Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28541001›Full record

SynthesisYonsei medical journal2017

Efficacy of Palonosetron vs. Ramosetron for the Prevention of Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Min Soo Kim, Jin Ha Park, Yong Seon Choi, Sang Hun Park, Seokyung Shin

Abstract readComparative StudyMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Yonsei medical journal, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Effects of Ramosetron on Nausea and Vomiting Following Spinal Surgery: A Meta-Analysis.Current therapeutic research, clinical and experimental · 2022
    Review
  8. [Risk factors for nausea and vomiting after adolescent idiopathic scoliosis surgery].Nan fang yi ke da xue xue bao = Journal of Southern Medical University · 2020
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Introduction to systematic review and meta-analysis.Korean journal of anesthesiology · 2018
    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.

Min Soo KimDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Severance Hospital, Seoul, Korea.
Jin Ha ParkDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Severance Hospital, Seoul, Korea.
Yong Seon ChoiDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Severance Hospital, Seoul, Korea.
Sang Hun ParkDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Severance Hospital, Seoul, Korea.
Seokyung ShinDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Severance Hospital, Seoul, Korea.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis study was designed as a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that included the comparison of palonosetron and ramosetron for postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) prophylaxis. MATERIALS AND

methodsA systematic search was conducted for the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, CENTRAL, KoreaMed, and Google Scholar databases (PROSPERO protocol number CRD42015026009). Primary outcomes were the incidences of postoperative nausea (PON) and postoperative vomiting (POV) during the first 48 hrs after surgery. The total 48-hr period was further analyzed in time epochs of 0-6 hrs (early), 6-24 hrs (late), and 24-48 hrs (delayed). Subgroup analyses according to number of risk factors, sex, and type of surgery were also performed.

resultsEleven studies including 1373 patients were analyzed. There was no difference in PON or POV between the two drugs for the total 48-hr period after surgery. However, palonosetron was more effective in preventing POV during the delayed period overall [relative risk (RR), 0.59; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.39 to 0.89; p=0.013], as well as after subgroup analyses for females and laparoscopies (RR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.86; p=0.009 and RR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.23 to 0.94; p=0.033). Subgroup analysis for spine surgery showed that ramosetron was more effective in reducing POV during the total 48-hr (RR, 3.34; 95% CI, 1.46 to 7.63; p=0.004) and early periods (RR, 8.47; 95% CI, 1.57 to 45.72; p=0.013).

conclusionThis meta-analysis discovered no definite difference in PONV prevention between the two drugs. The significant findings that were seen in different time epochs and subgroup analyses should be confirmed in future RCTs.

Indexed as

Randomized Controlled Trials as TopicAdultAntiemeticsBenzimidazolesFemaleHumansIsoquinolinesMaleMiddle AgedPalonosetronPostoperative Nausea and VomitingPublication BiasQuinuclidinesRisk FactorsTreatment OutcomeAntiemeticsBenzimidazolesIsoquinolinesPalonosetronQuinuclidinesramosetronPalonosetronpostoperative nausea and vomitingramosetron

Identifiers

PMID28541001
PMCPMC5447119

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.