Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-544b6db54f-jcwnq Total loading time: 0.196 Render date: 2021-10-21T00:11:42.470Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

Comparative study of the antiemetic efficacy of ondansetron, propofol and midazolam in the early postoperative period

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 July 2005

H. Unlugenc
Affiliation:
Cukurova University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Anaesthesiology, Adana, Turkey
T. Guler
Affiliation:
Cukurova University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Anaesthesiology, Adana, Turkey
Y. Gunes
Affiliation:
Cukurova University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Anaesthesiology, Adana, Turkey
G. Isik
Affiliation:
Cukurova University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Anaesthesiology, Adana, Turkey
Get access

Abstract

Summary

Background and objective: To compare the antiemetic efficacy of ondansetron with two different hypnotic drugs (propofol 15 mg, midazolam 1 and 2 mg) for the treatment of established postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV).

Methods: Four-hundred-and-fifty-three patients scheduled for elective gynaecological or abdominal surgery were enrolled. One-hundred-and-twenty patients (26%) experienced postoperative emesis, and when nausea scores reached 2 or greater on a five-point scale, they were randomized to receive intravenously: propofol 15 mg (1.5 mL) in Group P, midazolam 1 mg in Group M1, midazolam 2 mg in Group M2 and ondansetron 4 mg in Group O.

Results: Four patients (13.3%) in Group P, 13 patients (43.3%) in Group M1, five patients (16.6%) in Group M2 and one patient (3.3%) in Group O required a second dose of the study drug. After administration of the study drugs, nausea scores were significantly lower in all groups than before these drugs were given. No patient had a sedation score over 3 (the patients remained awake and/or responded to verbal contact). The sedative effects of midazolam and propofol lasted for a much shorter time than the antiemetic effects of these drugs.

Conclusions: Propofol and midazolam used in subhypnotic doses were as effective as ondansetron in treating PONV in patients undergoing abdominal or gynaecological surgery without untoward sedative or cardiovascular effects.

Type
Original Article
Copyright
2003 European Society of Anaesthesiology

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Camu F, Lauwers MH, Verbessem D. Incidence and aetiology of postoperative nausea and vomiting. Eur J Anaesthesiol 1992; 9: 2531.Google Scholar
Andersen R, Krogh K. Pain as a major cause for postoperative nausea. Can Anaesth Soc J 1976; 23: 366369.Google Scholar
Borgeat A, Wilder-Smith OHG, Suter PM. The nonhypnotic therapeutic applications of propofol. Anesthesiology 1994; 80: 642656.Google Scholar
Splinter WM, Rhine EJ, Roberts DJ. Vomiting after strabismus surgery in children: ondansetron vs propofol. Can J Anaesth 1997; 44: 825829.Google Scholar
Di Florio T. Is propofol a dopamine antagonist? Anesth Analg 1993; 77: 200201.Google Scholar
Splinter WM, MacNeill HB, Menard EA, Rhine EJ, Roberts DJ, Gould MH. Midazolam reduces vomiting after tonsillectomy in children. Can J Anaesth 1995; 42: 201203.Google Scholar
Borgeat A, Wilder-Smith OHG, Saiah M, Rifat K. Subhypnotic doses of propofol possess direct antiemetic properties. Anesth Analg 1992; 74: 539541.Google Scholar
Song D, Whitten CW, White PF, Yu SY, Zarate E. Antiemetic activity of propofol after sevoflurane and desflurane anesthesia for outpatient laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Anesthesiology 1999; 90: 17891790.Google Scholar
Splinter W, Noel LP, Roberts D, Rhine E, Bonn G, Clarke W. Antiemetic prophylaxis for strabismus surgery. Can J Ophthalmol 1994; 29: 224–226.Google Scholar
Cole WH. Midazolam in paediatric anaesthesia. Anaesth Intensive Care 1982; 10: 3639.Google Scholar
Blackwell CP, Harding SM. Clinical pharmacology of ondansetron. Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol 1989; 25: 2127.Google Scholar
Chernik DA, Gillings D, Laine H, et al. Validity and reliability of the Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation (OAA/S) scale: study with intravenous midazolam. J Clin Psychopharmacol 1990; 10: 244251.Google Scholar
Madej TH, Simpson KH. Comparison of the use of domperidone, droperidol and metoclopramide in the prevention of nausea and vomiting following gynaecological surgery in day cases. Br J Anaesth 1986; 58: 884887.Google Scholar
Ewalenko P, Janny S, Dejonckheere M, Andry G, Wyns C. Antiemetic effect of subhypnotic doses of propofol after thyroidectomy. Br J Anaesth 1996; 77: 463467.Google Scholar
Appadu BL, Strange PG, Lambert DG. Does propofol interact with D2 dopamine receptor? Anesth Analg 1994; 79: 11911192.Google Scholar
Gan TJ, El-Molem H, Ray J, Glass PSA. Patient-controlled antiemesis. A randomized, double blind comparison of two doses of propofol versus placebo. Anesthesiology 1999; 90: 15641570.Google Scholar
Harper I, Della-Marta E, Owen H, Plummer J, Ilsley A. Lack of efficacy of propofol in the treatment of early postoperative nausea and vomiting. Anaesth Intensive Care 1998; 26: 366370.Google Scholar
Di Florio T, Goucke CR. The effect of midazolam on persistent postoperative nausea and vomiting. Anaesth Intensive Care 1999; 27: 3840.Google Scholar
Kay NH, Sear JW, Uppington J, Cockshott ID, Douglas EJ. Disposition of propofol in patients undergoing surgery: A comparison in men and women. Br J Anaesth 1986; 58: 10751079.Google Scholar
Larijani GE, Gratz I, Afshar M, Minassian S. Treatment of postoperative nausea and vomiting with ondansetron: a randomized, double-blind comparison with placebo. Anesth Analg 1992; 74: 473474.Google Scholar
Polati E, Verlato G, Finco G, et al. Ondansetron versus metoclopramide in the treatment of postoperative nausea and vomiting. Anesth Analg 1997; 85: 395399.Google Scholar
Tramèr MR, Reynolds DJM, Moore RA, McQuay HJ. Efficacy, dose–response, and safety of ondansetron in prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting: a quantitative systematic review of randomized placebo-controlled trials. Anesthesiology 1997; 87: 12771289.Google Scholar
Tramèr MR, Reynolds DJM, Stoner NS, Moore RA, McQuay HJ. Efficacy of 5-HT3 receptor antagonists in radiotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: a quantitative systematic review. Eur J Cancer 1998; 34: 18361844.Google Scholar

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Comparative study of the antiemetic efficacy of ondansetron, propofol and midazolam in the early postoperative period
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Comparative study of the antiemetic efficacy of ondansetron, propofol and midazolam in the early postoperative period
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Comparative study of the antiemetic efficacy of ondansetron, propofol and midazolam in the early postoperative period
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *