Propofol anaesthesia and postoperative nausea and vomiting: Quantitative systematic review of randomized controlled studies

被引:188
作者
Tramer, M
Moore, A
McQuay, H
机构
[1] Pain Research, Nuffield Department Anaesthetics, Oxford Radcliffe Hospital, Headington
关键词
anaesthetics i.v; propofol; vomiting; nausea; antiemetics; incidence; statistics;
D O I
10.1093/bja/78.3.247
中图分类号
R614 [麻醉学];
学科分类号
100217 ;
摘要
We have analysed randomized controlled studies which reported the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) after propofol anaesthesia compared with other anaesthetics (control). Cumulative data of early (0-6 h) and late (0-48 h) PONV were recorded as occurrence or non-occurrence of nausea or vomiting. Combined odds ratio and number-needed-to-treat were calculated for propofol as an induction or maintenance regimen, early or late outcomes, and different emetic events. This was performed for all control event rates and within a range of 20-60% control event rates. We analysed 84 studies involving 6069 patients. The effect of propofol on PONV was dependent mainly on the method of administration, time of measurement and range of control event rates. When all studies were included the number-needed-to-treat to prevent PONV with propofol was more than 9 when used for induction of anaesthesia and at best 6 when used for maintenance. Within the 20-60% control event rate range, best results were achieved with propofol maintenance to prevent early PONV: the number-needed-to-treat to prevent early nausea was 4.7 (95% confidence interval 3.8-6.3), vomiting 4.9 (4-6.1) and any emetic event 4.9 (3.7-7.1). Within the 20-60% control event rate, of five patients treated with propofol for maintenance of anaesthesia, one will not vomit or be nauseated in the immediate postoperative period who would otherwise have vomited or been nauseated. This may be clinically relevant. In all other situations the difference between propofol and control may have reached statistical significance but was of doubtful clinical relevance. Treatment efficacy should be established within a defined range of control event rates for meaningful estimates of efficacy and for comparisons.
引用
收藏
页码:247 / 255
页数:9
相关论文
共 127 条
[1]  
APPADU BL, 1994, ANESTH ANALG, V79, P1191
[2]   RECOVERY AFTER PROPOFOL INFUSION ANESTHESIA IN CHILDREN - COMPARISON WITH PROPOFOL, THIOPENTONE OR HALOTHANE INDUCTION FOLLOWED BY HALOTHANE MAINTENANCE [J].
AUN, CST ;
SHORT, TG ;
OMEARA, ME ;
LEUNG, DHY ;
ROWBOTTOM, YM ;
OH, TE .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 1994, 72 (05) :554-558
[3]  
BARANN M, 1993, N-S ARCH PHARMACOL, V347, P125
[4]  
Bassil A, 1989, Middle East J Anaesthesiol, V10, P307
[5]   PROPOFOL VERSUS ETOMIDATE FOR SHORT UROLOGICAL SURGICAL-PROCEDURES [J].
BAUDE, C ;
LONG, D ;
CHABROL, B ;
MOSKOVTCHENKO, JF .
ANNALES FRANCAISES D ANESTHESIE ET DE REANIMATION, 1992, 11 (01) :12-16
[6]   COMPARATIVE-EVALUATION OF PROPOFOL OR METHOHEXITONE AS THE SOLE ANESTHETIC AGENT FOR MICROLARYNGEAL SURGERY [J].
BEST, N ;
TRAUGOTT, F .
ANAESTHESIA AND INTENSIVE CARE, 1991, 19 (01) :50-56
[7]   COMPARISON OF RECOVERY FROM ANESTHESIA WITH ISOFLURANE, METHOHEXITONE, AND PROPOFOL FOR LAPAROSCOPIC CHOLECYSTECTOMY [J].
BLOBNER, M ;
SCHNECK, HJ ;
FELBER, AR ;
GOEGLER, S ;
FEUSSNER, H ;
JELENESSELBORN, S .
ANAESTHESIST, 1994, 43 (09) :573-581
[8]  
BOEY W K, 1991, SMJ Singapore Medical Journal, V32, P150
[9]  
Boittiaux P, 1987, Ann Fr Anesth Reanim, V6, P324, DOI 10.1016/S0750-7658(87)80050-3
[10]  
Bonnardot J P, 1987, Ann Fr Anesth Reanim, V6, P297, DOI 10.1016/S0750-7658(87)80044-8