Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25801542›Full record

Trial reportJournal of anesthesia2015

Fosaprepitant versus ondansetron for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients who undergo gynecologic abdominal surgery with patient-controlled epidural analgesia: a prospective, randomized, double-blind study.

Tomohiro Soga, Katsuyoshi Kume, Nami Kakuta, Eisuke Hamaguchi, Rie Tsutsumi, Ryosuke Kawanishi, Kohei Fukuta, Katsuya Tanaka, Yasuo M Tsutsumi

Abstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of anesthesia, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Tomohiro SogaDepartment of Anesthesiology, Tokushima University Graduate School, 3-18-15 Kuramoto, Tokushima, 770-8503, Japan.
Katsuyoshi KumeDepartment of Anesthesiology, Tokushima University Graduate School, 3-18-15 Kuramoto, Tokushima, 770-8503, Japan.
Nami KakutaDepartment of Anesthesiology, Tokushima University Graduate School, 3-18-15 Kuramoto, Tokushima, 770-8503, Japan.
Eisuke HamaguchiDepartment of Anesthesiology, Tokushima University Graduate School, 3-18-15 Kuramoto, Tokushima, 770-8503, Japan.
Rie TsutsumiDepartment of Nutrition, Tokushima University Graduate School, Tokushima, Japan.
Ryosuke KawanishiDepartment of Anesthesiology, Tokushima University Graduate School, 3-18-15 Kuramoto, Tokushima, 770-8503, Japan.
Kohei FukutaDepartment of Anesthesiology, Tokushima University Graduate School, 3-18-15 Kuramoto, Tokushima, 770-8503, Japan.
Katsuya TanakaDepartment of Anesthesiology, Tokushima University Graduate School, 3-18-15 Kuramoto, Tokushima, 770-8503, Japan.
Yasuo M TsutsumiDepartment of Anesthesiology, Tokushima University Graduate School, 3-18-15 Kuramoto, Tokushima, 770-8503, Japan. tsutsumi@tokushima-u.ac.jp.
Tokushima University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposePostoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is the most common postoperative complication. The postoperative use of opioids is known to increase the incidence. We compared fosaprepitant, a neurokinin-1 (NK1) receptor antagonist, and ondansetron for their preventive effects on PONV in patients who underwent gynecologic abdominal surgery with patient-controlled epidural analgesia.

methodsThis prospective, double-blind, randomized study comprised 44 patients who underwent gynecologic abdominal surgery. They were randomly allocated to receive 150 mg intravenous fosaprepitant (n = 24; NKI group) or 4 mg ondansetron (n = 20; ONS group) before anesthesia, which was maintained with volatile anesthetics, remifentanil, fentanyl, and rocuronium. All patients received postoperative fentanyl by patient-controlled epidural anesthesia. The incidence of nausea and vomiting, complete response rate (i.e., no vomiting and no rescue antiemetic use), rescue antiemetic use, nausea score (0-3), and visual analog scale score (VAS 0-10) for pain were recorded at 2, 24, 48, and 72 h after surgery.

resultsNo (0 %) patient in the NKI group experienced vomiting after surgery; however, 4-6 (20-30 %) of 20 patients in the ONS group experienced vomiting. This difference was significant at 0-24, 0-48, and 0-72 h. During the study period, no significant differences existed between the NK1 and ONS groups in the incidence of PONV, complete response rate, rescue antiemetic use, nausea score, and VAS score for pain.

conclusionCompared to ondansetron, fosaprepitant more effectively decreased the incidence of vomiting in patients who underwent gynecologic abdominal surgery with patient-controlled epidural analgesia.

Indexed as

AdultAnalgesia, EpiduralAnalgesia, Patient-ControlledAnalgesics, OpioidAndrostanolsAntiemeticsDouble-Blind MethodFemaleFentanylGynecologic Surgical ProceduresHumansMiddle AgedMorpholinesOndansetronPainPiperidinesAnalgesics, OpioidAndrostanolsAntiemeticsFentanylfosaprepitantMorpholinesOndansetronPiperidinesRemifentanilRocuroniumFosaprepitantGynecologic abdominal surgeryOndansetronPatient-controlled epidural analgesiaPostoperative nausea and vomiting

Identifiers

PMID25801542
OpenAlexW1988759946

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.