Effect of timing of ramosetron administration on incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing laparoscopic gynecological surgery.
10.4097/kjae.2009.56.6.663
- Author:
Sun Yeul LEE
1
;
Yong Sup SHIN
;
Jeong Hyun KIM
;
Youn Hee CHOI
;
Young Kwon KO
Author Information
1. Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, College of Medicine, Chungnam National University, Daejeon, Korea. ysshin@cnu.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Gynecologic surgical procedures;
Postoperative nausea and vomiting;
Ramosetron
- MeSH:
Analgesics;
Anesthesia, General;
Antiemetics;
Benzimidazoles;
Female;
Gynecologic Surgical Procedures;
Humans;
Incidence;
Nausea;
Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting;
Vomiting
- From:Korean Journal of Anesthesiology
2009;56(6):663-668
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing laparoscopic gynecological surgery have a remarkably high incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of the timing of ramosetron administration on its antiemetic efficacy in patients undergoing laparoscopic gynecological surgery. METHODS: One hundred and twenty patients undergoing laparoscopic gynecological surgery under general anesthesia were randomized to receive 0.3 mg of ramosetron intravenously either immediately after induction (group I, n = 60) or at the completion of surgery (group II, n = 60). Occurrences of nausea and vomiting, the need for rescue antiemetics and analgesics, pain score, as well as adverse events associated with study medications, were recorded for 48 hrs after the operation. RESULTS: The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting in the I and II groups were 46.7%, 41.7% respectively. There was no significant difference between the groups in the incidences of PONV, the need for rescue antiemetics and analgesics, pain score and adverse events associated with study medications (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The effect of ramosetron administered either immediately after induction or at the completion of surgery was similar to each other on its efficacy as a prophylactic antiemetic in patients undergoing laparoscopic gynecological surgery.
