Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27650295›Full record

Trial reportJournal of anesthesia2016

A randomized, double-blind trial evaluating the efficacy of palonosetron with total intravenous anesthesia using propofol and remifentanil for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting after gynecologic surgery.

Yun-Sic Bang, Young Uk Kim, Dawoon Oh, Eui Yong Shin, Soo Kyoung Park

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of anesthesia, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.6field-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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Yun-Sic BangDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, International St. Mary's Hospital, Catholic Kwandong University College of Medicine, Incheon, Korea.
Young Uk KimDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, International St. Mary's Hospital, Catholic Kwandong University College of Medicine, Incheon, Korea.
Dawoon OhDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Dongtan Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, 7 Keun Jaebong Road, Hwaseong, Gyeonggi, Korea.
Eui Yong ShinDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Dongtan Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, 7 Keun Jaebong Road, Hwaseong, Gyeonggi, Korea.
Soo Kyoung ParkDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Dongtan Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, 7 Keun Jaebong Road, Hwaseong, Gyeonggi, Korea. hardmong@naver.com.
Hallym University Dongtan Sacred Heart Hospital · KRCatholic Kwandong University · KRCatholic Kwandong University International St. Mary's Hospital · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposePalonosetron has potent and long-acting antiemetic effects for postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). The aim of this study was to prospectively evaluate the efficacy of palonosetron when used with total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) using propofol and remifentanil for the prevention of PONV in patients undergoing laparoscopic gynecologic surgery.

methodsThis prospective double-blind study comprised 100 female American Society of Anesthesiologist physical status I and II patients who were undergoing laparoscopic gynecologic surgery under TIVA. The patients were randomly assigned to two groups-the palonosetron plus TIVA group (palonosetron 0.075 mg i.v., n = 50) and the TIVA group (normal saline 1.5 ml i.v., n = 50). The treatments were given before the induction of anesthesia. The incidence of PONV, severity, number of rescue antiemetics, adverse effects, and patient satisfaction during the first 24 h after surgery were evaluated.

resultsThe demographic profiles of the patients in the two groups were comparable. The overall incidence of PONV (0-24 h) was significantly lower in the TIVA plus palonosetron group than in the TIVA group (34 vs 58 %, p = 0.027). In particular, during the 6-24 h after surgery, the incidence of PONV (14 vs 30 %, p = 0.03) and the incidence of moderate to severe nausea (6 vs 22 %, p = 0.041) were significantly lower in the TIVA plus palonosetron group than in the TIVA group. There were no significant differences in adverse effects, use of rescue antiemetics or patient satisfaction.

conclusionCombining palonosetron with TIVA can be considered as a good method to prevent PONV, not only during the short postoperative period but also especially during the 6-24-h period after anesthesia.

Indexed as

AdultAnesthesia, GeneralAnesthesia, IntravenousAntiemeticsDouble-Blind MethodFemaleGynecologic Surgical ProceduresHumansIncidenceIsoquinolinesLaparoscopyMiddle AgedPalonosetronPatient SatisfactionPiperidinesPostoperative Nausea and VomitingAntiemeticsIsoquinolinesPalonosetronPiperidinesPropofolQuinuclidinesRemifentanilPalonosetronPostoperative nausea and vomitingTotal intravenous anesthesia

Identifiers

PMID27650295
OpenAlexW2522412057

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.