比较帕洛诺司琼和昂丹司琼对腹腔镜手术患者术后恶心和呕吐的预防效果和安全性:系统综述和荟萃分析。

Jitendra Kumar, Ragavi Alagarsamy, Babu Lal, Anshul J Rai, Rajnish Joshi, Sunaina Tejpal Karna, Prateek Shakti, Dinesh Kumar Verma, Vineeta Yadav, Pankaj Goel, Md Yunus, Arivarasan Barathi
{"title":"比较帕洛诺司琼和昂丹司琼对腹腔镜手术患者术后恶心和呕吐的预防效果和安全性:系统综述和荟萃分析。","authors":"Jitendra Kumar, Ragavi Alagarsamy, Babu Lal, Anshul J Rai, Rajnish Joshi, Sunaina Tejpal Karna, Prateek Shakti, Dinesh Kumar Verma, Vineeta Yadav, Pankaj Goel, Md Yunus, Arivarasan Barathi","doi":"10.7602/jmis.2024.27.4.202","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a prevalent and distressing complication, especially in laparoscopic surgeries. This review compares the efficacy and safety of palonosetron and ondansetron in preventing PONV after laparoscopic surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review was conducted in PubMed, Google Scholar, Semantic Scholar, and Cochrane Library to identify comparative studies that reported the efficacy (nausea and vomiting) at three postoperative time points T1 (0-2 hours), T2 (2-6 hours), T3 (6-24 hours) and safety (incidence of adverse effects). Meta-analysis of relative risk was performed using a random effect model and subgroup analysis based on factors such as antiemetic dose and timing of administration, type of surgery, and anesthetic agents.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-one randomized controlled trials were published between 2011 and 2022, involving 2,043 participants. Nineteen trials were included in the meta-analysis (efficacy, 17; safety, 11). The pooled risk ratio revealed that patients receiving palonosetron demonstrated significantly less likelihood of developing nausea and vomiting at various postoperative time points. Subgroup analysis indicated significantly less PONV when palonosetron was administered before intubation and in combination with isoflurane anesthesia. Headache, dizziness, constipation, and drowsiness were the most commonly reported. The safety profiles of palonosetron and ondansetron were comparable.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Palonosetron exhibits superior efficacy within the first 24 hours postoperatively and requires less rescue antiemetic intervention compared to ondansetron in laparoscopic surgery patients. Both demonstrate nearly comparable safety profiles. Future trials focusing on cardiac safety (QT interval) and cost consideration are needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":73832,"journal":{"name":"Journal of minimally invasive surgery","volume":"27 4","pages":"202-216"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11655172/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of efficacy and safety between palonosetron and ondansetron to prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Jitendra Kumar, Ragavi Alagarsamy, Babu Lal, Anshul J Rai, Rajnish Joshi, Sunaina Tejpal Karna, Prateek Shakti, Dinesh Kumar Verma, Vineeta Yadav, Pankaj Goel, Md Yunus, Arivarasan Barathi\",\"doi\":\"10.7602/jmis.2024.27.4.202\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a prevalent and distressing complication, especially in laparoscopic surgeries. This review compares the efficacy and safety of palonosetron and ondansetron in preventing PONV after laparoscopic surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review was conducted in PubMed, Google Scholar, Semantic Scholar, and Cochrane Library to identify comparative studies that reported the efficacy (nausea and vomiting) at three postoperative time points T1 (0-2 hours), T2 (2-6 hours), T3 (6-24 hours) and safety (incidence of adverse effects). Meta-analysis of relative risk was performed using a random effect model and subgroup analysis based on factors such as antiemetic dose and timing of administration, type of surgery, and anesthetic agents.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-one randomized controlled trials were published between 2011 and 2022, involving 2,043 participants. Nineteen trials were included in the meta-analysis (efficacy, 17; safety, 11). The pooled risk ratio revealed that patients receiving palonosetron demonstrated significantly less likelihood of developing nausea and vomiting at various postoperative time points. Subgroup analysis indicated significantly less PONV when palonosetron was administered before intubation and in combination with isoflurane anesthesia. Headache, dizziness, constipation, and drowsiness were the most commonly reported. The safety profiles of palonosetron and ondansetron were comparable.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Palonosetron exhibits superior efficacy within the first 24 hours postoperatively and requires less rescue antiemetic intervention compared to ondansetron in laparoscopic surgery patients. Both demonstrate nearly comparable safety profiles. Future trials focusing on cardiac safety (QT interval) and cost consideration are needed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73832,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of minimally invasive surgery\",\"volume\":\"27 4\",\"pages\":\"202-216\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11655172/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of minimally invasive surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7602/jmis.2024.27.4.202\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of minimally invasive surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7602/jmis.2024.27.4.202","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:术后恶心和呕吐(PONV)是一种常见且令人痛苦的并发症,尤其是在腹腔镜手术中。本综述比较了帕洛诺司琼和昂丹司琼在预防腹腔镜手术后 PONV 方面的有效性和安全性:在 PubMed、Google Scholar、Semantic Scholar 和 Cochrane Library 中进行了系统性综述,以确定报告术后三个时间点 T1(0-2 小时)、T2(2-6 小时)、T3(6-24 小时)疗效(恶心和呕吐)和安全性(不良反应发生率)的比较研究。采用随机效应模型对相对风险进行了元分析,并根据止吐药剂量、给药时间、手术类型和麻醉剂等因素进行了亚组分析:2011年至2022年期间共发表了21项随机对照试验,涉及2043名参与者。19项试验被纳入荟萃分析(有效性,17项;安全性,11项)。汇总风险比显示,接受帕洛诺司琼治疗的患者在术后不同时间点出现恶心和呕吐的可能性明显降低。亚组分析表明,在插管前使用帕洛诺司琼以及与异氟醚麻醉联合使用时,PONV明显减少。头痛、头晕、便秘和嗜睡是最常见的症状。帕洛诺司琼和昂丹司琼的安全性相当:结论:与昂丹司琼相比,帕洛诺司琼在腹腔镜手术患者术后最初24小时内的疗效更佳,所需的止吐抢救干预也更少。两者的安全性几乎相当。未来的试验需要关注心脏安全性(QT 间期)和成本因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of efficacy and safety between palonosetron and ondansetron to prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Purpose: Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a prevalent and distressing complication, especially in laparoscopic surgeries. This review compares the efficacy and safety of palonosetron and ondansetron in preventing PONV after laparoscopic surgery.

Methods: A systematic review was conducted in PubMed, Google Scholar, Semantic Scholar, and Cochrane Library to identify comparative studies that reported the efficacy (nausea and vomiting) at three postoperative time points T1 (0-2 hours), T2 (2-6 hours), T3 (6-24 hours) and safety (incidence of adverse effects). Meta-analysis of relative risk was performed using a random effect model and subgroup analysis based on factors such as antiemetic dose and timing of administration, type of surgery, and anesthetic agents.

Results: Twenty-one randomized controlled trials were published between 2011 and 2022, involving 2,043 participants. Nineteen trials were included in the meta-analysis (efficacy, 17; safety, 11). The pooled risk ratio revealed that patients receiving palonosetron demonstrated significantly less likelihood of developing nausea and vomiting at various postoperative time points. Subgroup analysis indicated significantly less PONV when palonosetron was administered before intubation and in combination with isoflurane anesthesia. Headache, dizziness, constipation, and drowsiness were the most commonly reported. The safety profiles of palonosetron and ondansetron were comparable.

Conclusion: Palonosetron exhibits superior efficacy within the first 24 hours postoperatively and requires less rescue antiemetic intervention compared to ondansetron in laparoscopic surgery patients. Both demonstrate nearly comparable safety profiles. Future trials focusing on cardiac safety (QT interval) and cost consideration are needed.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信