug companies to ensure better comparison of new with established drugs. This would avoid placebos being given to more than the fewest patients necessary to confirm effect and would allow doctors to be informed more quickly about relative efficacies.     

CISPLATIN-INDUCED VOMITING DEPENDS ON CIRCADIAN TIMING

We examined whether the clock time of cisplatin plus antiemetic and diuretic administration affects the amount of cisplatin-associated emesis and severity of renal toxicity. We treated 22 patients with urogenital cancer with two courses of chemotherapy containing 70 mg/m² of cisplatin. Cisplatin together with furosemide was administered in the morning (05:00) or evening (17:00) during two courses 1 month apart in a crossover fashion. Ondansetron was given either before or after cisplatin to control nausea and vomiting. The number of vomiting episodes, serum creatinine, serum urea nitrogen (BUN), creatinine clearance, and urinary β-N-acetyl glucosamidase (NAG) concentration were evaluated before and after each treatment course. Regardless of the timing of ondansetron, morning compared to evening cisplatin was always associated with greater vomiting in the first treatment course. However, prophylactic administration of ondansetron markedly diminished the impact of the clock time of cisplatin administration. Serum creatinine transiently decreased rather than increased 14 days after cisplatin and furosemide administration, while NAG excretion increased 3 days after cisplatin and furosemide administration. In the first course, serum creatinine levels were similar regardless of the clock time of cisplatin and furosemide administration. However, in the second course, serum creatinine rose in patients given evening cisplatin and furosemide, while it remained unchanged in those given morning cisplatin and furosemide. Moreover, the first course morning cisplatin and furosemide treatment was associated with less change in NAG excretion (less kidney toxicity) than the first course of evening cisplatin and furosemide treatment. The second course evening cisplatin and furosemide treatment was associated with an increase in NAG excretion compared to the first course of treatment, while morning cisplatin and furosemide treatment in the second course showed less change in NAG excretion compared to the first course. The clock time of cisplatin administration had an impact on the frequency of emesis. Prophylactic ondansetron, however, diminished the time-of-day dependency of cisplatin-induced vomiting. Administration of cisplatin and furosemide in the morning rather than evening appears to cause less renal damage, and this damage may be further reduced with aggressive hydration and routine administration of furosemide. (Chronobiology International, 18(5), 851–863, 2001)     

CISPLATIN-INDUCED VOMITING DEPENDS ON CIRCADIAN TIMING

We examined whether the clock time of cisplatin plus antiemetic and diuretic administration affects the amount of cisplatin-associated emesis and severity of renal toxicity. We treated 22 patients with urogenital cancer with two courses of chemotherapy containing 70 mg/m² of cisplatin. Cisplatin together with furosemide was administered in the morning (05:00) or evening (17:00) during two courses 1 month apart in a crossover fashion. Ondansetron was given either before or after cisplatin to control nausea and vomiting. The number of vomiting episodes, serum creatinine, serum urea nitrogen (BUN), creatinine clearance, and urinary β-N-acetyl glucosamidase (NAG) concentration were evaluated before and after each treatment course. Regardless of the timing of ondansetron, morning compared to evening cisplatin was always associated with greater vomiting in the first treatment course. However, prophylactic administration of ondansetron markedly diminished the impact of the clock time of cisplatin administration. Serum creatinine transiently decreased rather than increased 14 days after cisplatin and furosemide administration, while NAG excretion increased 3 days after cisplatin and furosemide administration. In the first course, serum creatinine levels were similar regardless of the clock time of cisplatin and furosemide administration. However, in the second course, serum creatinine rose in patients given evening cisplatin and furosemide, while it remained unchanged in those given morning cisplatin and furosemide. Moreover, the first course morning cisplatin and furosemide treatment was associated with less change in NAG excretion (less kidney toxicity) than the first course of evening cisplatin and furosemide treatment. The second course evening cisplatin and furosemide treatment was associated with an increase in NAG excretion compared to the first course of treatment, while morning cisplatin and furosemide treatment in the second course showed less change in NAG excretion compared to the first course. The clock time of cisplatin administration had an impact on the frequency of emesis. Prophylactic ondansetron, however, diminished the time-of-day dependency of cisplatin-induced vomiting. Administration of cisplatin and furosemide in the morning rather than evening appears to cause less renal damage, and this damage may be further reduced with aggressive hydration and routine administration of furosemide. (Chronobiology International, 18(5), 851-863, 2001)     

舒芬太尼联合昂丹司琼静脉术后镇痛应用妇科手术的临床观察

目的:了解舒芬太尼联合昂丹司琼静脉术后镇痛应用妇科手术的临床效果。方法:对我院2012年3月至2014年3月收治的全麻术后患者进行随机抽样,选取80例患者随机分成两组,对照组予以1.0 mg芬太尼联合8 mg昂丹司琼镇痛,实验组予以100μg舒芬太尼联合8 mg昂丹司琼镇痛。观察并比较两组患者的镇痛效果及不良反应的发生状况。结果:对比恶心、呕吐等临床症状,实验组患者的临床情况明显优于对照组,经统计学分析,差异具有统计学意义(P0.05),且镇静评分、疼痛评分亦优于对照组,经统计学分析,差异具有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论:术后持续静脉予以舒芬太尼联合昂丹司琼,能降低术后恶心、呕吐发生率,减轻患者疼痛程度,提升患者临床治疗效果。     

Promazine and Meperidine (Sparidol 50), an Efficient Combination for Preoperative Medication

A number of elderly patients undergoing intraocular surgery were premedicated with a combination of promazine 50 mg. and meperidine 50 mg. Superior sedation and a smoother postoperative course were noted as compared to a control group premedicated with the usual high dosages of opiates and barbiturates. The incidence of nausea and vomiting, urinary retention, and postoperative disorientation was less than 20%. Hypotension was not a problem.Promazine was found to potentiate the action of opiates and barbiturates given in smaller dosages, thus permitting surgical procedures to be carried out with safety in an older population prone to the complications of opiate and barbiturate administration. This finding confirms reports noted in the obstetrical literature.     

Nanomedicines in the treatment of emesis during chemotherapy: focus on aprepitant

Aprepitant, a selective high-affinity antagonist of human substance P/neurokinin 1 (NK1) receptors, is the active ingredient of EMEND which has recently been approved by the FDA for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). Aprepitant undergoes extensive metabolism, primarily via CYP3A4 mediated oxidation. It is eliminated primarily by metabolism and is not renally excreted. The apparent terminal half-life in humans ranged from 9 to 13 hours. Early development studies led to the development of a nanoparticle formulation to enhance exposure and minimize food effects. Two large randomized trials accruing 1099 patients studied the effect in patients receiving cisplatin of adding aprepitant to ondansetron and dexamethasone on day 1 then to dexamethasone on days 2 and 3 to control delayed emesis. The complete response of no vomiting and no rescue medication overall from days 1 to 5 improved from 48% to 68% (p<0.001), a 13% improvement in acute emesis but a 21% improvement in delayed emesis with the improvement from 51% to 72% (p<0.001). Similarly, 866 patients treated with cyclophosphamide plus either doxorubicin or epirubicin, received either ondansetron, dexamethasone, and aprepitant on day 1 followed by aprepitant on days 2 and 3 or ondansetron and dexamethasone on day 1 and dexamethasone on days 2 and 3. The overall complete response rate over 5 days was better for the aprepitant group 50.8% vs 42.5% (p=0.015). Complete responses were reported in more patients taking aprepitant in both the acute (76% vs 69%, p=0.034) and delayed (55% vs 49%, p=0.064) phases of vomiting. There were no clinically relevant differences in toxicity by adding aprepitant and improvements in the quality of life of patients on chemotherapy were recorded.     

Experience with aprepitant in the prevention of nausea and vomiting caused by highly emetic chemotherapy of lung cancer

Approximately one half of cancer patients experience nausea or vomiting during chemotherapy containing high-dose cisplatin, despite the use of a corticosteroid and 5-hydroxytryptamine(3) (5-HT(3)) receptor antagonists. The addition of aprepitant, a neurokinin 1 receptor antagonist, improves control of emesis by a further 15-20%, and improves late phase symptoms (>24 h after chemotherapy). The cornerstone of standard first line lung cancer chemotherapy is high-dose cisplatin. Our experience with aprepitant in the chemotherapy of 10 lung cancer patients is described, who reported more than one episode of vomiting caused by chemotherapy despite the use of ondansetron previously. Aprepitant prevented acute and late phase oncoming vomiting in all 10 patients and acute and late phase nausea in 9 of the 10 patients. According to our experience on a limited number of patients, aprepitant may be of clinical benefit in the supportive treatment of lung cancer, in achieving better quality of life during chemotherapeutic cycles in these patients.     

Efficacy of the pain pump catheter in immediate autologous breast reconstruction

The purpose of the investigation was to evaluate the efficacy of a slow bupivacaine infusion at postoperative surgical sites in immediate breast reconstruction patients. This prospective study included 16 patients who underwent autologous breast reconstruction with a latissimus dorsi pedicled flap immediately after mastectomy. A two-site infusion kit with dual split-flow catheters was secured at the operative sites before skin closure. A spring-loaded disposable pump then infused 0.25% bupivacaine at a rate of 2.08 cc per catheter per hour for 48 continuous hours. Patient pain levels, nausea/emesis, and oral and intravenous narcotic use were then recorded at 12-hour intervals. Medication use was converted to pain units for results comparison (one pain unit was defined as the equivalent of 10 mg of intravenous morphine). A retrospective control group comprised 16 consecutive patients from December of 1999 to October of 2002 who underwent the same surgery by the same surgeon using oral and intravenous pain medications. The experimental group demonstrated a more than fivefold decrease in the use of oral and intravenous pain medications compared with the historical controls (6.7 versus 1.7 pain units) (p < 0.001). The overall pain experienced by the catheter patients was nearly twofold less than the pain experienced by those without the catheter (1.8 versus 3.4 on the visual analog pain scale) (p < 0.017). Twenty-eight percent of the experimental group experienced nausea/emesis compared with 61 percent in the control group. No complications occurred with the use of the pain pump catheter. A 48-hour infusion of 0.25% bupivacaine significantly decreases the need for postoperative narcotics and the over-all pain experience in immediate breast reconstruction patients. This effective form of pain control may alleviate patient concerns of postoperative pain and may safely downstage many plastic surgery procedures, such as immediate breast reconstruction, and many cosmetic procedures to same-day status when the primary indication for admission is pain management.