CJA
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a scholarly reply
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Cozanitis, D.
Right arrow Articles by Paloheimo, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Cozanitis, D.
Right arrow Articles by Paloheimo, M.

Canadian Journal of Anesthesia, Vol 43, 106-109, Copyright © 1996 by Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society

ARTICLES

A comparison of ranitidine, droperidol or placebo in the prevention of nausea and vomiting after hysterectomy

D Cozanitis, R Asantila, P Eklund and M Paloheimo
Department of Anaesthesia, Helsinki University, Finland.

PURPOSE: The effect of ranitidine on postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) was assessed when compared with droperidol and with placebo. METHODS: Three groups of sixty patients were studied in a double-blind randomized manner. The first group received ranitidine tablets 300 mg on the night before and on the following morning, one hour before induction of anaesthesia. Thirty minutes before surgery ended they were given isotonic saline 0.3 ml iv. The second group had placebo in place of ranitidine while before the operation ended, droperidol 0.75 mg (0.3 ml) was injected. The third group received placebos rather than the study drugs. The immediate two-hour postoperative recovery room period and that on the ward were evaluated until the next morning. PONV information was gathered from complaints by the patients and from direct questioning by the nursing staff. Droperidol 0.75 mg iv served as the "rescue drug." RESULTS: Less PONV occurred in patients who received anti-emetics than those given placebo: recovery room, P = 0.0109; ward, P = 0.007. Droperidol better suppressed PONV in the recovery room (P = 0.005) with no statistical significance seen between ranitidine and placebo. On the ward, both anti-emetics were more effective than placebo (ranitidine, P = 0.01; droperidol, P = 0.003). "Rescue drug" requirements throughout the study periods were not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Although both anti-emetics were associated with a smaller incidence of PONV than was placebo, droperidol was superior to ranitidine in preventing sickness during the immediate postoperative period. The need for the "rescue drug" was similar in all groups.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Canadian J. AnesthesiaHome page
I. Henzi, J. Sonderegger, and M. R. Tramer
Efficacy, dose-response, and adverse effects of droperidol for prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting
Can J Anesth, June 1, 2000; 47(6): 537 - 551.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1996 by the Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society.