BackgroundThe aim of this study was to evaluate aprepitant in combination with palonosetron as compared to palonosetron alone for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in female patients receiving fentanyl- based intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV-PCA).MethodsIn this randomized single-blinded study, 100 female patients scheduled for elective surgery under general anesthesia were randomized to two groups: Group AP (80 mg aprepitant plus 0.075 mg palonosetron, n = 50) and Group P (0.075 mg palonosetron, n = 50). The patients in group AP received 80 mg aprepitant per oral 1–3 h before surgery, while all patients received 0.075 mg palonosetron after induction of standardized anesthesia. All patients had postoperative access to fentanyl-based IV-PCA. The incidence of nausea and vomiting, use of rescue medication, and severity of nausea were evaluated at 6 and 24 h after surgery.ResultsThe incidence of nausea (54%) and vomiting (2%) in group AP did not differ significantly from that in group P (48% and 14%, respectively) during the first 24 h after surgery (P > 0.05). Patient requirements for rescue medication in group AP (29%) were similar to those in group P (32%) at 24 h after surgery (P > 0.05). There was no difference between the groups in severity of nausea during the first 24 h after surgery (P > 0.05).ConclusionsAprepitant combined with palonosetron did not reduce the incidence of PONV as compared to palonosetron alone within 24 h of surgery in women receiving fentanyl-based IV-PCA.
We describe a case of a 35-year-old male patient who was scheduled for laparoscopic cholecystectomy and developed a life-threatening anaphylactic reaction 2 min after the administration of sugammadex. He manifested erythematous wheals on the entire body, dyspnea, hypotension, and tachycardia. These symptoms disappeared after the administration of epinephrine. The patient recovered and was discharged at postoperative day 5 without any complications. After 7 weeks, we performed a skin prick test, and there was a weakly positive reaction for sugammadex. This case is suspected anaphylaxis associated with sugammadex, and we need to be aware that the use of sugammadex is associated with a serious risk of anaphylaxis.
Background Phase-lag entropy (PLE) was recently described as a measurement of temporal pattern diversity in the phase relationship between two electroencephalographic signals from prefrontal and frontal montages. This study was performed to evaluate the performance of PLE for assessing the depth of sedation. Methods Thirty adult patients undergoing upper limb surgery with a brachial plexus block were administered propofol by target-controlled infusion. The depth of sedation was assessed using the Observer’s Assessment of Alertness/Sedation (OAA/S) scale. The effect-site concentration ( Ce ) of propofol was initially started at 0.5 μg/ml and was increased in increments of 0.2 μg/ml until an OAA/S score of 1 was reached. Three minutes after the target Ce was reached, the PLE, bispectral index (BIS), and level of sedation were assessed. Correlations between the OAA/S score and PLE or BIS were determined. The prediction probabilities (P k ) of PLE and BIS were also analyzed. Results The PLE values were closely correlated with the OAA/S scores (Spearman’s Rho = 0.755; P < 0.001) to an extent comparable with the correlation between the BIS and OAA/S score (Spearman’s Rho = 0.788; P < 0.001). The P k values of PLE and BIS were 0.731 and 0.718, respectively. Conclusions PLE is a new and reliable consciousness monitoring system for assessing the depth of sedation induced by propofol, which is comparable with the BIS.
BackgroundThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of palonosetron combined with dexamethasone for the prevention of PONV compared to dexamethasone alone in women who received intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV-PCA) using fentanyl.MethodsIn this randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study, 204 healthy female patients who were scheduled to undergo elective surgery under general anesthesia followed by IV-PCA for postoperative pain control were enrolled. Patients were divided into two groups: the PD group (palonosetron 0.075 mg and dexamethasone 5 mg IV; n = 102) and the D group (dexamethasone 5 mg IV; n = 102). The treatments were given after the induction of anesthesia. The incidence of nausea, vomiting, severity of nausea, and the use of rescue anti-emetics during the first 48 hours after surgery were evaluated.ResultsThe incidence of PONV was significantly lower in the PD group compared with the D group during the 0-24 hours (43 vs. 59%) and 0-48 hours after surgery (45 vs. 63%) (P < 0.05). The severity of nausea during the 6-24 hours after surgery was significantly less in the PD group compared with the D group (P < 0.05). The incidence of rescue antiemetic used was significantly lower in the PD group than in the D group during the 0-6 hours after surgery (13.1 vs. 24.5%) (P < 0.05).ConclusionsPalonosetron combined with dexamethasone was more effective in preventing PONV compared to dexamethasone alone in women receiving IV-PCA using fentanyl.
Introduction:We herein present 2 cases involving the combination of rocuronium and sugammadex in patients with motor neuron disease. The patients were a 54-year-old man with progressive muscular atrophy who underwent removal of internal fixators in the arm and leg, and a 66-year-old woman with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis who underwent skin grafting in the left lower leg. General anesthesia was induced with propofol, rocuronium, and remifentanil and maintained with desflurane and remifentanil. At the end of the surgical procedure, we administered sugammadex. Three or 4 minutes after administration of sugammadex, the patients began to breathe spontaneously and were extubated without complications.Conclusion:Sugammadex can be used successfully to reverse neuromuscular blockade in patients with motor neuron disease.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.