Advertisement

Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia

, Volume 44, Issue 8, pp 825–829 | Cite as

Vomiting after strabismus surgery in children: ondansetronvs propofol

  • William M. Splinter
  • Elliot J. Rhine
  • David J. Roberts
Reports of Investigation

Abstract

Purpose

To compare the antiemetic efficacy and costs associated with two anaesthetic regimens in children undergoing strabismus surgery. One regimen contained halothane, nitrous oxide and ondansetron, while the other contained propofol and nitrous oxide.

Methods

Three hundred children aged 2–14 yr undergoing strabismus surgery were enrolled into this single-blind, randomized, stratified, blocked study with a balanced design. Anaesthesia was induced by inhalation with halothane/N2O/O2 (Group O) or with 2.5–3.5 mg·kg1 propofol + 0.5 mg·kg−1 lidocaineiv (Group P). Group O patients were administered 0.15 mg·kg−1 ondansetron (maximum dose 8 mg)iv and all patients received atropine 20 μg·kg−1 iv immediately after induction of anaesthesia. Anaesthesia was maintained with N2O and halothane (Group O) or N2O and propofol (Group P). Patients were followed for 24 hr after their operation primarily to assess the incidence of postoperative vomiting. For each case, the costs of the anaesthetic drugs administered and their associated intravenous administration tubing were determined. Drug costs were those prevailing at the study site at the time of the investigation. Fixed costs, such as the cost of the anaesthetic equipment were not assessed.

Results

Groups were similar with respect to demographic data. The incidence of vomiting in both groups was 11 % while in-hospital and 23% after discharge. Each episode of in-hospital vomiting prolonged discharge by 17 ± 4 min, P < 0.001. Mean cost per case for anaesthetic drugs was less in Group 0. 18 ± 8vs 21 ± 10 CDN$. mean ± SD. P < 0.01.

Conclusion

The two methods of antiemetic prophylaxis were equally effective. Propofol-based anaesthesia was more expensive.

Keywords

Halothane Ondansetron Neostigmine Anaesthetic Drug Mivacurium 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Résumé

Objectif

Comparer l’efficacité antiémétique et les coûts associés à deux techniques anesthésiques chez des enfants opérés pour une correction de strabisme. Une des techniques comportait de l’halothane. du protoxyde d’azote, et de l’ondansetron, alors que l’autre comportait du propofol et du protoxyde d’azote.

Méthodes

Cette étude à l’insu, aléatoire, stratifiée et bloquée avec subtest des cubes avec modèle équilibré groupait trois cents enfants de 2 à 14 ans soumis à une correction chirurgicale de strabisme. Lanesthésie était induite par l’inhalation d’halothane/N2O/O2(Groupe O) ou l’injectioniv de propofol 2.5–3.5 mg·kg1 + hdocaïne 0.5 mg·kg−1 (groupe P). On a administré de l’ondansetron 0.15 mg·kg1 iv aux patients du groupe O (maximum 8 mg) et. à tous les patients, de l’atropine 20μg·kg−1 iv immédiatement après l’induction de l’anesthésie. Le protoxyde d’azote et l’halothane (Groupe O) et le propofol (Groupe P) ont servi au maintien de l’anesthésie. La surveillance anesthésique postopératoire était surtout onentée vers l’évaluation des vomissements. Dans chacun des cas, le coût des agents anesthésiques administrés et des tubulures utilisées pour leur administration ont été évalués. Le coût des agents était ceux qui étaient en vigueur localement et au moment de l’étude. Les coûts fixes comme ceux qui sont inhérents à l’équipement anesthésique n’ont pas été évalués.

Résultats

Les données démographiques étaient les mêmes pour les deux groupes. Lincidence des vomissements (11 %) à l’hôpital et hors de l’hôpital (23%) était identique pour les deux groupes. Chaque épisode de vomissements intrahospitalier a prolongé le séjpur à l’hôpital de 17 ± 4 min. P < 0,001. Le coût moyen des agents anesthésiques par patient était inféneur dans le groupe O, (18 ± 8 vs 21 ± 10$. moyenne ± ÉT, P < 0.01).

Conclusion

Ces deux méthodes ont la même capacité de prévention des vomissements. Lanesthésie à base de propofol coûte plus cher.

References

  1. 1.
    Abramowitz MD, Oh TH, Epstein BS, Ruttiman UE, Friendly DS. The antiemetic effect of droperidol following outpatient strabismus surgery in children. Anesthesiology 1983; 59: 579–83.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Patel RI, Hannallah RS. Anesthetic complications following pédiatric ambulatory surgery: a 3-yr study. Anesthesiology 1988; 69: 1009–12.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Baines D. Postoperative nausea and vomiting in children. Paediatr Anaesth 1996; 6: 7–14.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cunningham D, Turner A, Hawthorn J, Rosin RD. Ondansetron with and without dexamethasone to treat chemotherapy-induced emesis (Letter). Lancet 1989; i: 1323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Carr AS, Splinter WM, Bevan J, Reid CR, Stephenson CA, Lerman J. Ondansetron reduces postoperative vomiting in pédiatric strabismus surgery. Anesthesiology 1994; 81: A22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Splinter WM, Baxter MRN, Gould HM, et al. Oral ondansetron decreases vomiting after tonsillectomy in children. Can J Anaesth 1995; 42: 277–80.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Snellen FT, Vanacker B, Van Aken H. Propofol-nitrous oxide versus thiopental sodium-isoflurane-nitrous oxide for strabisimus surgery in children. J Clin Anesth 1993; 5: 37–41.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Weir PM, Munro HM, Reynolds PI, Lewis IH, Wilton NCT. Propofol infusion and the incidence of emesis in pediatric outpatient strabismus surgery. Anesth Analg 1993; 76: 760–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tramèr M, Borgeat A, Rifat K. Postoperative nausea and vomiting after strabismus surgery in children — Effects of propofol, ondansetron and lidocaine. Anesthesiology 1993; 79: A1193.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gan TJ, Ginsberg B, Grant AP, Glass PSA. Doubleblind, randomized comparison of ondansetron and intraoperative propofol to prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting. Anesthesiology 1996; 85: 1036–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Splinter W, Noël L, Roberts D, Rhine E, Bonn G, Clarke W. Antiemetic prophylaxis for strabismus surgery. Can J Ophthalmol 1994; 29: 224–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rose JB, Martin TM, Corddry DH, Zagnoev M, Kettrick RG. Ondansetron reduces the incidence and severity of poststrabismus repair vomiting in children. Anesth Analg 1994; 79: 486–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Davis A, Krige S, Moyes D. A double-blind randomized prospective study comparing ondansetron with droperidol in the prevention of emesis following strabismus surgery. Anaesth Intensive Care 1995; 23: 438–43.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hawkes C, Miller D, Martineau R, Hull K, Hopkins H, Tierney M. Evaluation of cost minimization strategies of anaesthetic drugs in a tertiary care hospital. Can J Anaesth 1994; 41: 894–901.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Vener DF, Carr AS, Sikich N, Bissonnette B, Lerman J. Dimenhydrinate decreases vomiting after strabismus surgery in children. Anesth Analg 1996; 82: 728–31.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Morscher AH, Smith CE, Gordon GJ, Patel N. A simple spreadsheet tool for cost accounting anesthesia care (Letter). Anesthesiology 1994; 81: 514–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Canadian Anesthesiologists 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • William M. Splinter
    • 1
  • Elliot J. Rhine
    • 1
  • David J. Roberts
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of AnaesthesiaChildren’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario and the University of OttawaOttawaCanada

Personalised recommendations