Journal of clinical anesthesia · 1995
Prevention of emesis after strabismus repair in children: a prospective, double-blinded, randomized comparison of droperidol versus ondansetron.
Клиническое исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Litman R S, Wu C L, Lee A, Griswold J D, Voisine R, Marshall C
Аннотация
STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of ondansetron with droperidol in preventing postoperative emesis in children after strabismus repair.
DESIGN: Randomized, double-blind study.
PATIENTS AND SETTING: 57 ASA physical status I and II children aged 3 to 14 years, undergoing outpatient strabismus repair in two separate study centers.
INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized to receive either 0.15 mg/kg intravenous (i.v.) ondansetron or 0.075 mg/kg i.v. droperidol shortly after induction of anesthesia.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Number of episodes of emesis and times to discharge from the recovery room and ambulatory center were assessed. Twenty-nine (94%) of 31 children who received ondansetron and 21 (81%) of 26 children who received droperidol were emesis-free (p = NS). There were no significant differences in the number of episodes of emesis on the day after surgery or times to discharge.
CONCLUSIONS: Ondansetron is at least as effective as droperidol in reducing the frequency of emesis in children after strabismus repair, and it did not shorten times to discharge home. The low number of patients in our study may have masked a difference in effect between the two groups. The clinician should decide whether the increased cost of ondansetron justifies its use over other antiemetics.
DESIGN: Randomized, double-blind study.
PATIENTS AND SETTING: 57 ASA physical status I and II children aged 3 to 14 years, undergoing outpatient strabismus repair in two separate study centers.
INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized to receive either 0.15 mg/kg intravenous (i.v.) ondansetron or 0.075 mg/kg i.v. droperidol shortly after induction of anesthesia.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Number of episodes of emesis and times to discharge from the recovery room and ambulatory center were assessed. Twenty-nine (94%) of 31 children who received ondansetron and 21 (81%) of 26 children who received droperidol were emesis-free (p = NS). There were no significant differences in the number of episodes of emesis on the day after surgery or times to discharge.
CONCLUSIONS: Ondansetron is at least as effective as droperidol in reducing the frequency of emesis in children after strabismus repair, and it did not shorten times to discharge home. The low number of patients in our study may have masked a difference in effect between the two groups. The clinician should decide whether the increased cost of ondansetron justifies its use over other antiemetics.