Background. Droperidol is commonly noted to be more effective at preventing postoperative nausea (PON) than vomiting (POV) and it is assumed to have a short duration of action. This may be relevant for clinical decisions, especially for designing multiple-drug antiemetic regimens.Methods. We conducted a post hoc analysis of a large multicentre trial. Within this trial, 1734 patients underwent inhalation anaesthesia and were randomly stratified to receive several antiemetic interventions according to a factorial design, one of which was droperidol 1.25 mg vs placebo. We considered differences to be significant when: (i) point estimates of one outcome are not within the limits of the confidence interval (CI) of the other outcome; and (ii) differences in risk ratio (also known as relative risks, RR) are at least 20%.Results. Over 24 h, nausea was reduced from 42.9% in the control to 32.0% in the droperidol group, corresponding to a relative risk (RR) of 0.75 (95% CI from 0.66 to 0.84). Vomiting was reduced from 15.6% to 11.8%, and therefore associated with a similar RR of 0.76 (0.59-0.96). In the early postoperative period (0-2 h), droperidol prevented nausea and vomiting similarly, with an RR of 0.57 (0.46-0.69) for nausea and 0.56 (0.37-0.85) for vomiting. In the late postoperative period (2-24 h), the RR was again similar with 0.83 (0.72-0.96) for nausea compared with 0.89 (0.66-1.18) for vomiting but significantly less compared with the early postoperative period.Conclusions. We conclude that droperidol prevents PON and POV equally well, yet its duration of action is short-lived.

Anesthesiology, Intensive Care Medicine and Pain Management, University Hospital, Homburg, Saarland, Germany

Bislang existieren für den deutschen Sprachraum keine expertenbasierten Handlungsempfehlungen zur Vermeidung oder Therapie von „postoperative nausea and vomiting“ (postoperative Übelkeit und Erbrechen, PONV). Ziel war daher die Entwicklung von Empfehlungen, aus denen im klinikspezifischen Kontext „standard operating procedures“ (SOPs) abgeleitet werden können. Ein anästhesiologisch besetztes Expertengremium bearbeitete relevante Schlüsselthemen in Arbeitsgruppen, die anschließend im Plenum diskutiert wurden. Die Empfehlungen sollten sich auf Erkenntnisse stützen, zu denen umfassende und vertrauenswürdige Daten vorliegen. Einzelne Risikofaktoren, wie z. B. die Anamnese des Patienten, besitzen, isoliert betrachtet, keine ausreichende Sensitivität und Spezifität, um anhand dessen klinisch rationale Entscheidungen zu treffen. Im Gegensatz dazu berücksichtigen vereinfachte Risikoscores mehrere Faktoren und ermöglichen folglich eine zuverlässigere Risikoeinschätzung. Einzelne antiemetische Interventionen zur Vermeidung von PONV sind mit einer relativen Risikoreduktion von ca. 30% im Allgemeinen vergleichbar effektiv. Dieses scheint für die total intravenöse Anästhesie (TIVA) ebenso wie für Dexamethason und andere Antiemetika (Dimenhydrinat, Droperidol, Serotoninantagonisten, transdermales Scopolamin) zu gelten. Eine adäquate, hinreichend hohe Dosierung ist dabei Voraussetzung, die bei Kindern natürlich gewichtsadaptiert erfolgen sollte. Während die relative Risikoreduktion weitgehend unabhängig vom Kontext ist, sind die absolute Risikoreduktion und somit die „number needed totreat“ (NNT) einer Prophylaxe vor allem vom Patientenrisiko abhängig. Bei einem niedrigen Risiko erscheint eine Prophylaxe nicht sinnvoll. Bei mittlerem Risiko sollte eine Prophylaxe nicht vorenthalten werden. Ein hohes Risiko erfordert ein multimodales Vorgehen, das im Einzelfall angepasst werden sollte (medizinisches Risiko, Patientenpräferenz). Die Therapie von PONV sollte prompt, vorzugsweise mit zuvor noch nicht verwendeten Antiemetika erfolgen. Das Gremium schlägt Algorithmen vor, bei denen die Indikation und das Ausmaß einer Prophylaxe vor allem vom Patientenrisiko abhängig sind. Unter Berücksichtigung lokaler Gegebenheiten sollten diese eine evidenzbasierte Erstellung von SOPs erleichtern.

Introduction:The present investigation was designed to investigate the accuracy and precision of lactate measurement obtained with contemporary biosensors (Chiron Diagnostics, Nova Biomedical) and standard enzymatic photometric procedures (Sigma Diagnostics, Abbott Laboratories, Analyticon).Materials and Methods: Measurements were performed in vitro before and after the stepwise addition of 1molar sodium lactate solution to samples of fresh frozen plasma to systematically achieve lactate concentrations of up to 20 mmol/l.Results: Precision of the methods investigated varied between 1% and 7%, accuracy ranged between 2% and -33% with the variability being lowest in the Sigma photometric procedure (6%) and more than 13% in both biosensor methods. Conclusion:Biosensors for lactate measurement provide adequate accuracy in mean with the limitation of highly variable results.A true lactate value of 6 mmol/l was found to be presented between 4.4 and 7.6 mmol/l or even with higher difference.Biosensors and standard enzymatic photometric procedures are only limited comparable because the differences between paired determinations presented to be several mmol.The advantage of biosensors is the complete lack of preanalytical sample preparation which appeared to be the major limitation of standard photometry methods.

There are no consensus guidelines for the management of postoperative nausea and vomiting ( PONV) in German speaking countries. This meeting was intended to develop such guidelines on which individual health care facilities can derive their specific standard operating procedures (SOPs). Anesthesiologists reviewed published literature on key topics which were subsequently discussed during two meetings. It was emphasized that recommendations were based on the best available evidence. The clinical relevance of individual risk factors should be viewed with caution since even well proven risk factors, such as the history of PONV, do not allow the identification of patients at risk for PONV with a satisfactory sensitivity or specificity. A more useful approach is the use of simplified risk scores which consider the presence of several risk factors simultaneously. Most individual antiemetic interventions for the prevention of PONV have comparable efficacy with a relative risk reduction of about 30%. This appears to be true for total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) as well as for dexamethasone and other antiemetics; assuming a sufficiently high, adequate and equipotent dosage which should be weight-adjusted in children. As the relative risk reduction is context independent and similar between the interventions, the absolute risk reduction of prophylactic interventions is mainly dependent on the patient's individual baseline risk. Prophylaxis is thus rarely warranted in patients at low risk, generally needed in patients with a moderate risk and should include a multi-modal approach in patients at high risk for PONV. Therapeutic interventions of PONV should be administered promptly using an antiemetic which has not been used before. The group suggests algorithms where prophylactic interventions are mainly dependent on the patient's risk for PONV. These algorithms should provide evidence-based guidelines allowing the development of SOPs/policies which take local circumstances into account.

Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University of Saarland, Homburg/Saar, Germany

In this prospective, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study we compared the efficacy of three IV non-opioid analgesics for postoperative pain relief after lumbar microdiscectomy. Eighty healthy patients were randomly divided into 4 treatment groups (n = 20 each) to receive either parecoxib 40 mg, paracetamol 1 g, metamizol 1 g, or placebo IV 45 min before the end of surgery. In the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) patients were treated using patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) with piritramide. In the metamizol group the pain score at arrival in the PACU was significantly lower compared with the paracetamol, parecoxib, and placebo groups. In addition, in the metamizol group significantly fewer patients required additional PCA compared with the other groups studied. However, in those patients who required additional pain therapy in the four treatment groups, there was no significant difference in time to first request for piritramide and cumulative consumption of piritramide as assessed by the PCA data in the PACU. The incidence of adverse side effects was infrequent in all groups. These results suggest that in patients undergoing lumbar microdiscectomy, metamizol is superior to parecoxib, paracetamol, and placebo for immediate postoperative pain relief with minimal side effects.

Kreuer, S.; Bruhn, J.; Biedler, A.; Wagner, K.; Ellerkmann, R.; Wilhelm, W. Author Information

Schneider, S. O.; Rensing, H.; Pradarutti, S.; Müller, P.; Larsen, R.; Biedler, A. Author Information

Kreuer, S.; Bruhn, J.; Biedler, A.; Walter, E.; Larsen, R.; Wilhelm, W. Author Information

In der vorliegenden Untersuchung wurde die Geschlechtsabhängigkeit von Propofolverbrauch und Aufwachzeiten nach Propofol-Remifentanil-Anästhesie bei standardisierter Anästhesietiefe untersucht.

BACKGROUND Untreated, one third of patients who undergo surgery will have postoperative nausea and vomiting. Although many trials have been conducted, the relative benefits of prophylactic antiemetic interventions given alone or in combination remain unknown. METHODS In a randomized, controlled trial of factorial design, 5,199 patients at high risk for postoperative nausea and vomiting were randomly assigned to 1 of 64 possible combinations of 6 prophylactic interventions: 1) 4 mg of ondansetron or no ondansetron; 2) 4 mg of dexamethasone or no dexamethasone; 3) 1.25 mg of droperidol or no droperidol; 4) propofol or a volatile anesthetic; 5) nitrogen or nitrous oxide; 6) remifentanil or fentanyl. The primary aim parameter was nausea and vomiting within 24 h after surgery, which was evaluated blindly. RESULTS Ondansetron, dexamethasone, and droperidol each reduced the risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting by about 26%, propofol reduced the risk by 19%, and nitrogen by 12%. The risk reduction with both of these agents (i.e., total intravenous anesthesia) was thus similar to that observed with each of the antiemetics alone. All the interventions acted independently of each other and independently of the patients' baseline risk. Consequently, the relative risks associated with the combined interventions could be estimated by multiplying the relative risks associated with each intervention. However, absolute risk reduction was a critical function of patients' baseline risk. CONCLUSIONS Because antiemetic interventions are similarly effective and act independently, the safest or least expensive should be used first. Prophylaxis is rarely warranted in low-risk patients, moderate-risk patients may benefit from a single intervention, and multiple interventions should be reserved for high-risk patients.

Das Erkennen einer okkulten Zell- und Gewebshypoxie ist eines der fundamentalen Ziele in der Beurteilung des kritisch Kranken. Die Konzentration des Laktats im Plasma wurde hierzu bisher als globaler Marker einer gestörten O2-Versorgung der Gewebe verstanden und als Beweis für das Vorliegen anaerober Stoffwechselprozesse infolge einer Hypoxie. Mit der Verfügbarkeit patientenseitiger Meßverfahren (point-of care) hat das Interesse auch für diesen Parameter weiter zugenommen. Dabei wird dem mittels Biosensor erhaltenen Meßwert ein hoher Stellenwert für die Therapie und Prognose des kritisch kranken Patienten zugewiesen: Entweder per se oder in Kombination mit weiteren Parametern soll der mittels Elektrode direkt und über 24 Stunden verfügbar gewordene Laktatwert bisherigen diagnostischen Ansätzen je nach klinischer Situation sogar überlegen sein können können. Die Literatur gibt hierfür eine Reihe von Beispielen (vgl. Tab. [1]). Allerdings finden sich auch kritische Stimmen, beispielsweise Hinweise auf die Komplexität der Aussagekraft des Parameters durch das Wechselspiel zwischen Laktatbildung, -clearance und -utilisation [1] [2] [3]. So wird inzwischen selbst die Spezifität des Laktats als Marker einer Gewebshypoxie oder globaler Störungen von O2- Angebot und O2-Verbrauch bezweifelt [4]. Auch die Validität und Reproduzierbakeit der Meßmethoden werden kritisch betrachtet [1] [3] [21] [24]. Ferner wird auf das Problem der Vergleich- und Übertragbarkeit des mit verschiedenen Methoden zu erhaltenden Parameters aufmerksam gemacht [1] [2]. Vorliegend sollen Aspekte zur klinischen Einordnung und Meßmethodik betrachtet und aus methodischen Gründen auf eine Besprechung der in Tab. [1] genannten Sachverhalte verzichtet werden.

A common side effect associated with succinylcholine is postoperative myalgia. The pathogenesis of this myalgia is still unclear; inflammation has been suggested but without convincing evidence. We designed the present study to investigate whether an inflammatory reaction contributes to this myalgia. The incidence and severity of succinylcholine-associated myalgia was determined in 64 patients pretreated with saline or dexamethasone before succinylcholine (n = 32 for each). Incidence and severity of myalgia did not differ significantly between the two groups: 15 patients in the dexamethasone group complained of myalgia compared with 18 patients in the saline group, and severe myalgia was reported by five patients and three patients, respectively (not significant). At 48 h after surgery, 12 patients in both groups still suffered from myalgia (not significant). In addition, interleukin-6 (IL-6) as an early marker of inflammation was assessed in a subgroup of 10 patients pretreated with saline. We found an increase of IL-6 for only three patients, but only one patient reported myalgia; no relationship between myalgia and the increase of IL-6 was found. In conclusion, there is no evidence for an inflammatory origin of succinylcholine-associated myalgia. IMPLICATIONS: Administration of dexamethasone before succinylcholine was not effective in decreasing the incidence or the severity of succinylcholine-induced postoperative myalgia. Furthermore, there was no significant relationship between postoperative myalgia and time course of interleukin-6 concentrations, a marker of inflammation. Pretreatment with dexamethasone is not justified to prevent postoperative myalgia after succinylcholine.

Die Möglichkeiten der Restriktion leicht diffusibler kristalloider Lösungen bei gleichzeitig erreichbarer hämodynamischer Stabilisierung lassen den Einsatz hypertoner Kolloide als Volumenersatzmittel bei herzchirurgischen Patienten geeignet erscheinen. Ziel der vorliegenden Untersuchung war es, erstmalig die hämodynamischen Effekte verschiedener hyperton-hyperonkotischer Kolloide bei koronarchirurgischen Patienten zu überprüfen.