Efficacy of palonosetron in postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV)—a meta-analysis

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Preet Mohinder Singh ; MD ; DNB^a ; ^{Preetrajpal@gmail.com" class="auth_mail" title="E-mail the corresponding author} (Assistant Professor) ; Anuradha Borle ; MD^a ; ^{Andromeda85@gmail.com" class="auth_mail" title="E-mail the corresponding author} (Senior Research Associate) ; Divakara Gouda^b ; ^{Dg2488@nyu.edu" class="auth_mail" title="E-mail the corresponding author} (Graduate Student) ; Jeetinder Kaur Makkar ; MD^c ; ^{jeet1516@gmail.com" class="auth_mail" title="E-mail the corresponding author} (Associate Professor) ; Mahesh K. Arora ; MD^d ; ^{Mkarora442@gmail.com" class="auth_mail" title="E-mail the corresponding author} (Professor & Head) ; Anjan Trikha ; MD^a ; ^{anjantrikha@gmail.com" class="auth_mail" title="E-mail the corresponding author} ; Ashish Sinha ; MD ; MBA^d ; ^{drashish.sinha@gmail.com" class="auth_mail" title="E-mail the corresponding author} (Vice Chair (Research) ; Professor) ; Basavana Goudra ; MD ; FRCA ; FCARCSI^e ; ^{Goudrab@uphs.upenn.edu" class="auth_mail" title="E-mail the corresponding author} (Assistant Professor)
• 关键词：Palonosetron for PONV ; Palonosetron vs placebo or ramosetron or granisetron or ondansetron ; Palonosetron meta-analysis for PONV ; Palonosetron for delayed PONV
• 刊名：Journal of Clinical Anesthesia
• 出版年：2016
• 出版时间：November 2016
• 年：2016
• 卷：34
• 期：Complete
• 页码：459-482
• 全文大小：4571 K

文摘

Palonosetron is a second-generation 5-HT3 receptor antagonist with proposed higher efficacy and sustained action for prophylaxis of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV).

Methods

Randomized controlled trials involving adult population undergoing elective surgery under general anesthesia comparing palonosetron to placebo, ramosetron, granisetron, and ondansetron were included. Data were extracted for vomiting incidence (VI), complete response (no nausea/vomiting; Complete Response [CR]), and rescue antiemetic need. This was categorized as early phase (24 hours postoperative for ramosetron and 6 hours for rest) and delayed phase (48 hours for ramosetron and 24 hours for rest). VI and CR were used as markers of drug efficacy. Any adverse effects were evaluated.

Results

Twenty-two trials (4 with 3 groups) were included (comparing palonosetron to placebo in 5, ramosetron in 5, granisetron in 4, and ondansetron in 12 subgroups). Palonosetron demonstrated statistical superiority over placebo for VI and CR, both early/delayed PONV prevention. For delayed phase, palonosetron surpassed ramosetron in all 3 variables; however, none of the variables attained statistical significance during early phase. In early phase, palonosetron had better VI and CR than did granisetron; however, variables other than CR (better for palonosetron) failed to achieve statistical significance for delayed phase. All 3 outcomes were significantly better for palonosetron compared with ondansetron in delayed phase, but statistical superiority could only be demonstrated for VI in early phase. Being inconsistently documented across trials, nausea scores could not be evaluated.

Conclusion

Palonosetron is as safe as and more effective than placebo, ramosetron, granisetron, and ondansetron in preventing delayed PONV. For early PONV, it has higher efficacy over placebo, granisetron, and ondansetron.