AIMS: To investigate the effect of intraperitoneal administration of ondansetron for postoperative pain management as an adjuvant to intravenous acetaminophen in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
METHODS: Patients scheduled for elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomized into two groups (n = 25 each) to receive either intraperitoneal ondansetron or saline injected in the gall bladder bed at the end of the procedure. The primary outcome was the difference in pain from baseline to 24-h post-operative assessed by comparing the area under the curve of visual analog score between the two groups.
RESULTS: The derived area under response curve of visual analog scores in the ondansetron group (735.8 ± 418.3) was 33.97% lower than (p = 0.005) that calculated for the control group (1114.4 ± 423.9). The need for rescue analgesia was significantly lower in the ondansetron (16%) versus in the control group (54.17%) (p = 0.005), indicating better pain control. The correlation between the time for unassisted mobilization and the area under response curve of visual analog scores signified the positive analgesic influence of ondansetron (rs =0.315, p = 0.028). The frequency of nausea and vomiting was significantly lower in patients who received ondansetron than that reported in the control group (p = 0.023 (8 h), and 0.016 (24 h) respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: The added positive impact of ondansetron on postoperative pain control alongside its anti-emetic effect made it a unique novel option for patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
METHODS: Using a decision tree model, clinical and economic outcomes associated with olanzapine-containing regimen and standard antiemetic regimen (doublet antiemetic regimen: dexamethasone+first generation 5HT3RA) in most SEA countries except in Singapore (triplet antiemetic regimen: dexamethasone+first generation 5HT3RA + aprepitant) for CINV prevention following HEC were evaluated. This analysis was performed in Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, and Singapore, using societal perspective method with 5-day time horizon. Input parameters were derived from literature, network meta-analysis, government documents, and hospital databases. Outcomes were incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) in USD/quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. A series of sensitivity analyses including probabilistic sensitivity analysis were also performed.
RESULTS: Compared to doublet antiemetic regimen, addition of olanzapine resulted in incremental QALY of 0.0022-0.0026 with cost saving of USD 2.98, USD 27.71, and USD 52.20 in Thailand, Malaysia, and Indonesia, respectively. Compared to triplet antiemetic regimen, switching aprepitant to olanzapine yields additional 0.0005 QALY with cost saving of USD 60.91 in Singapore. The probability of being cost-effective at a cost-effectiveness threshold of 1 GDP/capita varies from 14.7 to 85.2% across countries.
CONCLUSION: The use of olanzapine as part of standard antiemetic regimen is cost-effective for the prevention of CINV in patients receiving HEC in multiple SEA countries.
METHODS: In three double-blind phase 3 studies, patients receiving HEC or MEC were randomized 1:1 to receive oral rolapitant 180 mg or placebo prior to chemotherapy plus 5-hydroxytryptamine type 3 receptor antagonist and dexamethasone therapy. Patients completed the FLIE questionnaire on day 6 of cycle 1. Endpoints included FLIE total score, nausea and vomiting domain scores, and the proportion of patients with no impact on daily life (total score >108 [range 18-126]). We performed a prespecified analysis of the MEC/anthracycline-cyclophosphamide (AC) study and a post hoc analysis of two pooled cisplatin-based HEC studies.
RESULTS: In the pooled HEC studies, rolapitant significantly improved the FLIE total score (114.5 vs 109.3, p nausea score (55.3 vs 53.5, p nausea score (54.1 vs 52.3, p
STUDY DESIGN: Randomised controlled trial.
SETTING: Tertiary level hospital in Malaysia.
PATIENTS: 77 patients undergoing elective Caesarean delivery.
INTERVENTION: Differing speeds of spinal injection.
MEASUREMENTS: Systolic blood pressure was assessed every minute for the first 10min and incidence of hypotension (reduction in blood pressure of >30% of baseline) was recorded. The use of vasopressor and occurrence of nausea/vomiting were also recorded.
MAIN RESULTS: 36 patients in SLOW group and 41 patients in FAST group were recruited into the study. There was no significant difference in blood pressure drop of >30% (p=0.497) between the two groups. There was no difference in the amount of vasopressor used and incidence of nausea/vomiting in both groups.
CONCLUSION: In our study population, there was no difference in incidence of hypotension and nausea/vomiting when spinal injection time is prolonged beyond 15s to 60s.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.govNCT02275897. Registered on 15 October 2014.
PATIENT CONCERNS: A 61-year-old Asian female with underlying type 2 DM presented to our ED with body weakness, dyspnea, nausea, vomiting, and mild abdominal pain for the past 2 days. These symptoms were preceded by poor oral intake for 1 week due to severe toothache. Dapagliflozin was recently added to her antidiabetic drug regimen of metformin and glibenclamide 2 weeks ago.
DIAGNOSES: Arterial blood gases showed a picture of severe metabolic acidosis with an elevated anion gap, while ketones were elevated in blood and positive in urine. Blood glucose was mildly elevated at 180 mg/dL. Serum lactate levels were normal. Our patient was thus diagnosed with eDKA.
INTERVENTION: Our patient was promptly admitted to the intensive care unit and treated for eDKA through intravenous rehydration therapy with insulin infusion.
OUTCOMES: Serial blood gas analyses showed gradual resolution of the patient's ketoacidosis with normalized anion gap and clearance of serum ketones. She was discharged uneventfully on day 4, with permanent cessation of dapagliflozin administration.
LESSONS: Life-threatening eDKA as a complication of dapagliflozin is a challenging and easilymissed diagnosis in the ED. Such an ED presentation is very rare, nevertheless emergency physicians are reminded to consider the diagnosis of eDKA in a patient whose drug regimen includes any SGLT2 inhibitor, especially if the patient presents with nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, dyspnea, lethargy, and is clinically dehydrated. These patients should then be investigated with ketone studies and blood gas analyses regardless of blood glucose levels for prompt diagnosis and treatment.
Methods: A prospective observational study including 223 patients receiving the branded medicine Exjade® and 101 patients receiving the copy Osveral® was carried out. Data were assessed for a 1-year period and included clinical symptoms, serum ferritin (SF), serum creatinine (SC), and alanine aminotransferase (ALT). Data were analyzed with SPSS version 22 software (SPSS, Chicago, IL, USA).
Results: The median age of the sample was 8 years. There was no significant difference in gender distribution between the two groups (p = 0.625). Nausea was the most frequently reported adverse effect followed by diarrhea and abdominal pain in both groups. Patients receiving Exjade® had a higher relative reduction of SF at the end of the study compared with the Osveral® group (19.9% versus 9.93%, p = 0.028). SC was found to be significantly higher in the Osveral® group than in the Exjade® group throughout the study period. The mean platelet count was higher in the Exjade® group. ALT was significantly higher among patients receiving Osveral® over the last three months of the study.
Conclusions: Exjade® showed a better ability to reduce SF, with less liver toxicity, and better hemostasis profile. No congenital anomalies associated with short-term use of both drugs during pregnancy were observed or reported.