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.     

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.     

The prevention of emesis in plastic surgery: a randomized,prospective study

Perhaps the most unpleasant experience following outpatient plastic surgery procedures is postoperative nausea and vomiting. Postoperative nausea and vomiting often results in delayed recovery time and unintended admission, and it can be a contributing factor to the formation of hematoma following rhytidectomy. Ondansetron (Zofran) has proven benefit in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting if given before general anesthesia in a variety of surgical procedures. Its utility in cases performed under conscious sedation has not been determined. The purpose of this study was (1) to test the ability of prophylactic ondansetron to prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting in plastic surgery cases performed under conscious sedation, and (2) to determine relative risk factors for postoperative nausea and vomiting and a selection policy for the administration of antiemetic prophylaxis. This was a prospective, randomized, double-blind study. One hundred twenty patients were enrolled after giving informed consent. Patients received a single dose of either placebo or ondansetron (4 mg intravenously) before administration of sedation. Sedation administration followed a standardized institutional protocol, using midazolam and fentanyl. Data were recorded from a series of three questionnaires: preoperatively, immediately postoperatively, and at the time of the first office return. Data were confirmed by means of telephone interview, chart analysis, and nursing documentation. Multivariate analysis was conducted. Nausea and emesis occurred with an overall frequency of 33 percent and 22 percent, respectively. Postoperative nausea and vomiting was associated with statistically longer recovery periods. The incidence of emesis was statistically higher among women, among those undergoing facial rejuvenation, and among those with a history of opioid-induced emesis or postoperative nausea and vomiting following a previous operation (p < 0.05). The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting paralleled increases in case duration; the incidence of emesis was zero in cases less than 90 minutes in duration. Ondansetron significantly reduced the incidence of emesis overall (placebo, 30 percent; ondansetron, 13 percent; p < 0.05). Postoperative perception of nausea was significantly lower among those who had received ondansetron (p < 0.05). These results confirm the efficacy of ondansetron for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in plastic surgery cases under conscious sedation. In those who are at increased risk, prophylaxis should be considered. Such risks include female gender, facial rejuvenation procedures, and a patient history of opioid-induced emesis or postoperative nausea and vomiting following a prior operation. The zero incidence of emesis in cases less than 90 minutes does not support the routine use of prophylaxis in such cases. Patient satisfaction in plastic surgery is derived from the overall subjective experience of the event as much as by the final result. By remaining attentive to patient concerns and optimizing perioperative care, we can improve the subjective experience for our patients.     

Adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer: side effects and quality of life.

In a trial of postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy women with primary breast cancer and spread to one or more axillary nodes were randomised to receive a six-month course of either the single agent chlorambucil or the five-drug combination of chlorambucil, methotrexate, fluorouracil, vincristine, and adriamycin. On completing the treatment 47 patients were asked to fill in questionnaires at home on the side effects of treatment and its influence on the quality of their life. Side effects including nausea, vomiting, malaise, and alopecia had been severe enough to interfere with their lifestyle in 9 (42%) of the patients who had received the single agent and 19 (79%) of those who had received multiple-drug treatment. Various other side effects were reported by a few patients. Seven (29%) of the patients who had received the multiple-drug schedule voluntarily added that the treatment had been "unbearable" or "could never be gone though again." The proportion of patients who had experienced severe side effects while receiving the treatment was considerable; hence such adjuvant chemotherapy is justifiable only if it will substantially improve a patient''s prognosis.     

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.     

Phenethylbiguanide in diabetic patients; clinical and metabolic effects

Phenethylbiguanide (DBI) was given to 70 unselected but not obese diabetic patients who were receiving restricted diabetic diets. The only side effects attributed to the drug were anorexia, nausea, vomiting and diarrhea in 28 patients. These symptoms subsided with reduction of dosage. No evidence of serious toxicity has been demonstrated in clinical and metabolic studies. In 27 of the 70 patients diabetes was controlled adequately with DBI alone, and more stable control was obtained in 11 labile diabetics who received DBI in combination with insulin.The mechanism of action is not definitely known.     

Cancer therapy, vomiting, and antiemetics

Both radiotherapy and chemotherapy for cancer are capable of causing nausea and vomiting. With both treatment modalities, the nausea and vomiting is thought to be a second-order process rather than being due to direct stimulation of neuromechanisms that control vomiting. Both a peripheral (gastrointestinal tract) and central (chemoreceptor trigger zone) effect may be operating with both radiotherapy- and chemotherapy-induced vomiting. With radiotherapy, gastrointestinal toxicity is affected by the type of radiation, radiation dose and field size, fractionation schedule, individual patient factors, and the part of the patient that is radiated. Many different factors also influence the frequency and severity of nausea and vomiting following chemotherapy. With both radiotherapy and chemotherapy, the frequency and severity of nausea and vomiting is probably mediated by a reduction in breakdown of various neurotransmitters. It is presumed that as the levels of neurotransmitters increase, nausea and vomiting develop. Antagonists of these neurotransmitters may afford some antiemetic protection. Nausea and vomiting may be so severe in patients with cancer that they may refuse potentially curative therapy because of it. Anticipatory nausea and vomiting may develop in patients who have become quite sick after receiving treatment. Exposure to stimuli associated with the emetogenic agent is then sufficient to trigger nausea and vomiting. Standard antiemetics do not help anticipatory nausea and vomiting, although behavioural training may. A variety of different drugs have proven useful as antiemetics, including dopamine antagonists such as phenothiazines, metoclopramide, corticosteroids (dexamethasone and methylprednisolone), cannabinoids, and benzodiazapines. Antihistamines and anticholinergics are of value in some situations. New serotonin antagonists appear to be very promising and are currently undergoing clinical studies. Multiagent antiemetic regimens appear to be more effective than single agent regimens in some situations.     

The Effects of Thiethylperazine Dimaleate (Torecan) on Nausea and Vomiting

A double-blind study of thiethylperazine dimaleate (Torecan) and a placebo, given intramuscularly, was carried out on 40 patients with nausea and/or vomiting due to a variety of causes. No effect on these symptoms was noted in five patients who received the drug and in six who received the placebo. Thiethylperazine dimaleate was judged to have a good effect in 14 patients and the placebo in five patients. The placebo had a slight effect in nine patients and the drug in one.     

Efficacy of feverfew as prophylactic treatment of migraine.

Seventeen patients who ate fresh leaves of feverfew daily as prophylaxis against migraine participated in a double blind placebo controlled trial of the herb: eight patients received capsules containing freeze dried feverfew powder and nine placebo. Those who received placebo had a significant increase in the frequency and severity of headache, nausea, and vomiting with the emergence of untoward effects during the early months of treatment. The group given capsules of feverfew showed no change in the frequency or severity of symptoms of migraine. This provides evidence that feverfew taken prophylactically prevents attacks of migraine, and confirmatory studies are now indicated, preferably with a formulation controlled for sesquiterpene lactone content, in migraine sufferers who have never treated themselves with this herb.     

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.     

Prepartum depression; a study of seventy unwed mothers treated with d-amphetamine sulfate and amobarbital

Seventy unwed pregnant patients in states of mild to moderate depression evidenced by one or more symptoms (tenseness, "nervousness," crying spells, listlessness, fatigue, nausea and vomiting, insomnia and overeating), received informal psychotherapy and a sustained-release capsule combining d-amphetamine sulfate and amobarbital.Forty-eight patients had complete or substantial relief of symptoms, 15 had partial relief, seven had slight or no relief. Use of the preparation seemed to make tense, "nervous" patients more communicative and amenable to counseling, but was less effective in listless, easily fatigued patients. Because of its direct mood-alleviating action and its ability to facilitate psychotherapy, the d-amphetamine sulfate-amobarbital combination proved a very effective treatment for mild and moderate depression accompanying pregnancy.     

Phase I evaluation of coumarin (1,2-benzopyrone) and cimetidine in patients with advanced malignancies.

Fifty-four patients with advanced malignancies were treated on this phase I trial of coumarin and cimetidine. The dose of coumarin was escalated, with three patients treated at each dose level, while the cimetidine dose was held constant at 300 mg four times daily. Patients received coumarin alone as a single daily oral dose for 14 days; on day 15, cimetidine was added and both drugs were continued until progression of disease. This trial was initiated with patients receiving coumarin at 400 mg daily and closed at 7 g daily with four of five patients on this dose experiencing nausea and vomiting. Treatment was generally well tolerated over a wide range of coumarin doses. Symptomatic side effects were few, mild, and usually self limited. Side effects included insomnia, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and dizziness. Two patients withdrew from therapy because of daily nausea and vomiting. Typically, nausea, vomiting, and dizziness occurred 2.5-3 hours after a dose of coumarin. In most patients, these side effects abated spontaneously with continuation of therapy. There was no significant hematologic or renal toxicity. Hepatotoxicity occurred in only one patient and was manifested by asymptomatic abnormal elevations of serum hepatic transaminases. This toxicity was reversible upon interruption of therapy. Objective tumor regressions were observed in six patients with renal cell carcinoma. Responses occurred at coumarin doses ranging from 600 mg to 5 g daily. Coumarin is a relatively nontoxic, oral, outpatient therapy that warrants further investigations for the treatment of human malignancies. Because of its low toxicity, there is potential for combining coumarin with chemotherapeutic and/or biological agents in an attempt to improve on efficacy.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

非阿片类镇痛复合静脉全麻在鼾症手术患者中的疗效

目的:观察三重措施预防为基础,联合非阿片镇痛药复合静脉全麻在行鼾症手术患者术后恶心呕吐的应用效果。方法:选择择期行鼾症手术男性病人80例,随机分为两组:吸入麻醉组(inhalation group, IHLA组)和静脉麻醉组(intravenous group, TIVA组),每组40例,两组均采用三重措施预防恶心呕吐,IHLA组采用以舒芬太尼为基础复合七氟烷吸入麻醉,TIVA组以氯胺酮和右美托咪定镇痛基础上丙泊酚全凭静脉麻醉。评估两组病人恶心呕吐危险系数,采用李克特量表(Likert scale),记录并分析两组患者术后6~8 h在麻醉后监测治疗室(post anesthesia care unit, PACU)及病房24 h恶心呕吐发生情况及补救用药用量。结果:两组患者一般临床资料、恶心呕吐风险评分、手术时间、术后恢复期补救用药量人数无显著差异(P>0.05);IHLA组在PACU恶心呕吐发生率为39.5%,TIVA组发生率为18.9%,两者相比有显著性差异(P<0.05);IHLA组病房24 h恶心呕吐严重程度高于TIVA组,两组术后需要补救应用抗呕吐药物用量无显著差异(P>0.05)。结论:以三重措施预防为基础,与吸入麻醉相比,非阿片类镇痛药复合静脉麻醉可以减少肥胖病人鼾症手术术后恶心呕吐发生率和严重程度,降低围术期风险,有利于患者早期恢复。     

草酸铂联合FL三周方案二线治疗晚期肠癌25例疗效分析

目的评价草酸铂（L-OHP）联合氟脲嘧啶（5-FU）、甲酰四氢叶酸钙（CF）二线治疗晚期复发大肠癌的疗效和不良反应。方法L-OHP 130 mg/m^2,静脉滴入,2 h,d1;CF 100 mg/m^2,5-FU前2小时静脉滴入,d1-d5;5-FU 500 mg/m^2,静脉滴入,6-8 h,d1-d5,21 d为1个周期。结果全组CR 1例,PR 3例,SD 17例,PD 4例,总有效率为16%,疾病控制率为84%。主要不良反应为中性粒细胞减少、消化道反应及外周神经毒性。结论L-OHP联合5-FU、CF方案（OFL）二线治疗晚期复发大肠癌安全、有效,毒性反应可耐受。     

药学干预对乳腺癌患者辅助化疗期间恶心呕吐和生活质量影响的研究

目的:探讨药学干预对乳腺癌患者辅助化疗期间恶心呕吐和生活质量的影响。方法:采用前瞻性队列研究,共入组87例乳腺癌术后患者。在接受辅助化疗前随机分为干预组(n=44)和对照组(n=43),干预组患者在接受化疗和常规支持治疗的同时,针对化疗引起的恶心呕吐由临床药师对患者进行咨询并指导用药,优化对症治疗方案,对照组仅接受化疗和常规支持治疗。比较两组患者对止吐药物的完全反应率、恶心严重程度、呕吐频次和生活质量。结果:化疗的前3个周期两组对止吐药物的完全缓解率分别为37.2%和63.6%,46.5%和75.0%,44.2%和72.7%,干预组完全缓解率明显高于对照组(P=0.014,P=0.006,P=0.007)。干预组的急性和迟发性恶心较对照组轻(P=0.023,P=0.045),急性和迟发性呕吐频率较对照组明显减少(P=0.006,P=0.034)。生活质量测评显示干预组患者的总健康状况较对照组升高(P=0.028),恶心、呕吐和食欲丧失的症状评分较对照组降低(P=0.025,P=0.045)。结论:临床药师对乳腺癌患者辅助化疗期间进行药学干预可明显减轻患者恶心、呕吐的副反应,并可改善生活质量。临床药师参与乳腺癌患者辅助化疗期间的对症治疗值得在临床广泛推广。     

Efficacy and safety of transcatheter arterial chemoembolization combined with ginsenosides in hepatocellular carcinoma treatment

BackgroundTranscatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) is a standard therapy to treat hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), but often limited for its complications. Ginsenosides, including total ginsenosides (GS), Rg3, Rh2 and CK, have been clinically used as adjuvants of TACE in HCC therapy. However, partial clinical observations concerning the efficacy and safety of the combinational treatment were contradictory.PurposeTo investigate the efficacy and safety of TACE and ginsenosides combination for HCC therapy.MethodsRandomized controlled trials (RCTs) regarding TACE and ginsenosides for HCC up to May 2021 were screened from six databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chinese VIP Information and Web of Science). The outcomes of tumor response, adverse reactions (ADRs), quality of life (QOL), survival rates (OS) and liver function were extracted and evaluated by meta-analysis, respectively.ResultsA total of 18 RCTs with 1308 HCC patients were enrolled, and most of the eligible studies had unclear bias risk. Compared with TACE, combining ginsenosides improved objective response rate [ORR, risk ratio (RR) 1.39, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 1.20∼1.61], disease control rate (DCR, RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.12∼1.30), QOL (RR 1.54, 95% CI 1.25∼1.90), one- (RR 1.37, 95% CI 1.16∼1.62) and two- (RR 1.43, 95% CI 1.06∼1.95) year OS, and A level of Child-pugh, as well as reduced the risks of nausea and vomiting, pyrexia, ache, hyperbilirubinemia, anorexia, fatigue, leukopenia, thrombocytopenia and myelosuppression. Subgroup analyses showed that both short- and long- treatment durations of ginsenosides enhanced the A level of Child-pugh, and reduced nausea and vomiting, ache and hyperbilirubinemia. Besides, combining Rg3 benefited DCR, ORR and QOL, and alleviated nausea and vomiting, hyperbilirubinemia, leukopenia, myelosuppression, thrombocytopenia and α-fetoprotein, while combining GS alleviated nausea and vomiting, ache and hyperbilirubinemia, combining Rh2 alleviated thrombocytopenia, and combining CK alleviated nausea and vomiting, pyrexia, ache and leukopenia, respectively.ConclusionThe results suggested that combining ginsenosides could continuously benefit the efficacy and safety of TACE in HCC treatment, and Rg3 is the prior selection during the combination.     

PREPARTUM DEPRESSION—A Study of Seventy Unwed Mothers Treated with d-Amphetamine Sulfate and Amobarbital

Seventy unwed pregnant patients in states of mild to moderate depression evidenced by one or more symptoms (tenseness, “nervousness,” crying spells, listlessness, fatigue, nausea and vomiting, insomnia and overeating), received informal psychotherapy and a sustained-release capsule combining d-amphetamine sulfate and amobarbital.Forty-eight patients had complete or substantial relief of symptoms, 15 had partial relief, seven had slight or no relief.Use of the preparation seemed to make tense, “nervous” patients more communicative and amenable to counseling, but was less effective in listless, easily fatigued patients.Because of its direct mood-alleviating action and its ability to facilitate psychotherapy, the d-amphetamine sulfate-amobarbital combination proved a very effective treatment for mild and moderate depression accompanying pregnancy.     

Subjective adverse reactions to metronidazole in patients with amebiasis

Subjective adverse reactions to metronidazole were analyzed in 111 patients with amebiasis. Metronidazole was administered to 36 patients at a daily dose of 2250 mg and 75 patients at daily doses lower than 2250 mg. The reactions reported included nausea without vomiting in 11 (9.9%) patients, nausea with vomiting in 2 (1.8%), dysgeusia in 2 (1.8%), diarrhea in 1 (0.9%), headache in 1 (0.9%), numbness in 1 (0.9%), dizziness in 1 (0.9%), urticaria in 1 (0.9%), exanthema in 1 (0.9%), and discomfort in 1 (0.9%). Nausea was reported by 28% (10/36) of the patients receiving metronidazole at a daily dose of 2250 mg and 4% (3/75) of the patients receiving lower daily doses. The duration of the metronidazole administration in days was not associated with the appearance of nausea. No life-threatening adverse reactions were identified, and good clinical therapeutic effects were observed in 96% (107/111) of the patients. While metronidazole appears to be a safe anti-protozoal agent for patients with amebiasis, our results indicate that a daily metronidazole dose of 2250 mg is excessive for amebiasis, as it often induces nausea.     

尼莫司汀对复发恶性胶质瘤化疗的临床观察

目的:探讨尼莫司汀在复发胶质瘤化疗的疗效。方法:回顾性分析接受尼莫司汀化疗的13例复发胶质瘤患者的临床治疗效果、生存时间及不良反应。结果:所有患者均接受超过3个周期的化学治疗,平均完成4.6个化疗周期。随访时间5-26个月,平均随访时间16个月。3个月无进展生存率53.8%;6个月无进展生存率30.8%;12月无进展生存率23.1%。2例出现Ⅲ度骨髓抑制,其余不良反应包括恶心呕吐(6例)和疲倦乏力(9例),经积极治疗后均好转。结论:尼莫司汀为主的化疗方案是复发胶质瘤化疗的有效手段之一,可以显著地延长患者的生命,并不伴有严重的并发症,特别是针对前期进行过TMZ化疗的病例,具有价格低廉,疗效相当的优点,是替莫唑胺治疗之外很好的选择。     

Observations in five cases of spontaneous cerebellar hemorrhage

Five cases of spontaneous intracerebellar hemorrhage are reported. Three had a vascular malformation and two had mild hypertension. The presenting symptom was sudden headache followed by nausea and vomiting. Signs of brain stem dysfunction without prominent cerebellar deficit were the commonest feature. Meningeal involvement was present in the majority of cases. Unsuspected sudden death can occur. It is suggested that patients below the age of 30 who present with sudden headache followed by brain stem dysfunction with or without a subarachnoid hemorrhage, and patients over the age of 45 who present this picture along with subarachnoid hemorrhage should be investigated urgently with contrast studies for possible cerebellar hemorrhage.