Postoperative nausea and vomiting: a review of the "minor-major" problem

Abstracts

JUSTIFICATIVA E OBJETIVOS: Apesar da investigação contínua e do desenvolvimento de novos fármacos e técnicas, as náuseas e vômitos no pós-operatório (NVPO) são freqüentes e podem contribuir para o desenvolvimento de complicações com conseqüente aumento dos custos hospitalares e dos recursos humanos. Os objetivos deste artigo são a revisão dos mecanismos fisiológicos, dos fatores de risco e das medidas terapêuticas disponíveis para o manuseio de NVPO. CONTEÚDO: Várias são as estratégias de manuseio de NVPO sugeridas neste artigo, destacando-se, no entanto, as linhas de orientação emitidas por Gan em 2003. Estas constituem a contribuição mais recente para a estratificação de risco, prevenção e tratamento dos pacientes com NVPO. CONCLUSÕES: Embora o manuseio de NVPO tenha melhorado nos últimos anos, estes ainda ocorrem freqüentemente em grupos de risco elevado. A estratégia atual para a prevenção e manuseio de NVPO permanece por estabelecer e as linhas de orientação de Gan deverão ser adaptadas a cada população de pacientes e à instituição hospitalar.

ANTIEMÉTICOS; COMPLICAÇÕES; COMPLICAÇÕES

REVIEW ARTICLE

Postoperative nausea and vomiting: a review of the "minor-major" problem^*

Náuseas y vómitos en el posoperatorio: una revisión del "pequeño-grande'' problema

Neusa Lages, M.D.^I; Cristina Fonseca, M.D.^I; Aida Neves, M.D.^II; Nuno Landeiro, M.D.^II; Fernando José Abelha, M.D.^II

^IInterno Complementar de Anestesiologia

^IIAssistente Hospitalar Graduado

^{Correspondence to}

SUMMARY

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Notwithstanding continuous investigations and the development of new drugs and techniques, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) are frequent and may contribute to the development of complications, thus increasing hospital and human costs. This article aimed at reviewing physiological mechanisms, risk factors and therapeutic approaches available to manage PONV.

CONTENTS: Several strategies to manage PONV are suggested in this article, but stress is given to guidelines published by Gan in 2003. They are the most recent contribution for risk stratification, prevention and treatment of PONV patients.

CONCLUSIONS: Although the management of PONV has improved in recent years, it is still common among high-risk patients. Current strategy to prevent and treat PONV is not yet established and Gan guidelines should be adapted to each population and institution.

Key Words: ANTIEMETICS; COMPLICATIONS: postoperative nausea, vomiting

RESUMEN

JUSTIFICATIVA Y OBJETIVOS: A pesar de la averiguación continuada y del desarrollo de nuevos fármacos y técnicas, las náuseas y vómitos en el posoperatorio (NVPO) son frecuentes y pueden aportar para el desarrollo de complicaciones con consecuente aumento de los costeos hospitalarios y de los recursos humanos. Los objetivos de este artículo son la revisión de los mecanismos fisiológicos, de los factores de riesgo y las medidas terapéuticas disponibles para el manoseo de NVPO.

CONTENIDO: Varias son las estrategias de manoseo de NVPO sugeridas en este artículo, destacándose, sin embargo, las líneas de orientación emitidas por Gan en 2003. Éstas, constituyen la contribución más reciente para la estratificación del riesgo, prevención y tratamiento de los pacientes con NVPO.

CONCLUSIONES: Aunque el manoseo del NVPO haya mejorado en los últimos años, éstos aún ocurren frecuentemente en grupos de riesgo elevado. La estrategia actual para la prevención y manoseo de NVPO permanece por establecer y las líneas de orientación de Gan deberán ser adaptadas a cada población de pacientes y a la institución hospitalaria.

INTRODUCTION

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) are among most frequent complications during anesthetic recovery. Until 1960, when inhalational anesthetics such as ether or cyclopropane were widely used, the incidence of vomiting could reach 60% ¹. Today, in spite of the progress of anesthetic techniques, of short-lasting drugs and of the development of new antiemetic drugs, global incidence is still approximately 20% to 30% ². Pediatric patients are not spared and children above 3 years of age have an incidence of PONV of approximately 40% ³. In risk populations, PONV may reach 70% and approximately 0.2% of patients may suffer untreatable PONV ², delaying hospital discharge, requiring unexpected admissions, generating a low level of patients' satisfaction and increasing hospital costs. In addition to above-mentioned complications, more severe situations may be generated, such as suture dehiscence, vomiting aspiration, aspiration pneumonia, dehydration, hydroelectrolytic changes, esophageal rupture and increased intracranial pressure.

Several studies were carried out to determine major postoperative concerns. Eberhart et al. have evaluated 220 patients and have stratified which of the 9 proposed scenarios (from 81 possible) for the recovery unit would be more desirable to be avoided. PONV was the scenario most patients would like to avoid (49%), followed by others such as pain (27%) and no sedation (13%) ⁵. Eberhart et al. have concluded that patients would be willing to accept other complications and even additional personal costs to minimize or prevent PONV. Macario et al. in a similar study have proposed to patients to spend a hypothetical amount of 100 dollars to prevent some anesthetic side effects ⁶. The conclusion was that patients would be willing to spend a higher amount to prevent vomiting (18 dollars) and nausea (12 dollars), as compared to preventing postoperative pain (17 dollars) or shivering (8 dollars). Gan et al., in a different study, has also concluded that patients were willing to spend more than 100 dollars, at their own expenses, for an effective antiemetic drug ⁷.

PONV DEFINITIONS AND PHYSIOLOGY

Nausea and vomiting are not synonyms, being important to separate them since some drugs are more effective against nausea and others against vomiting ⁸. Nausea is the uncomfortable sensation associated to the need for vomiting, while vomiting is the forced expelling of gastric content.

The act of vomiting is controlled by the vomiting center, located in the lateral reticular formation of the spinal cord. It receives afferences from the chemoreceptor zone (4^th ventricle floor), vestibular tract, cerebellum, solitary tract nucleus and upper cortical centers. There are several receptors involved in transmitting impulses to the vomiting center: muscarinic, dopaminergics (D₂), hystaminergics (H₁), opioids, serotoninergics (5-HT₃) and neurokyninics (NK-1) ⁹. Vomiting pathways may be triggered by several stimulations that integrate and activate the vomiting center. Other factors also contribute for PONV, such as dehydration, some odors, pain, concern and fear ⁹. Mechanisms of action of antiemetics and receptors blockade or stimulations already mentioned are represented in figure 1.

IDENTIFICATION OF PONV RISK FACTORS

Several studies have been carried out to identify PONV risk factors and anticipate patients with higher risk of this complication ^2,10-12. These may be related to patients, surgical procedure or anesthetic technique.

Patient-related factors are gender, age, previous PONV history, motion sickness and smoking. Males seem to be more protected against PONV, with one third lower incidence as compared to females ^2,12. Age above 18 years is considered by some studies as protective against PONV, while others do not confirm it ^2,11,12.

Some studies attribute a protecting effect to previous smoking history ^2,11-13. Some surgical procedures are traditionally associated to higher incidence of PONV (strabismus correction, ENT surgery, gynecologic surgery, shoulder surgery and laparoscopic surgery) ¹². In a recent study with approximately 5200 patients, the relative risk was similar for all types of surgery, when corrected for Apfel's risk factors, except for hysterectomies and possibly laparoscopic cholecystectomy ¹³. So, predictive models of PONV risk including surgery type do no add to predictive value as compared to simplified models ^14,15. Surgery length and surgeon's experiences (associated to the intensity of visceral manipulation) are also considered risk factors ¹⁶.

Anesthesia-related factors influence the incidence of PONV ¹⁶. Hypotension, especially during induction, postoperative opioids and ineffective analgesia contribute to a higher incidence of PONV. Three meta-analysis have shown that lack of N₂O decreases PONV in adults submitted to low risk procedures ⁸. Proposed mechanism consists of N₂O spread to middle ear with vestibular tract stimulation, and to the bowel distending it, inducing spinal cord dopaminergic system activation and increasing endogenous opioids in CSF. Other authors advocate that lack of N₂O is correlated to the use of higher oxygen concentrations and that this would be the protecting mechanism ¹⁷. High doses of anticholinesterase drugs used to antagonize neuromuscular block increase gastric motility and PONV ¹⁸. Inhalational anesthesia is also of higher risk as compared to total intravenous anesthesia, especially in terms of early PONV ¹⁹.

Considering that several factors influence PONV genesis and worsening, many attempts have been made to obtain predictive factors and identify patients at high risk for PONV. Sinclair et al. have developed a mathematical model to anticipate PONV risk in ambulatory patients ¹². Participated in this prospective study 17,638 ambulatory patients of whom 816 (< 5%) have developed PONV. Predictive factors identified were: age, gender, and history of smoking, history of PONV, type of anesthesia and surgery type and length. Koivuranta et al. have concluded in a prospective study with 1107 patients aged 4 to 86 years, that predictive factors for PONV would be female gender, previous PONV history, surgery length, history of smoking and history of motion sickeness ¹¹.

There are several studies on the subject, but the most popular predictive model is the model developed by Apfel et al. ¹⁹. This model is based on 4 risk factors: female gender, history of motion sickness and/or history of PONV, no smoking and postoperative opioids. The incidence of PONV would be 10%, 21%, 61% and 79%, respectively, whether 1, 2, 3 or 4 factors are present (Table I).

Apfel's predictive scores are easy to apply, with reasonable predictability of PONV; in addition, they allow for the comparison among several groups in the domain of clinical antiemetic investigations. Some authors have criticized Apfel for the difficulty in applying some of his risk factors ²⁰, especially how to classify occasional smokers, how to consider patients without surgical history and how to anticipate the prescription of postoperative opioids. In spite of all limitations, risk scores help clinicians define the group of patients benefiting of preventive therapy.

In the early 2003, a multidisciplinary group of experts has met to create recommendations for adults and children, based on exhaustive literature review, for the managing of PONV and the definition of risk groups ²¹. Chart I shows risk factors for adults and children.

PONV PREVENTION AND TREATMENT

Several questions are posed when the issue PONV prevention versus treatment is addressed. Should we prevent it, or should we wait for its development and then treat. If PONV is preventively treated which drugs or doses should be used? If deciding for a conservative approach and treating after the development of PONV, which drugs or doses should be used? If patients are preventively treated and even then develop PONV, which drugs or doses should be used?

With preventive treatment, many patients at low risk for PONV will be unnecessarily treated, in addition to being exposed to the adverse effects of drugs, while other patients will present PONV despite of the treatment. Routine antiemetics are associated to high costs, which in a time of costs and resources contention should be avoided. However, preventive antiemetics in moderate to high-risk patients have an effective cost-benefit ratio and are associated to higher level of patients' satisfaction ²².

The 2003 consensus conference has recommended preventive treatment for patients at moderate to high risk of PONV or for those with potential morbidity associated to PONV, specifically suture dehiscence, esophageal rupture, hematoma and aspiration pneumonia ²¹. Whenever possible, it is recommended to identify risk factors and minimize them. Visser et al. have shown that propofol for anesthetic induction and maintenance decreases the incidence of early PONV (first 6 postoperative hours) ²³. The incidence of PONV decreases when inhalational anesthetics or nitrous oxide are avoided ²⁴. Neostigmine in doses equal to or below 2.5 mg decreases PONV ¹⁸. Sinclair et al. has shown that loco-regional anesthesia decreases PONV risk 11 times as compared to general anesthesia ¹². Yogendran et al. has concluded that effective fluid therapy with blood pressure maintenance during induction decreases the incidence of PONV ²⁵.

High perioperative oxygen inspired fractions decreases in 50% the incidence of nausea and vomiting ²⁶. Last but not least, less opioids and effective analgesia (surgical wound infiltration with local anesthetics or cycloxygenase inhibitor administration) also contribute to decrease the incidence of nausea and vomiting ²⁶.

ANTIEMETIC DRUGS USED FOR PONV PREVENTIVE TREATMENT (Table II)

Serotonin receptor antagonists: there is no difference in efficacy and safety profile within this group of drugs - ondansetron, dolasetron, granisetron or etropisetron ²¹. These are more effective when administered at surgery completion and are more useful to prevent vomiting as compared to nausea ^27,28.

Dexamethasone: the action mechanism of steroids as antiemetic drugs is still to be explained. They are more effective when administered before anesthetic induction. Most popular intravenous dose is 8 to 10 mg, but lower doses (2.5 to 5 mg) are also effective. Notwithstanding side effects of these drugs, such as surgical wound infection or adrenal gland suppression, no side effects were observed after bolus doses ²⁹.

Droperidol: is one of the most widely studied antiemetics to prevent PONV and is similar in efficacy to ondansetron ³⁰. It is better to prevent nausea than to prevent vomiting and is more effective when administered at surgery completion ³¹. In morphine patient-controlled analgesia this seems to be the most effective antiemetic drug. Doses between 15 and 50 µg droperidol per mg of morphine are those with best efficacy/side effects ratio ³². In 2001, the Food and Drug Administration has published a warning about the association of droperidol in patients with prolonged QT interval at ECG and/or Torsade de Pointes, which in some cases has resulted in arrhythmias and death.

This warning was based on 10 clinical cases observed along 30 years of clinical use, in which doses equal to or below 1.25 mg were used ³³. As a consequence, the laboratory producing droperidol has recommended ECG monitoring during and 2 to 3 hours after its administration and has counterindicated it for male patients with QT intervals above 440 ms or for female patients with QT intervals above 450 ms. Other risk patients are those with congestive heart failure, bradycardia, ventricular hypertrophy, hypokalemia, hypomagnesemia, patients medicated with diuretics or other drugs which may originate prolonged QT interval. Some droperidol advocates argue that there are no descriptions in indexed publications of clinical cases in which prolonged QT interval, arrhythmias or death were associated to droperidol in adequate doses to prevent PONV.

Other antiemetic drugs: subcutaneous scopolamine should be administered the night before surgery or approximately 4 hours before surgery completion ³⁴. It is not recommended for the elderly and its limitation is late onset (2 to 4 hours after administration) ³⁵. Phenothyazides (prometazine and proclhorperazine) are effective if administered at surgery completion, but their adverse effects (sedation, dizziness and dehydration) limit its use, especially in outpatient regimen ³⁶. Intramuscular ephedrine seems to be effective, especially if nausea and vomiting are associated to dehydration or hypotension ³⁷.

Non-pharmacological techniques: acupuncture, compression, intradermal nervous stimulation and hypnosis were effective if used before surgery ³⁸, but they lack further evaluation.

Insufficient Evidences: intravenous metoclopramide in doses used in the clinical practice (10 mg) is not recommended to treat PONV ³⁹, as well as ginger root ⁴⁰ or cannabinoids ⁴¹.

A multimodal antiemetic approach has been recommended in recent years, based on the multifactorial concept of PONV etiology. So, using more than one class of antiemetics it would be possible to reach more than one receptor involved in PONV.

The already mentioned consensus conference has recommended no preventive treatment for low risk patients; for moderate risk patients, prevention with single or combined therapy; for high risk patients, prevention with 3 antiemetic drugs of different classes ²¹. However, a recent study has stressed that the combination of different therapies is associated to higher costs, higher risk of side effects and lack of cumulative benefit of several antiemetic drugs. For these authors, combined therapy should be kept for patients at high risk for PONV or those who may be at risk due to PONV ⁴². This specific group has a higher number of candidates to antiemetic prevention, since the incidence of PONV is two-fold. First line drugs should be 5-HT³ receptor antagonists. Due to its extra-pyramidal effects, droperidol should be kept for admitted children when all other therapies have failed ²¹.

Guidelines for the treatment of PONV of patients who have not received preventive treatment or those for whom prevention has failed (Chart II) ²¹.

First, all drugs or mechanical factors that may originate PONV should be withdrawn and then treatment should be started.

Patients not receiving preventive PONV treatment should be given 5-HT₃ antagonists. One fourth of preventive doses have shown to be effective. There are still few data on doses and efficacy of other antiemetics to treat PONV. In patients with failed preventive treatment, low 5-HT₃ receptor antagonist doses are recommended.

If prevention with 5-HT₃ receptor antagonists has failed, subsequent doses of the same class of drugs should not be used during the first 6 postoperative hours. If prevention with 5-HT₃ receptor antagonists associated to dexamethasone was ineffective, a different class of antiemetics should be administered.

In general, patients with PONV in the first 6 postoperative hours should be treated with different classes of antiemetics than those used for prevention. If PONV is present 6 hours after surgery, drugs used for prevention may be repeated, with the exception of scopolamine or dexamethasone, because they act for more than 6 hours.

Low propofol doses may be used, provided patients are under continuous surveillance.

CONCLUSION

Although PONV management has improved in recent years, it is still frequent in high-risk groups.

The identification of risk factors for PONV, frequently done during preoperative evaluation, helps preventive therapy. The publication in 2003 of international recommendations for PONV management allowed the definition of patients benefiting from single, double or triple therapy as a function of identified risk level.

From different available drugs, droperidol, 5HT₃ receptor antagonists and dexamethasone play a distinctive role in controlling PONV, and their association, based on action mechanisms and efficacy/tolerance ratio, has allowed for more effective PONV control.

Notwithstanding limited data in the literature and variations in the identification of risk factors, recommendations for adults are extrapolated to children. It should be reminded that these recommendations do not rule out the individualized analysis and its adaptation to populations, surgical and anesthetic techniques.

REFERENCES

Submitted for publication March 15, 2005

Accepted for publication May 31, 2005

• 01. Bonica J, Crepps W, Monk B et al - Postanesthetic nausea, retching and vomiting; evaluation of cyclizine (marezine) suppositories for treatment. Anesthesiology, 1958;19:532-540.
• 02. Apfel CC, Laara E, Koivuranta M et al - A simplified risk score for predicting postoperative nausea and vomiting: conclusions from cross-validations between two centers. Anesthesiology, 1999;91:693-700.
• 03. Leman J - Surgical and patient factors involved in postoperative nausea and vomiting. Br J Anaesth, 1992;69:(7Suppl1): 24S-32S.
• 04. Gold BS, Kitz DS, Lecky JH et al - Unanticipated admission to the hospital following ambulatory surgery. JAMA, 1989;262: 3008-3010.
• 05. Eberhart LH, Morin AM, Wulf H et al - Patient preferences for immediate postoperative recovery. Br J Anaesth, 2002;89: 760-761.
• 06. Macario A, Weinger M, Carney S et al - Which clinical anesthesia outcomes are important to avoid? The perspective of patients. Anesth Analg, 1999;89:652-658.
• 07. Gan T, Sloan F, Dear Gde L et al - How much are patients willing to pay to avoid postoperative nausea and vomiting? Anesth Analg, 2001;92:393-400.
• 08. Tramer MR - A rational approach to the control of postoperative nausea and vomiting: evidence from systematic reviews. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand, 2001;45:4-13.
• 09. Watcha MF, White PF - Postoperative nausea and vomiting. Its etiology, treatment, and prevention. Anesthesiology, 1992;77: 164-184.
• 10. Junger A, Hartmann B, Benson M et al - The use of an anesthesia information management system for prediction of antiemetic rescue treatment at the postanesthesia care unit. Anesth Analg, 2001;92:1203-1209.
• 11. Koivuranta M, Laara E, Snare L et al - A survey of postoperative nausea and vomiting. Anaesthesia, 1997;52:443-449.
• 12. Sinclair PR, Chung F, Mezei G - Can postoperative nausea and vomiting be predicted? Anesthesiology, 1999;91:109-118.
• 13. Thomas R - The effect of smoking on postoperative nausea and vomiting. Anaesthesia, 2000;55:1032-1033.
• 14. Apfel CC, Kranke P, Eberhart LH et al - Comparison of predictive models for postoperative nausea and vomiting. Br J Anaesth, 2002;88:234-240.
• 15. Pierre S, Benais H, Pouymayou J - Apfel's simplified score may favourably predict the risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting. Can J Anaesth, 2002;49:237-242.
• 16. Scuderi PE, James RL, Harris L et al - Multimodal antiemetic management prevents early postoperative vomiting after outpatient laparoscopy. Anesth Analg, 2000;91:1408-1414.
• 17. Greif R, Laciny S. Rapf B et al - Supplemental oxygen reduces the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting. Anesthesiology, 1999;91:1246-1252.
• 18. Tramer MR, Fuchs-Buder T - Omitting reversal of neuromuscular block: effect on postoperative nausea and vomiting and risk of residual paralysis. A systematic review. Br J Anaesth, 1999;82:379-386.
• 19. Apfel CC, Greim CA, Haubitz I et al - A risk score to predict the probability of postoperative vomiting in adults. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand, 1998;42:495-501.
• 20. Thomas R, Jones NA, Strike P - The value of risk scores for predicting postoperative nausea and vomiting when used to compare patient group in randomised controlled trial. Anaesthesia, 2002;57:1119-1128.
• 21. Gan TJ, Meyer T, Apfel CC et al - Consensus guidelines for managing postoperative nausea and vomiting. Anesth Analg, 2003;97:62-71.
• 22. Hill RP, Lubarsky DA, Phillips-Bute B et al - Cost-effectiveness of prophylactic antiemetic therapy with ondansetron, droperidol, or placebo. Anesthesiology, 2000;92:958-967.
• 23. Visser K, Hassink EA, Bonsel GJ et al - Randomized controlled trial of total intravenous anesthesia with propofol versus inhalation anesthesia with isoflurane - nitrous oxide: postoperative nausea with vomiting and economic analysis. Anesthesiology, 2001;95:616-626.
• 24. Apfel CC, Kranke P, Katz MH et al - Volatile anaesthetics may be main cause of early but not delayed postoperative vomiting: a randomized controlled trial of factorial design. Br J Anaesth, 2002;88:659-668.
• 25. Yogendran S, Asokumar B, Cheng DC et al - A prospective, randomized, double-blinded study of the effect of intravenous fluid therapy on adverse outcomes on outpatient surgery. Anesth Analg, 1995;80:682-686.
• 26. Apfel CC, Kranke P, Eberhart LH et al - Comparison of predictive models for postoperative nausea and vomiting. Br J Anaesth, 2002;88:234-240.
• 27. Tramer MR, Reynolds DJ, Moore RA et al - Efficacy, dose-response, and safety of ondansetron in prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting: a qualitative systematic review of randomized placebo-controlled trials. Anesthesiology, 1997;87:1277-1289.
• 28. Sun R, Klein KW, White PF - The effect of timing of ondansetron administration in outpatient undergoing otolaryngologic surgery. Anesth Analg, 1997;84:331-336.
• 29. Henzi I, Walder B, Tramer MR - Dexamethasone for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting: a quantitative systematic review. Anesth Analg, 2000;90:186-194.
• 30. Millo J, Siddons M, Innes R et al - Randomised double-blind comparison of ondansetron and droperidol to prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting associated with patient-controlled analgesia. Anaesthesia, 2001;56:60-65.
• 31. Henzi I, Sonderegger J, Tramer MR - Efficacy, dose-response, and adverse effects of droperidol for prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting. Can J Anaesth, 2000;47:537-551.
• 32. Culebras X, Corpataux JB, Gaggero G et al - The antiemetic efficacy of droperidol added to morphine patient-controlled analgesia: a randomized, controlled, multicenter dose-finding study. Anesth Analg, 2003;97:816-821.
• 33. Habib AS, Gan TJ - Food and drug administration black box warming on the perioperative use of droperidol: a review of the cases. Anesth Analg, 2003;96:1377-1379.
• 34. Kranke P, Morin AM, Roewer N et al - The efficacy and safety of transdermal scopolamine for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting: a quantitative systematic review. Anesth Analg, 2002;95:133-143.
• 35. Bailey PL, Streisand JB, Pace NL et al - Transdermal scopolamine reduces nausea and vomiting after outpatient laparoscopy. Anesthesiology, 1990;72:977-980.
• 36. Chen JJ, Frame DG, White TJ - Efficacy of ondansetron and prochlorperazine for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting after total hip replacement or total knee replacement procedures: a randomized, double-blind, comparative trial. Arch Intern Med, 1998;158:2124-2128.
• 37. Hagemann E, Halvorsen A, Holgersen O et al - Intramuscular ephedrine reduces emesis during the first three hours after abdominal hysterectomy. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand, 2000;44: 107-111.
• 38. Lee A, Done ML - The use of nonpharmacologic techniques to prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting: a meta-analysis. Anesth Analg, 1999;88:1362-1369.
• 39. Henzi I, Walder B, Tramer MR - Metoclopramide in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting: a quantitative systematic review of randomized placebo-controlled studies. Br J Anaesth, 1999;83:761-771.
• 40. Ernst E, Pittler MH - Efficacy of ginger for nausea and vomiting: a systematic review of randomized clinical trials. Br J Anaesth, 2000;84:367-371.
• 41. Tramer MR, Carroll D, Campbell FA et al - Cannabinoids for control of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: quantitative systemic review. BMJ, 2001;323:16-21.
• 42. Apfel CC, Korttila K, Abdalla M et al - A factorial trial of six interventions for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting. N Engl J Med, 2004;350:2441-2451.

^*

Received from Departamento de Anestesiologia e Cuidados Intensivos, Hospital São João, Porto, Portugal

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  13 Feb 2006
• Date of issue
  Oct 2005

History

• Accepted
  31 May 2005
• Received
  15 Mar 2005