Indonesian
Albanian
Arabic
Armenian
Azerbaijani
Belarusian
Bengali
Bosnian
Catalan
Czech
Danish
Deutsch
Dutch
English
Estonian
Finnish
Français
Greek
Haitian Creole
Hebrew
Hindi
Hungarian
Icelandic
Indonesian
Irish
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Latvian
Lithuanian
Macedonian
Mongolian
Norwegian
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Romanian
Russian
Serbian
Slovak
Slovenian
Spanish
Swahili
Swedish
Turkish
Ukrainian
Vietnamese
Български
中文(简体)
中文(繁體)
Pain Practice

Aprepitant vs. multimodal prophylaxis in the prevention of nausea and vomiting following extended-release epidural morphine.

Hanya pengguna terdaftar yang dapat menerjemahkan artikel
Masuk daftar
Tautan disimpan ke clipboard
Craig T Hartrick
Yeong-Shiuh Tang
David Hunstad
John Pappas
Kathy Muir
Cecile Pestano
Daniel Silvasi

Kata kunci

Abstrak

BACKGROUND

Extended-release epidural morphine (EREM) is an effective option for postoperative analgesia following major orthopedic surgery; however, postoperative nausea/vomiting (PONV) is a recognized limitation. The incidence of PONV following prophylactic aprepitant, a neurokinin-1 antagonist, was compared with prophylactic multimodal antiemetic therapy in patients receiving EREM for postoperative analgesia following unilateral primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

METHODS

Prospectively collected quality assurance data were examined with Institutional Review Board approval. A sequential, open-label, active matched case-control study compared PONV following EREM in patients receiving ondansetron and dexamethasone, and either metoclopramide, diphenhydramine, or prochlorperazine every 6 hours for the 48-hour study period, to patients receiving aprepitant 40 mg given as a single oral dose in the preoperative holding area. Cases were matched for procedure (TKA), age, epidural morphine dose, and known major risk factors for PONV (sex, smoking, previous PONV/motion sickness).

RESULTS

Twelve consecutive patients (3 male; 9 female) receiving aprepitant prior to EREM were matched to 12 patients of the same sex of similar age (range 51 to 84 years.) and EREM dose (range 5 to 12.5 mg) receiving the multimodal regime. The incidence of PONV was significantly less for the aprepitant group where 3 of 12 (25%) had PONV compared with 9 of 12 (75%) in the multimodal group (P = 0.039, Fisher's Exact Test; odds ratio = 0.11; 95% CI: 0.018 to 0.706, P = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

While aprepitant significantly reduced the incidence of PONV compared with a multimodal antiemetic regime, used alone it did not eliminate PONV.

Bergabunglah dengan
halaman facebook kami

Database tanaman obat terlengkap yang didukung oleh sains

  • Bekerja dalam 55 bahasa
  • Pengobatan herbal didukung oleh sains
  • Pengenalan herbal melalui gambar
  • Peta GPS interaktif - beri tag herba di lokasi (segera hadir)
  • Baca publikasi ilmiah yang terkait dengan pencarian Anda
  • Cari tanaman obat berdasarkan efeknya
  • Atur minat Anda dan ikuti perkembangan berita, uji klinis, dan paten

Ketikkan gejala atau penyakit dan baca tentang jamu yang mungkin membantu, ketik jamu dan lihat penyakit dan gejala yang digunakan untuk melawannya.
* Semua informasi didasarkan pada penelitian ilmiah yang dipublikasikan

Google Play badgeApp Store badge