No abstract available.
Hemorrhage ; Metoclopramide

No abstract available.
Blood Pressure* ; Metoclopramide* ; Rabbits*

No abstract available.
Antiemetics* ; Cisplatin* ; Dexamethasone* ; Humans ; Lorazepam* ; Metoclopramide* ; Ondansetron*

No abstract available.
Disorders of Excessive Somnolence ; Humans ; Metoclopramide ; Parkinsonian Disorders

No abstract available.
Drug Therapy, Combination* ; Metoclopramide* ; Ondansetron* ; Prospective Studies* ; Vomiting*

Methods: In a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial, 144 ASA I-II patients, scheduled for elective surgery under general anesthesia were randomly assigned to 1 of 4 groups. Group I received 2 ml of plain NSS, group II received lidocaine 40 mg, group III received thiopental 0.5mg/kg and group IV received metoclopramide 10 mg. All pretreatment drugs were made into 2 ml solutions and were given IV with manual venous occlusion of 1 minute. Propofol was administered after release of venous occlusion. pain was then assessed using a four-point scale and face pain scale during propofol injection. Results: 36 patients (100%) complained of pain in the control group compared with 20 (56%), 22 (61%) and 23 (64%) in the lidocaine, thiopental and metoclopramide groups, respectively (p<0.05). there was no significant difference among the 3 test solution with regards to severity of pain. Nor were there any noted complications 24 hours postoperatively on the injection site. Conclusion: Thiopental and metoclopramide are equally effective as lidocaine in reducing pain during propofol injection when used with manual venous occlusion.
Human ; LIDOCAINE ; THIOPENTAL ; METOCLOPRAMIDE ; PROPOFOL ; PAIN MANAGEMENT ; ANESTHESIA

BACKGROUND: Midazolam has been reported to decrease postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). We studied the antiemetic effect of midazolam after middle ear surgery. METHODS: In this prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, 90 healthy patients were scheduled for middle ear surgery (tympanomastoidectomy and tympanoplasty). Patients were randomly divided into two groups; Midazolam 0.075 mg/kg (n = 45) or normal saline (n = 45) was administered after induction of anesthesia. The incidence of PONV, metoclopramide and ketorolac usage, pain, sedation, and other side effects were assessed at 6, 24 h after the operation. RESULTS: The incidences of PONV were 15 (33%) in midazolam group and 27 (60%) in placebo group during 24 h postoperatively. The incidence of PONV in midazolam group was significantly lower than that in placebo group (P < 0.05). There were no significant differences between groups in adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Midazolam 0.075 mg/kg was effective for preventing PONV after middle ear surgery without significant adverse effects.
Anesthesia ; Antiemetics ; Ear, Middle* ; Humans ; Incidence ; Ketorolac ; Metoclopramide ; Midazolam* ; Nausea* ; Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting ; Prospective Studies ; Vomiting*

BACKGROUND: Propofol is a good induction agent. but it has a disadvantage of pain on intravenous injection. Pretreatment of metoclopramide or lidocaine have been reported to reduce pain on injection. thus, we have evaluated the quantity and quality of anagesic effect of metoclopramide and lidocaine. We observed differences in quality of pain according to venous cannula sizes and intravenous injection sites as well as nausea and vomiting in the postoperative state. METHODS: Eighty patients scheduled for an elective operation by general anesthesia were chosen according to ASA (I or II) and divided into four groups randomly. Each group was injected through venous cannulas with normal saline (control group), metoclopramide 5 mg (group 1), metoclopramide 10 mg (group 2), or 2% lidocaine 40 mg (group 3) respectively. Then, propofol was injected of a 2 mg/kg dose with 0.5 ml/sec to all groups and we asked questions about injection pain after 10 seconds. RESULTS: Pain relief was shown in all groups compared with the control. but metoclopramide 10 mg and lidocaine 40 mg pretreatment groups showed significant pain reief. Pain was relieved significantly when the drug was injected in the antecubital area. Postoperative nausea and vomiting were not observed. CONCLUSIONS: Metoclopramide 10 mg or lidocaine 40 mg pretreatment to induction by propofol revealed a good analgesic effect for propofol injection pain.
Anesthesia, General ; Anesthetics ; Catheters ; Humans ; Injections, Intravenous ; Lidocaine ; Metoclopramide* ; Nausea ; Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting ; Propofol* ; Vomiting

The object of this study is to measure the transit time and passage rate of capsule endoscopy (CE) in the gastrointestinal tract in medium sized beagle dogs (7~13 kg). Animals were divided into four groups: only capsule (group 1, n=10), capsule+water (group 2, n=10), mettoclopramide+capsule (group 3, n=10), metoclopramide +capsule+water (group 4, n=10). The capsule transit times through the stomach and small bowel were evaluated by radiography findings. Gastric transit time (GTT), small intestinal transit time (SITT) and complete passage rate were measured in four groups. GTT's for each group were as follows; 45+/-20 min (group 1), 117+/-35 min (group 2), 150+/-40 min (group 3), and 154+/-65 min (group 4), while SITT's were 75+/-20 min (group 1), 195+/-55 min (group 2), 70+/-15 min (group 3), and 76+/-15 min (group 4). The complete passage rates were 20% (group 1), 40% (group 2), 20% (group 3), 50% (group 4). In all groups, if CE could pass through the pylorus, it passed all small intestinal tracts within 8 hours (battery life). Administration of water helped CE to pass pylori, except in case of metoclopramide administration. These results indicate that CE could be an useful tool for examining gastrointestinal diseases in the veterinary medicine.
Animals ; Capsule Endoscopy ; Dogs ; Gastrointestinal Diseases ; Gastrointestinal Tract ; Gastrointestinal Transit ; Metoclopramide ; Pylorus ; Stomach ; Veterinary Medicine ; Water

OBJECTIVETo investigate the effect of metoclopramide on capsule endoscopy (CE) examination.

METHODSTotal 116 patients referred for CE were randomized into two groups with 58 patients in each group. In treatment group patients received 10 mg metoclopramide intramuscular injection after swallowing the capsule and in control group no metoclopramide was administered. The gastric transit time, small bowel transit time, complete endoscopy rate were observed in both groups.

RESULTSThe CE examination was completed in 51 patients of treatment group (87.9%) and 48 of control group (84.2%). Mean gastric transit time was (32.45 ± 29.63) min in treatment group and (45.81 ± 40.01)min in control group, there was significant difference between two groups (P<0.05). Mean small bowel transit time was (252.69 ± 113.29) min in treatment group and (258.75 ± 83.83) min in control group, there was no significant difference between two groups (P>0.05).

CONCLUSIONMetoclopramide may reduces gastric transit time, but not effect small bowel transit time,which suggests that it might increase the likelihood of complete small-bowel examination in patients undergoing capsule endoscopy.

Adult ; Capsule Endoscopy ; Female ; Gastrointestinal Transit ; drug effects ; Humans ; Male ; Metoclopramide ; therapeutic use ; Middle Aged