In this study we compared the efficacy and safety of three antiemetic combinations in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). Ninety ASA status I-II women, aged 18-65 yr, undergoing general anesthesia for major gynecological surgery, were included in a prospective, randomized, double-blinded study. A standardized anesthetic technique and postoperative analgesia (intrathecal morphine plus IV patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) with morphine) were used in all patients. Patients were randomly assigned to receive ondansetron 4 mg plus droperidol 1.25 mg after the induction of anesthesia and droperidol 1.25 mg 12 h later (Group 1, n = 30), dexamethasone 8 mg plus droperidol 1.25 mg after the induction of anesthesia and droperidol 1.25 mg 12 h later (Group 2, n = 30), or ondansetron 4 mg plus dexamethasone 8 mg after the induction of anesthesia and placebo 12 h later (Group 3, n = 30). A complete response, defined as no PONV in 48 h, occurred in 80% of patients in Group 1, 70% in Group 3, and 40% in Group 2 (P = 0.004 versus Groups 1 and 3). The incidences of side effects and other variables that could modify the incidence of PONV were similar among groups. In conclusion, ondansetron, in combination with droperidol or dexamethasone, is more effective than dexamethasone in combination with droperidol in women undergoing general anesthesia for major gynecological surgery with intrathecal morphine plus IV PCA with morphine for postoperative analgesia. The combination of ondansetron plus dexamethasone or droperidol was significantly better than the combination of dexamethasone plus droperidol in the prophylaxis of postoperative nausea and vomiting in women undergoing general anesthesia for major gynecological surgery, with intrathecal and IV morphine (patient-controlled analgesia) for management of postoperative pain.

This study compares the cost-effectiveness of three combinations of antiemetics in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). We conducted a prospective, double-blind study. Ninety ASA I-II females, 18-65 yr, undergoing general anaesthesia for major gynaecological surgery, with standardized postoperative analgesia (intrathecal 0.2 mg plus i.v. PCA morphine), were randomly assigned to receive: ondansetron 4 mg plus droperidol 1.25 mg after induction and droperidol 1.25 mg 12 h later (Group 1); dexamethasone 8 mg plus droperidol 1.25 mg after induction and droperidol 1.25 mg 12 h later (Group 2); ondansetron 4 mg plus dexamethasone 8 mg after induction and placebo 12 h later (Group 3). A decision analysis tree was used to divide each group into nine mutually exclusive subgroups, depending on the incidence of PONV, need for rescue therapy, side effects and their treatment. Direct cost and probabilities were calculated for each subgroup, then a cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted from the hospital point of view. Groups 1 and 3 were more effective (80 and 70%) than Group 2 (40%, P=0.004) in preventing PONV but also more expensive. Compared with Group 2, the incremental cost per extra patient without PONV was euro;6.99 (95% CI, -1.26 to 36.57) for Group 1 and euro;13.55 (95% CI, 0.89-132.90) for Group 3. Ondansetron+droperidol is cheaper and at least as effective as ondansetron+ dexamethasone, and it is more effective than dexamethasone+droperidol with a reasonable extra cost.

Previous studies have compared levobupivacaine versus ropivacaine in various peripheral nerve blocks in terms of block duration, quality of analgesia, and onset time, but this has not occurred in the PENG block. Here, a single-center, randomized, and controlled clinical trial is presented. One hundred and twenty patients older than 65 years suffering from hip fractures and surgically treated at our institution under spinal anesthesia were eligible for participation; of them, one hundred and eight were analyzed. Patients were randomized to receive ultrasound-guided PENG blocks using 20 mL of either 0.25% levobupivacaine or 0.375% ropivacaine (both of which are equipotent concentrations). The primary endpoint was to compare the analgesic duration (time to first rescue) and analgesic quality (pain scores using the VAS, PAINAD, and AlgoPlus scales) between the groups. Secondary endpoints included comparing the onset time, describing the need for and type of rescue analgesics, and possible associated adverse effects. There were no statistically significant differences in analgesic duration between levobupivacaine (median 861.0, IQR 960) and ropivacaine (median 1205.0, IQR 1379; p = 0.069). Likewise, the quality of analgesia and onset time were comparable among the groups. A small number of patients required opioids as rescue analgesics (4.6%). The possible associated adverse effects included postoperative infection (11.1%) and delirium (2.8%).

Background and Objectives: In the context of hip fracture surgeries, episodes of hypotension are common, and have been associated in various studies with increased complications and mortality. The latest clinical guidelines recommend close hemodynamic management. Our research team hypothesized that the use of peripheral nerve blocks in this surgery could help adjust the doses of subarachnoid anesthesia for these procedures, thereby limiting the hypotensive episodes, without compromising an adequate depth and duration of intraoperative anesthesia. Materials and Methods: A retrospective study of 184 elderly patients undergoing hip fracture surgery is proposed. In total, 76 patients were operated under subarachnoid anesthesia using 9.5 mg of hyperbaric bupivacaine 0.5% and 10 mcg of fentanyl (Group S), while 108 received a reduced dose of 5 mg hyperbaric bupivacaine 0.5% and 10 mcg of fentanyl, supplemented by preoperative PENG and FLCN blocks (Group B). The main outcome of this study is to compare the number and duration of hypotensive episodes, and its secondary outcome is to compare the use of vasoactive drugs between the groups. Results: The number of hypotensive episodes and their duration were lower in Group B: −12.94 min (−8.57 to −18.03, p = 0.000). The consumption of vasoactive drugs did not reach statistical significance. None of the patients in Group B required supplementary intraoperative anesthesia. Conclusions: Reducing the dose in subarachnoid anesthesia is associated with better hemodynamic control in hip fracture surgeries, and PENG + NFCL blocks are proposed as an appropriate adjunct to ensure adequate anesthetic depth and duration despite a substantial subarachnoid anesthesia dose adjustment.