Mechanisms of cisplatin- and m-chlorophenylbiguinide-induced emesis in ferrets

Kamato, Takeshi; Ito, Hiroyuki; Nagakura, Yukinori; Nishida, Akito; Yuki, Hidenobu; Yamano, Michiyo; Miyata, Keiji

doi:10.1016/0014-2999(93)90868-i

Cited by 50 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…9 In the present study, we found no clinically important adverse events that include excessive sedation and extrapyramidal signs in any group. Therefore, the safety profiles of ramosetron at 3 different doses (3 µg/kg, 6 µg/kg, and 12 µg/kg) and placebo used in this study were comparable.…”

Section: Commentmentioning

confidence: 79%

A Randomized Clinical Trial of a Single Dose of Ramosetron for the Prevention of Vomiting After Strabismus Surgery in Children

Fujii¹,

Tanaka²,

Ito³

2005

Arch Ophthalmol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Commentmentioning

confidence: 79%

A Randomized Clinical Trial of a Single Dose of Ramosetron for the Prevention of Vomiting After Strabismus Surgery in Children

Fujii¹,

Tanaka²,

Ito³

2005

Arch Ophthalmol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Ramosetron is an effective treatment for vomiting in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy [16][17][18] and many studies have concluded that prophylactic therapy with ramosetron is effective for preventing PONV after various surgical procedures [7,19,20]. The precise antiemetic mechanism of ramosetron remains unclear, but it may act on sites containing receptors that have demonstrated antiemetic effects [18].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The precise antiemetic mechanism of ramosetron remains unclear, but it may act on sites containing receptors that have demonstrated antiemetic effects [18]. Many studies have examined the prophylactic antiemetic effects of ramosetron compared with other 5-HT3 receptor antagonists including ondansetron and granisetron [21,22].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of prophylactic anti-emetic effects of ramosetron between single bolus administration and continuous infusion following bolus administration

Doo

Kim

et al. 2016

Anesth Pain Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Background:The authors hypothesized that the continuous infusion of ramosetron 0.15 mg following a 0.15 mg bolus administration would maintain higher 5-hydroxytryptamine type 3 receptor occupancy levels and be more effective in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) than a 0.3 mg single bolus administration. We conducted a study to compare the efficacy of single bolus ramosetron administration with the combination of continuous infusion following intravenous bolus administration for PONV prophylaxis. Methods: One hundred and fifty female patients undergoing thyroidectomy were allocated randomly to one of three groups to receive a placebo (Group 1, n = 49), 0.3 mg of IV ramosetron (Group 2, n = 53), or the continuous infusion of 0.15 mg ramosetron following a bolus administration of 0.15 mg of ramosetron (Group 3, n = 48). Anesthesia was maintained with sevoflurane and N2O. The incidence of PONV, nausea severity, and use of rescue antiemetics during the postoperative 24 hours were recorded. Results: Group 1 showed higher incidences of PONV during the postoperative 24 hour than Group 2 (81% vs. 58%, P = 0.02) and Group 3 (81% vs. 48%, P ＜ 0.01), but there was no difference between Groups 2 and 3 (P = 0.39). The use of rescue antiemetics was significantly lower in Groups 2 and 3 than Group 1 during the postoperative 6 to 24 hours. Conclusions: There were no significant differences of incidence and severity of PONV between ramosetron 0.3 mg single bolus administration and the combination of ramosetron infusion after 0.15 mg bolus administration. (Anesth Pain Med 2016; 11: 166-171)

show abstract

“…Release of serotonin has been implicated as a cause of the acute emesis induced by chemotherapy drugs, such as cisplatin and cyclophosphamide because ondansetron and other 5-HT 3 antagonists effectively block the immediate emetic response that occurs within the first 8 hours of the chemotherapy infusion [Andrews and Bhandari, 1993]. Also, 5-HT 3 agonists, such as mCPBG, induce emesis in species such as ferrets [Kamoto et al, 1993] and pigeons [Wolff and Leander, 1995], which can also be blocked by 5-HT 3 antagonists. However, 5-HT 3 antagonists are ineffective against nausea and vomiting produced through different pathways.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%