SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Nausea”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 109 records · Page 6Linked to original sources

PubMed2002

Frequency of postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing laparoscopic foregut surgery.

BACKGROUND: Wrap disruption or intrathoracic herniation of a fundoplication is a dreaded complication of laparoscopic foregut surgery. This problem may often be related to postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). This study aimed to investigate the occurrence of PONV and its management in patients undergoing laparoscopic foregut procedures. METHODS: Between January 31 and May 23, 2000, 104 patients undergoing laparoscopic foregut procedures (fundoplication, myotomy, or paraesophageal hernia repair) were followed prospectively. Their postoperative course was documented along with the occurrence and management of PONV. All laparoscopic foregut surgery patients are managed postoperatively with a uniform clinical pathway, and their care is focused on a nursing unit with skill and experience in postoperative management. RESULTS: Nausea was documented in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) for 30.1% of the patients, and for 59.6% of the patients during their nursing unit stay. Antiemetics were given to all the patients with documented nausea. Emesis was noted in 1.9% of the patients in the PACU, as compared with 3.8% of the patients on the floor. In one of the patients with nursing unit emesis, an acute wrap herniation into the chest occurred, necessitating a return to the operating room for correction. The patients with a history of postoperative nausea did not have a higher rate of PONV than in those with no history of postoperative nausea. The use of preoperative or intraoperative antiemetics did not appear to alter the occurrence of PONV. Postoperative nausea occurred in 60% of the patients administered preoperative antiemetic, as compared with 64% of the patients who received no preoperative antiemetic. The average length of hospital stay was longer in those with PONV than in those with no PONV (2.6 vs 1.8 days). CONCLUSION: Nausea after laparoscopic foregut procedures is common, occurring twice as often on the nursing unit as in the PACU. The occurrence of PONV leads to a longer hospital stay, and can result in significant sequelae requiring reoperation. The use of preoperative or intraoperative antiemetics does not alter the frequency of postoperative nausea, suggesting the need to develop effective preemptive regimens for patients undergoing laparoscopic foregut procedures. The high rate of PONV and its potential risk of damage to a fundoplication and hiatal hernia repair should lead surgeons to consider whether laparoscopic foregut procedures should ever be performed on an outpatient basis.

Antiemetics↗

PubMed2002

Tropisetron vs ondansetron for prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative nausea and vomiting are observed in increased frequency after laparoscopic surgery. This study was performed in order to compare the efficacy of two 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 (5-HT3) receptor antagonists, ondansetron and tropisetron, in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. METHODS: Using a randomized, double-blind study design, 87 ASA I and II patients scheduled for laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomly assigned to receive 4 mg ondansetron (Group A, n = 29), 5 mg tropisetron (Group B, n = 31), or placebo (Group C, n = 27) intravenously (IV) before induction of anesthesia. The end points evaluated were frequency of nausea, nausea intensity rated on a scale from 1 (mild) to 5 (most severe), frequency of vomiting, and need for rescue antiemetics. These parameters were measured immediately after surgery (0 h), at 3 h, 6 h, and 12 h postoperatively. RESULTS: The frequency of nausea was significantly higher in group A (31.2%) compared to group B (14%) at 12 h postoperatively (p <0.01). However, patients of group A had significantly lower nausea scores at 3 h postoperatively compared to group B. Postoperative vomiting occurred in 13.8% of patients in group A and 9.6% of patients in group B throughout the whole study period (p = n.s.). The need for rescue antiemetics was similar between groups A and B. Both groups were superior to placebo concerning all studied parameters. CONCLUSION: Our results show that ondansetron may be more effective in controlling nausea intensity during the first 3 h after laparoscopic cholecystectomy, while tropisetron has a longer-acting activity, with a major impact on nausea frequency at 12 h postoperatively.

Adult↗

PubMed1998

The impact of postchemotherapy nausea and vomiting on quality of life after moderately emetogenic chemotherapy.

The purpose of the study was to assess the impact of postchemotherapy nausea and vomiting (PCNV) after moderately emetogenic chemotherapy on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in patients with cancer being treated in a routine clinical practice setting. The European Organization for Research and Treatment in Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) was administered on day 2 and day 6 following moderately emetogenic chemotherapy to 119 patients with a variety of cancers. Patients kept daily diaries to record the occurrence and severity of nausea and vomiting. The QLQ-C30 questions were modified, for this study only, to assess the impact of nausea and vomiting on HRQOL in patients who experienced nausea and/or vomiting during the six days following chemotherapy. Those patients who experienced either nausea or vomiting experienced a decrease in HRQOL from prechemotherapy levels on six functioning and five symptom scales at day 2, and on four functioning and four symptom scales on day 6. Comparison of mean scores between the unmodified QLQ-30 and the nausea and vomiting versions demonstrated that the HRQOL rating attributed to nausea and vomiting accounted for much, but not all, of the deterioration in HRQOL scores in patients who experienced these symptoms. It can be concluded that patients who experience PCNV experience a significant negative impact on their HRQOL and that this impact can be attributed in large part to their experience of nausea and vomiting. However, since not all of the deterioration is attributable to these symptoms, other reasons for some of the decrease in HRQOL must also be identified in future studies.

Adult↗

PubMed1995

Nausea and vomiting in fractionated radiotherapy: a prospective on-demand trial of tropisetron rescue for non-responders to metoclopramide.

A prospective trial was performed to better assess the risk of nausea and vomiting and the rescue value of tropisetron (TRO), a 5-HT3 receptor antagonist, in 88 patients undergoing fractionated radiotherapy to the abdomen or to large supradiaphragmatic fields and failing a first anti-emetic trial with metoclopramide (MET). Nausea was graded 0 (absent), 1 (mild), 2 (moderate) and 3 (severe). Nausea requiring anti-emetics (> or = grade 2) was present in 64% of the patients. MET was able to control nausea (< or = grade 1) in 26 of 58 patients (45%) who developed > or = grade 2 nausea during radiation treatment (2 patients vomiting without nausea included). 34 patients required TRO, and 31 experienced immediate relief. However, nausea (> or = grade 2) recurred in 7 patients from 1 to 3 weeks after starting TRO. Sex, age, field type and field size (cm2) did not influence the incidence and severity of nausea and vomiting. Only 24/88 patients vomited after starting radiotherapy. MET helped to eliminate emesis in one third of these patients. TRO helped to control vomiting in 73% of the salvaged patients. Constipation was observed in 8 patients on TRO and was a reason to stop the medication in 4 cases.

Abdominal Neoplasms↗

PubMed2004

Recall bias of the symptoms of nausea and vomiting of pregnancy.

OBJECTIVE: Nausea and vomiting of pregnancy is the most common medical condition in pregnancy. Relatively little research has been conducted on this condition, and much of it is based on women's reports. Determinants that affect women's reports of their nausea and vomiting of pregnancy symptoms have not been elucidated. The purpose of this study was to assess the accuracy of recall by women of their symptoms of nausea and vomiting of pregnancy. STUDY DESIGN: Two hundred women who called the Motherisk nausea and vomiting of pregnancy counseling line in Toronto were asked about the severity of their nausea and vomiting of pregnancy symptoms with the use of the pregnancy unique quantification of emesis and nausea system (PUQE). The patients were asked the same questions again during a follow-up call, which took place up to 16 weeks later. RESULTS: There was a recall (or reporting) bias for nausea and vomiting, with women reporting significantly more severe symptoms during their follow-up call than they had reported originally. Multivariate analysis revealed that the severity of the symptoms affected the accuracy of recall positively, whereas the time that has elapsed affected it negatively. CONCLUSION: Retrospective evaluation of nausea and vomiting of pregnancy symptoms may produce a recall bias, which may distort the evaluation of the therapeutic effectiveness of antiemetics.

Female↗

PubMed2006

Nausea and nutrition.

Nausea and vomiting are symptoms associated with a wide variety of diseases and particular life conditions, such as pregnancy. The symptoms may occur in acute form or chronically depending on the underlying pathogenesis. In some cases, nausea and vomiting are directly triggered by food, e.g. in patients suffering from food allergy or food intolerances. In other cases, food is not the primary cause but dietetic manipulations may still contribute to the management of the nausea and vomiting. Therefore, food plays an important pathophysiological and therapeutic role in nausea and vomiting. In the present article, we describe the most relevant nutrient triggers for nausea and vomiting, discuss food allergy and intolerance as cause of nausea and vomiting, propose a clinical classification of nausea and vomiting, and present in detail dietetic and other therapeutic strategies of relevance for the management of nausea and vomiting.

Female↗

PubMed2006

Pavlovian conditioning of nausea and vomiting.

Cancer patients undergoing cytotoxic drug treatment often experience side-effects, the most distressing being nausea and vomiting. Despite antiemetic drugs, 25-30% of the chemotherapy patients report these side-effects when being re-exposed to the stimuli that usually signal the chemotherapy session and its drug infusion. These symptoms are called anticipatory nausea and anticipatory vomiting. The present paper summarizes the evidence that anticipatory vomiting is acquired by Pavlovian conditioning, and, consequently, may be alleviated by conditioning techniques. To explore the mechanisms that induce and alleviate conditioned nausea and vomiting further, a conditioned nausea model was established in healthy humans using body rotation as the nausea-inducing treatment. The validity of this motion sickness model to examine conditioning mechanisms in the acquisition and alleviation of conditioned nausea was demonstrated. Cortisol and tumor-necrosis factor-alpha were elevated as endocrine and immunological correlates of nausea. Data in the rotation-induced motion sickness model indicated that gender is an important moderator variable to be considered in further studies. The paper concludes with a review of applications of the demonstrated conditioning principles as interventions to ameliorate distressing anticipatory nausea or anticipatory vomiting in cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy.

Animals↗

PubMed2005

Nausea: the neglected symptom?

Advances in antiemetic therapy over the past decade have undoubtedly eased the burden of radiotherapy- and chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. Despite this, these distressing side-effects of cancer therapy are still experienced by some patients. Moreover, nausea has both a higher incidence and a greater effect on patient quality of life than vomiting. The impact of nausea may therefore warrant more attention than perhaps it has received previously, and there is undoubtedly room for improvement regarding its treatment. Recognizing and treating nausea is complicated by the fact that it can only be measured subjectively by the patient rather than objectively by clinical staff. However, various patient-centred strategies may be employed by nurses to ensure self-reporting of the occurrence and impact of nausea. Nurses may also be best placed to identify patient-related prognostic factors in order to determine the risk of nausea. Antiemetic guidelines recommend the use of a 5-HT3-receptor antagonist for the control of emesis with moderate and highly emetogenic cancer therapy. Although guidelines do not distinguish between the available agents, pharmacological differences do exist, and it is necessary to consider this when tailoring regimens to individual patients. As with any therapy, less complicated dosing regimens are likely to improve compliance, an issue that may be particularly pertinent in nauseated patients who are unable to ingest multiple doses. Furthermore, the focus of antiemetic therapy should be on prevention, as the presence and severity of acute symptoms have been linked to occurrence of symptoms in the delayed phase and the likelihood of anticipatory nausea and vomiting with further treatment cycles. This review aims to assess the potentially neglected symptom of nausea and focuses on recognizing and controlling this side-effect of cancer therapy.

Antiemetics↗

PubMed2004

Aromatherapy with peppermint, isopropyl alcohol, or placebo is equally effective in relieving postoperative nausea.

To determine whether aromatherapy can reduce postoperative nausea, the investigators studied 33 ambulatory surgery patients who complained of nausea in the PACU. After indicating the severity of nausea on a 100-mm visual analogue scale (VAS), subjects received randomized aromatherapy with isopropyl alcohol, oil of peppermint, or saline (placebo). The vapors were inhaled deeply through the nose from scented gauze pads held directly beneath the patients' nostrils and exhaled slowly through the mouth. Two and 5 minutes later, the subjects rated their nausea on the VAS. Overall nausea scores decreased from 60.6 +/- 4.3 mm (mean +/- SE) before aromatherapy to 43.1 +/- 4.9 mm 2 minutes after aromatherapy (P <.005), and to 28.0 +/- 4.6 mm 5 minutes after aromatherapy (P < 10(-6)). Nausea scores did not differ between the treatments at any time. Only 52% of the patients required conventional intravenous (IV) antiemetic therapy during their PACU stay. Overall satisfaction with postoperative nausea management was 86.9 +/- 4.1 mm and was independent of the treatment group. Aromatherapy effectively reduced the perceived severity of postoperative nausea. The fact that a saline "placebo" was as effective as alcohol or peppermint suggests that the beneficial effect may be related more to controlled breathing patterns than to the actual aroma inhaled.

2-Propanol↗

PubMed2003

Ondansetron for the prevention and treatment of nausea and vomiting following pediatric strabismus surgery.

BACKGROUND: Neither droperidol nor ondansetron has been proven completely effective, and there are conflicting data comparing the efficacy of the two agents. The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy, safety and cost of a combination of ondansetron administered intravenously in the operating room followed by oral ondansetron treatment at home with the more commonly used treatment of intravenous droperidol therapy and oral dimenhydrinate therapy, for the prevention and treatment of postoperative nausea and vomiting in children undergoing strabismus surgery. METHODS: Double-blind randomized clinical trial with parallel comparison groups. All patients aged 6 months to 18 years who underwent strabismus surgery at a pediatric hospital in Montreal between Nov. 13, 2000, and June 12, 2001, were included. The exclusion criteria were nausea or vomiting, or use of antiemetics or narcotics in the 24 hours preceding surgery, and past history of hepatic, gastric or renal disease. The outcome measures were frequency of nausea and vomiting, severity of nausea and adverse effects in hospital, during transportation home and during the first 24 hours at home. Data were obtained through nursing notes and through a telephone interview conducted 24 to 48 hours after discharge. RESULTS: Of the 208 eligible patients, 172 were randomly assigned to the study groups (88 to the ondansetron group and 84 to the droperidol/dimenhydrinate group). We found no statistically significant difference in the incidence of nausea and vomiting in hospital or at home between the two groups (25.3% vs. 31.6%, p = 0.371). There was a significant difference between the two groups in the rate of vomiting during transportation home (3.6% vs. 12.6%, p = 0.044). The incidence of severe nausea was 14.4% with ondansetron and 15.4% with droperidol, a nonsignificant difference (p = 1.00). No significant difference was observed between the two groups in the incidence of any nausea (p = 0.434) or adverse effects (p = 0.220). We calculated that the combination of droperidol and dimenhydrinate was seven times less costly than the ondansetron regimen. INTERPRETATION: In this study, the efficacy and safety of intravenous administration of droperidol followed by oral use of dimenhydrinate did not differ from that of intravenous followed by oral use of ondansetron in children undergoing strabismus surgery. Since treatment with ondansetron is much more costly than the combination of droperidol and dimenhydrinate, at this time the use of ondansetron in the prevention and treatment of vomiting and nausea in this population may not be beneficial on a cost basis if all other variables are considered.

Administration, Oral↗

PubMed2001

Characteristics of fluvoxamine-induced nausea.

We investigated the association between fluvoxamine and nausea from various viewpoints. The incidence of nausea induced by fluvoxamine was 29% (12/41). Plasma 5-hydroxyindoleacetic acid (p5-HIAA) levels after fluvoxamine administration were significantly higher in patients with nausea (6.6+/-3.4 ng/ml) than in those without nausea (3.5+/-2.7 ng/ml). On the other hand, no significant differences were found between patients with and patients without nausea in terms of sex, age, initial and maximum dosages of fluvoxamine and its plasma concentrations, and clinical response to fluvoxamine. However, the incidence of nausea in patients who were initially administered fluvoxamine at under 50 mg/day was significantly lower than in those who were started at above 50 mg/day. In addition, mosapride, a member of the benzamide family, was effective in alleviating fluvoxamine-induced nausea. These results suggest that fluvoxamine-induced nausea is associated with hyperactivity in serotonergic neurons.

Adult↗

PubMed1996

Nonpharmacologic treatment of postoperative nausea.

UNLABELLED: Nausea is the most common postoperative complication of anesthesia. Appropriately applied acupressure offers a safe and cost-effective nursing approach to the prevention of this problem. This study tested the effect of acupressure on the incidence of postoperative nausea in same-day surgery patients. METHODS: Ninety outpatient surgery patients were randomly assigned to one of three groups. The treatment group (n = 30) received bilateral elastic bands designed to exert pressure on the appropriate location on the distal aspect of the wrist during the perioperative period. The placebo group (n = 30) had elastic bands incapable of acupressure placed on their wrists. The control group (n = 30) received routine nursing and medical interventions for nausea and vomiting. Antiemetics were prescribed by the anesthesiologist and administered to patients in all three groups if nausea persisted and/or emesis occurred. The incidences of nausea or vomiting were tabulated separately for operating room, PACU phase I, and PACU phase II, and compared using Fisher's Exact Test. RESULTS: The incidence of nausea and vomiting did not differ overall in the OR or PACU phase I. However, in PACU phase II the incidence was 10% in the treatment group, 20% in the placebo group, and 50% in the control group (overall, P = .0001). Treatment wrist bands reduced the incidence of nausea and vomiting as compared with the control group (P = .0001), as did the placebo wrist bands (P = .0033). The numerical trend suggests that the incidence is reduced by half. The incidence of nausea can be significantly reduced by the use of placebo and suggests that further reduction can be obtained by using acupressure.

Acupressure↗

PubMed1986

Vasopressin and catecholamine secretion during apomorphine-induced nausea mediate acute changes in haemostatic function in man.

Seven male volunteers were given apomorphine (14-20 micrograms/kg) subcutaneously on a total of ten occasions. Nausea was experienced on six occasions and on four occasions there was no effect. Venous samples were taken before injection, at peak nausea and 20 min later for assay of factor VIII coagulant activity (FVIIIC), von Willebrand factor antigen (vWFAg), the ristocetin cofactor (FVIIIRiCof), euglobulin clot lysis time (ECLT), fibrinopeptide A (FPA), FPA generation time, activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT), vasopressin (aVP) and adrenaline. During nausea plasma aVP concentrations rose from median values of 0.4 pg/ml (at time 0) to 76 pg/ml at peak nausea and fell to 32 pg/ml 20 min later. Adrenaline rose from 0.36 to 0.91 nmol/l (P less than 0.05) before falling to 0.55 nmol/l. During nausea, FVIIIC rose from 100% to 143% (P less than 0.05) and to 214% (P less than 0.05) 20 min later. FVIIIRiCof and vWFAg showed similar changes. Plasminogen activator activity (10(6)/ECLT2) rose from 23 units at time 0 to 592 units during nausea and 1135 units (P less than 0.05) after 20 min. The APTT fell from 49 s to 44 s during the study, plasma FPA levels and the FPA generation time both remained unchanged. On the four occasions nausea was not experienced, there were no changes in vasopressin and catecholamine concentrations nor in haemostatic function. During the study, plasma aVP concentrations rose to levels previously shown to influence haemostatic function. This provides further support for the view that aVP has a secondary role as a mediator of acute changes in haemostasis, and during nausea contributes with adrenaline to an abrupt change in factor VIII and fibrinolytic activator activity.

Apomorphine↗

PubMed2001

Placebo-controlled comparison of dolasetron and metoclopramide in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing hysterectomy.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: In a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial, we compared the efficacy of dolasetron and metoclopramide in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in women undergoing hysterectomy. METHODS: Patients were allocated randomly to one of three groups: group A (n = 50) received 50 mg dolasetron orally, group B (n = 50) received 20 mg metoclopramide intravenously and placebo orally, group C (n = 50) received placebo orally. If patients complained of retching or vomiting, or if patients demanded an antiemetic, 1.25 mg droperidol was administrated intravenously. To quantify postoperative nausea and vomiting the following score was used: 0 = no nausea, 1 = nausea, 2 = retching, 3 = single vomiting, 4 = multiple vomiting. The Raatz test was used to analyse postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) scores. RESULTS: Dolasetron reduced the postoperative nausea and vomiting score significantly (P < 0.02 vs. metoclopramide; P < 0.0001 vs. placebo). Metoclopramide also reduced the postoperative nausea and vomiting score (P < 0.02 vs. placebo). Fisher's exact test showed a significant reduction of vomiting in the dolasetron group compared with metoclopramide-treated patients (P < 0.007) and placebo-treated patients (P < 0.000006) and a significantly lower rate of nausea in comparison to the placebo group (P < 0.009). There were no significant differences between the metoclopramide and the placebo groups (in Fisher's exact test). The use of postoperative droperidol per patient was significantly lower in the dolasetron group (P < 0.04 vs. metoclopramide; P < 0.0001 vs. placebo) than in the metoclopramide (P < 0.02 vs. placebo) and in the placebo groups. CONCLUSIONS: Oral dolasetron is more effective than either metoclopramide given intravenously or placebo for preventing vomiting after hysterectomy. It also was significantly superior to either metoclopramide or placebo concerning the PONV score and the need for droperidol rescue.

Antiemetics↗

PubMed1999

Dimenhydrinate for prevention of post-operative nausea and vomiting in female in-patients.

Dimenhydrinate is an inexpensive antihistaminic drug, that is frequently used as an anti-emetic during anaesthesia. The popularity of the drug is contrasted by the lack of modern studies concerning its efficacy in reducing the incidence of post-operative nausea and vomiting. Thus, dimenhydrinate was compared with placebo in this prospective, randomized, double-blind study. One hundred and thirty-three female in-patients were studied. They were stratified according to the type of surgery (laparoscopic cholecystectomy, thyroid resection or knee arthroscopy) to ensure an homogeneous distribution in both groups. General anaesthesia was induced with etomidate, fentanyl, vecuronium and maintained with enflurane in N2O/O2. Neuromuscular block was reversed with pyridostigmine/atropine. Patients in the dimenhydrinate group (n = 67) received 62 mg dimenhydrinate intravenously after induction of anaesthesia. Placebo patients (n = 66) received saline. Administration of dimenhydrinate (and placebo) was repeated three times during the 48-h study to mitigate the short half-life of the drug. Post-operative analgesia and anti-emetic rescue medication was standardized. Episodes of vomiting, retching and the need for additional anti-emetics were recorded. Nausea was assessed using a 10-cm visual analogue scale. Post-operative nausea and vomiting was rated as 'none', 'mild', 'moderate' and 'severe' using a fixed scoring algorithm. There were no differences between the two groups with regard to biometric data, type of surgery and distribution of risk factors for developing post-operative nausea and vomiting. In the dimenhydrinate group, more patients remained completely free from post-operative nausea and vomiting compared with placebo (dimenhydrinate: 38.8%; placebo: 15.1%; P = 0.004). The incidence of severe post-operative nausea and vomiting was also reduced from 39.4% to 14.9%. No relevant side effects were observed. Intra-operative dimenhydrinate, followed by three further administrations after surgery, reduces the incidence and the severity of post-operative nausea and vomiting without side effects. However, there still remained an unacceptable high number of patients who were not prevented completely from experiencing post-operative nausea and vomiting.

Adult↗

PubMed2002

Acupuncture to treat nausea and vomiting in early pregnancy: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Nausea and vomiting in early pregnancy are troublesome symptoms for some women. We undertook a single blind randomized controlled trial to determine whether acupuncture reduced nausea, dry retching, and vomiting, and improved the health status of women in pregnancy. METHODS: The trial was undertaken at a maternity teaching hospital in Adelaide, Australia, where 593 women less than 14 weeks' pregnant with symptoms of nausea or vomiting were randomized into 4 groups: traditional acupuncture, pericardium 6 (p6) acupuncture, sham acupuncture, or no acupuncture (control). Treatment was administered weekly for 4 weeks. The primary outcomes were nausea, dry retching, vomiting, and health status. Comparisons were made between groups over 4 consecutive weeks. RESULTS: Women receiving traditional acupuncture reported less nausea (p < 0.01) throughout the trial and less dry retching (p < 0.01) from the second week compared with women in the no acupuncture control group. Women who received p6 acupuncture (p < 0.05) reported less nausea from the second week of the trial, and less dry retching (p < 0.001) from the third week compared with women in the no acupuncture control group. Women in the sham acupuncture group (p < 0.01) reported less nausea and dry retching (p < 0.001) from the third week compared with women in the no acupuncture group. No differences in vomiting were found among the groups at any time. CONCLUSION: Acupuncture is an effective treatment for women who experience nausea and dry retching in early pregnancy. A time-related placebo effect was found for some women.

Acupuncture Therapy↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Dolasetron decreases postoperative nausea and vomiting after breast surgery.

In a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial, we compared the efficacy of dolasetron, dexamethasone, and metoclopramide in a preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in women undergoing breast surgery. Patients were allocated randomly to one of four groups (20 patients each): group A received 12.5 mg dolasetron, group B received 8 mg dexamethasone, group C received 20 mg metoclopramide, and group D received placebo intravenously. If patients complained of retching or vomiting or if patients demanded an antiemetic, 1.25 mg droperidol was administered intravenously. To quantify postoperative nausea and vomiting, the following score was used: 0 = no nausea, 1 = nausea, 2 = retching, 3 = single vomiting, 4 = multiple vomiting. Dolasetron and dexamethasone reduced the postoperative nausea and vomiting score significantly (p < 0.02 versus metoclopramide; p < 0.0001 versus placebo). Metoclopramide also reduced the postoperative nausea and vomiting score (p < 0.02 versus placebo). Fisher's exact test showed a significant reduction of vomiting in the dolasetron and dexamethasone groups compared with metoclopramide-treated patients (p < 0.007) and placebo-treated patients (p < 0.000006) and a significantly lower rate of nausea in comparison to the placebo group (p < 0.009). There were no significant differences between the metoclopramide and the placebo groups (using Fisher's exact test). The use of postoperative droperidol was significantly lower in both the dolasetron group (p < 0.04 versus metoclopramide; p < 0.0001 versus placebo) and dexamethasone group (p < 0.04 versus metoclopramide; p < 0.0001 versus placebo), as well as in the metoclopramide group (p < 0.02 versus placebo). Intravenous dolasetron and dexamethasone were equally effective and both are more effective than metoclopramide for preventing vomiting after breast surgery. Also both were significantly superior to either metoclopramide or placebo for postoperative nausea and vomiting and the need for droperidol rescue.

Antiemetics↗

PubMed2001

Comparison of tropisetron and granisetron in the control of nausea and vomiting in children receiving combined cancer chemotherapy.

Tropisetron and granisetron are selective serotonin (5-HT3) antagonists that have been proven effective in the prevention of nausea and vomiting in adults and children receiving cancer chemotherapy. This prospective, randomised study was designed to compare the efficacy of the two agents in the prevention of vomiting and nausea in children receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy for various malignancies. A total of 51 children (mean age: 7.7 +/- 4.8 year) were studied in 133 chemotherapy cycles. In 66 chemotherapy cycles, the children received tropisetron as an antiemetic agent in a dose of 0.2 mg/kg/24 h intravenously and, in 67 cycles, they received granisetron 40 micrograms/kg/24 h intravenously before cytotoxic drug administration during the days they received chemotherapy. The response per 24 h of chemotherapy was defined as complete (no nausea and vomiting), partial (1-4 events of vomiting and/or nausea), and failure (more than 4 events of vomiting and/or nausea). Efficacy of antiemetic therapy was evaluated as acute (Day 1) and overall was based on the worst day during the chemotherapy. Complete control of acute vomiting was achieved in 74% of tropisetron and 88% of granisetron patients (P = 0.04), and complete control of acute nausea in 56% and 82% respectively (p = 0.002). Overall response by means of complete control of both vomiting and nausea during the whole therapy period was 29% of tropisetron group and 55% of granisetron group (p = 0.007). The statistical analysis (depending on the emetogenicity of the chemotherapy cycles) showed increased efficacy of granisetron in highly (grade 3) emetogenic chemotherapy cycles (p = 0.002), whereas there was no difference in the very highly emetogenic cycles (p = 0.7). Also, granisetron was found to be more effective than tropisetron, especially in patients heavier than 25 kg (p = 0.02). The adverse reactions were few and mild. There were no differences in the tolerability of the two antiemetic therapy modalities. In conclusion, granisetron was found to be more effective than tropisetron in controlling nausea and vomiting in children receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy. This increased antiemetic efficacy of ganisetron might have been related to maximal dose differences according to body weight.

Adolescent↗