sábado, 28 de septiembre de 2013

NVPO/Postoperative nausea and vomit

Adopción de guías de consenso para el manejo de NVPO 
Consensus guideline adoption for managing postoperative nausea and vomiting.
Myklejord DJ, Yao L, Liang H, Glurich I.
Department of Anesthesiology, Marshfield Clinic, Marshfield, WI 54449, USA. myklejord.duane@marshfieldclinic.org
WMJ. 2012 Oct;111(5):207-13
Abstract
OBJECTIVE:Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a major source of patient dissatisfaction and is the leading cause of discharge delays and unanticipated postsurgical hospital admissions. The objective of this study was to examine the efficacy of PONV management consensus guidelinesat the institutional level. DESIGN: Retrospective, cross sectional study. SETTING: Post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) at a 504-bed multispecialty referral center. PARTICIPANTS:300 adult surgical patients who underwent general anesthesia prior to institutional adoption of PONV management guidelines and 301 adult surgical patients who underwent general anesthesia following adoption of guidelines. METHODS: The records of 601 adult surgical patients were examined for documented treatment for PONV while in the PACU, length of PACU stay, medications administered perioperatively, and patient characteristics including number and type of PONV risk factors. RESULTS:Institutional incidence of PONV decreased from 8.36% to 3.01% following adoption of management guidelines (P = 0.0047). All patients who developed PONV had 3 or more risk factors, and the reduction in incidence is attributable to an overall increase in preoperative antiemetic prophylaxis (P < 0.0001), with a concomitant increase in multimodal treatment (P < 0.0001) and decrease in single modality treatment (P = 0.0004). Length of stay in the PACU increased approximately 15 minutes in patients with PONV, but did not reach statistical significance. Development of PONV was associated with the presence of greater than 3 conventional risk factors (P = 0.009), never smoker status (P = 0.0009), and surgery type. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of consensus PONV prevention guidelines significantly reduced incidence at an institutional level. However, patients with 3 or more risk factors remain at risk for PONV. Risk stratification remains important and greater intervention is required in this subgroup at our institution. In response to publication of procedural consensus guidelines, individual institutions should consider modification of practices and assessment of outcomes following application. 

Estudio randomizado, prospectivo, doble ciego controlado con placebo comparando el efecto aditivo de midazolam oral y clonidina para profilaxis de nausea y vomito en pacientes premedicados con ganisetron sometidos a colecistectomía laparoscópica 
A prospective, randomized, double blind and placebo-control study comparing the additive effect of oral midazolam and clonidine for postoperative nausea and vomiting prophylaxis in granisetron premedicated patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystecomy.
Yadav G, Pratihary BN, Jain G, Paswan AK, Mishra LD.
Department of Anesthesiology, Sir Sunder Lal Hospital, Institute of Medical Sciences, BHU, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh, India.
J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2013 Jan;29(1):61-5. doi: 10.4103/0970-9185.105800.
Abstract
BACKGROUND:Reduction of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) continues to be a major challenge in perioperative care in spite of introduction of newer antiemetics with better efficacy and safety profiles. Therefore, we evaluated the additive effect of oral midazolam and clonidine for PONV prophylaxis in granisetron premedicated patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS:In a prospective, randomized fashion, 120 selected cases were randomized into three groups: I, II or III to receive a tablet of midazolam (15 mg, n = 36), clonidine (150 mcg, n = 40), or glucose as placebo (5 g, n = 44) orally, 1 h before anesthesia. Occurrence of PONV along with need for rescue antiemetic during the first postoperative day was compared between groups as a primary outcome. RESULTS: Episodes of PONV reduced significantly in Group II (15%) as compared to group I and III (22.2%, 59%) at various time points during the period of observation (P = 0.002). Need for rescue antiemetic was significantly lower in group I (13.88%) and II (5%) as compared to group III (52.27%, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION:Oral clonidine is better adjuvant for PONV prophylaxis, as compared to midazolam, in granisetron premedicated patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
KEYWORDS: Clonidine, PONV prophylaxis, granisetron premedicated, midazolam
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3590545/ 
  
La administración de dextrosa intravenosa reduce los requerimientos postoperatorios de antieméticos de rescate y la estancia postanestésica 
Intravenous dextrose administration reduces postoperative antiemetic rescue treatment requirements and postanesthesia care unit length of stay.
Dabu-Bondoc S, Vadivelu N, Shimono C, English A, Kosarussavadi B, Dai F, Shelley K, Feinleib J.
Department of Anesthesiology, Yale New Haven Hospital/Yale School of Medicine, 333 Cedar St., TMP 3, New Haven, CT 06520. susan.dabubondoc@yale.ed.
Anesth Analg. 2013 Sep;117(3):591-6. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0b013e3182458f9e. Epub 2012 Jan 17.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) remains the most common postoperative complication, and causes decreased patient satisfaction, prolonged postoperative hospital stays, and unanticipated admission. There are limited data that indicate that dextrose may reducenausea and vomiting. In this trial, we attempted to determine whether the rate of PONV can be decreased by postoperative administration of IVdextrose bolus. METHODS: To test the effect of postoperative dextrose administration on PONV rates, we conducted a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. We enrolled 62 nondiabetic, ASA class I or II nonsmoking outpatients scheduled for gynecologic laparoscopic and hysteroscopic procedures. Patients were randomized into 2 groups: the treatment group received dextrose 5% in Ringer lactate solution, and the control (placebo) group received Ringer lactate solution given immediately after surgery. All patients underwent a standardized general anesthesia and received 1 dose of antiemetic a half hour before emergence from anesthesia. PONV scores, antiemetic rescue medications, narcotic consumption, and discharge time were recorded in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) in half-hour intervals. RESULTS: The 2 groups were similar with regard to age, weight, anxiety scores, prior PONV, non per os status, presurgical glucose, anesthetic duration, intraoperative narcotic use, and total weight-based fluid volume received. Postoperative nausea scores were not significantly different in thedextrose group compared with the control group (P > 0.05) after Bonferroni correction for repeated measurements over time. However, patients who received dextrose 5% in Ringer lactate solution consumed less rescue antiemetic medications (ratio mean difference, 0.56; 95% confidence interval, 0.39-0.82; P = 0.02), and had a shorter length of stay in the PACU (ratio mean difference, 0.80; 95% confidence interval, 0.66-0.97; P = 0.03) compared with patients in the control group. CONCLUSION:In this trial, postanesthesia IV dextrose administration resulted in improved PONV management as defined by reductions in antiemetic rescue medication requirements and PACU length of stay that are worthy of further study. In light of its ease, low risk, and benefit to patient care and satisfaction, this therapeutic modality could be considered.

 
Atentamente
Dr. Francisco Martínez-Pelayo
Anestesiología y Medicina del Dolor
Publicar un comentario