Suppr超能文献

昂丹司琼给药时间对接受耳鼻喉科手术的门诊患者的影响。

The effect of timing of ondansetron administration in outpatients undergoing otolaryngologic surgery.

作者信息

Sun R, Klein K W, White P F

机构信息

Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Management, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas 75235-9068, USA.

出版信息

Anesth Analg. 1997 Feb;84(2):331-6. doi: 10.1097/00000539-199702000-00016.

Abstract

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was designed to compare the relative efficacy of prophylactic ondansetron, 4 mg intravenously (IV), when administered before induction of anesthesia or at the end of surgery to an outpatient population at high risk of developing postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). Patients undergoing otolaryngologic surgery were randomly assigned to one of three different treatment groups: Group 1 (placebo) received saline 5 mL prior to induction of anesthesia and again at the end of surgery; Group II received ondansetron 4 mg in 5 mL prior to induction of anesthesia and saline 5 mL at the end of surgery; and Group III received saline 5 mL prior to induction of anesthesia and ondansetron 4 mg at the end of surgery. All patients received the same general anesthetic technique. A standardized regimen of rescue antiemetics was administered in the recovery room to patients with > or = 2 emetic episodes or at the patients request for persistent nausea. Episodes of nausea and vomiting, as well as the need for rescue antiemetics, were recorded for 24 h after the operation. The incidences of nausea and emesis in the recovery room after prophylactic ondansetron, 4 mg IV, administered either before induction (68% and 20%, respectively) or at the end of surgery (60% and 4%, respectively) were not significantly decreased compared to the placebo control group (80% and 12%, respectively). However, when ondansetron was administered at the end of the operation, it significantly reduced the need for rescue antiemetics in the recovery room (36% vs 64% in the control group). The postanesthesia care unit and hospital discharge times were similar in all three study groups. One patients in Group II and one patient in Group III were hospitalized because of intractable symptoms related to PONV. After discharge from the ambulatory surgery unit, the incidence of nausea, vomiting, and the need for rescue antiemetic drugs were similar in all three treatment groups. In conclusion, ondansetron (4 mg IV) was more effective in reducing the need for rescue antiemetics in the recovery room when administered at the end versus prior to the start of otolaryngologic surgery. Therefore, when ondansetron is used for antiemetic prophylaxis in outpatients undergoing otolaryngologic procedures, it should be administered at the end of the operation rather than prior to induction of anesthesia.

摘要

一项随机、双盲、安慰剂对照研究旨在比较预防性静脉注射4毫克昂丹司琼,在麻醉诱导前或手术结束时给予高风险发生术后恶心呕吐(PONV)的门诊患者的相对疗效。接受耳鼻喉科手术的患者被随机分配到三个不同治疗组之一:第1组(安慰剂组)在麻醉诱导前和手术结束时各接受5毫升生理盐水;第II组在麻醉诱导前接受5毫升含4毫克昂丹司琼的溶液,手术结束时接受5毫升生理盐水;第III组在麻醉诱导前接受5毫升生理盐水,手术结束时接受4毫克昂丹司琼。所有患者均采用相同的全身麻醉技术。对有≥2次呕吐发作或患者因持续性恶心要求时,在恢复室给予标准化的抢救性止吐药方案。记录术后24小时内的恶心和呕吐发作情况以及使用抢救性止吐药的需求。与安慰剂对照组(分别为80%和12%)相比,术前(分别为68%和20%)或手术结束时(分别为60%和4%)静脉注射4毫克昂丹司琼预防性给药后,恢复室恶心和呕吐的发生率并未显著降低。然而,当在手术结束时给予昂丹司琼时,它显著降低了恢复室对抢救性止吐药的需求(36%对对照组的64%)。所有三个研究组的麻醉后护理单元停留时间和出院时间相似。第II组和第III组各有一名患者因与PONV相关的顽固性症状住院。在门诊手术单元出院后,所有三个治疗组的恶心、呕吐发生率以及使用抢救性止吐药的需求相似。总之,在耳鼻喉科手术结束时而非开始前给予昂丹司琼(静脉注射4毫克)在减少恢复室对抢救性止吐药的需求方面更有效。因此,当昂丹司琼用于接受耳鼻喉科手术的门诊患者的止吐预防时,应在手术结束时而非麻醉诱导前给药。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验