雷莫司琼与昂丹司琼预防成人术后恶心呕吐的Meta分析

doi:10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-6568.2017.03.005

目的

用Meta分析来比较雷莫司琼与昂丹司琼在预防成人术后恶心呕吐的临床效果。

方法

通过检索Pubmed、Web of science、Cochrane Library、Google scholar等数据库，搜集比较雷莫司琼与昂丹司琼预防成人术后恶心呕吐效果的随机对照实验研究，应用R统计软件(R-3.1.3)对数据进行分析。

结果

经过评价和筛选，纳入12篇随机对照研究。Meta分析结果显示：与昂丹司琼比较，雷莫司琼具有更有效的预防术后恶心呕吐的作用，并且差异有统计学意义。

结论

就目前已有的文献来看，雷莫司琼预防术后恶心呕吐的作用由于昂丹司琼。

关键词: 雷莫司琼, 昂丹司琼, 术后恶心呕吐, Meta分析

Objective

The aim of this study was to systematicallyand objectively compare the anti-emetic effects of ramosetron and ondansetron on postoperative nausea and vomiting.

Methods

A systematic literature search of MEDLINE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and the Google scholar were performed to recruit studies compared ramosetron and ondansetron in the treatment of postoperative nausea and vomiting.A Meta-analysis(R-3.1.3) was conducted to estimate the effect of different interventions.

Results

A total of 12 randomized controlled trails met the inclusion criteria.The study demonstrates that ramosetron is more effective than ondansetron for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting.

Conclusions

Use of ramosetron is a more effective mean for reducing postoperative nausea and vomiting than ondansetron.

Key words: Ramosetron, Ondansetron, Postoperative nausea and vomiting, Meta-analysis

表1 纳入研究的基本信息

纳入研究	JADAD评分	干预	人数	患者一般信息		手术类型	手术时间(min)	数据采集的时间(h)
纳入研究	JADAD评分	干预	人数	年龄(Y)	体质量(kg)	手术类型	手术时间(min)	数据采集的时间(h)
Phillips and Hutchinson	B	G	40	35	67	腹腔镜	25	24
?	?	P	40	31	66	?	25	?
Pongprojpaw and Chiamchanya	B	G	40	32	53	腹腔镜	72	0，4，24
?	?	P	40	34	52	?	70	?
Eberhart et al.	A	G	57	57	N	腹腔镜	34	0，3，6，24
?	?	P	59	59	N	?	34	?
Nanthakomon et al.	A	G	60	41	58	开腹	127	0，2，6，12，24
?	?	P	60	41	54	?	128	?
Kalava et al.	A	G	116	33	N	剖宫产	45	2，2.5，24
?	?	P	123	33	N	?	45	?
Janngam et al.	A	G	54	37	61	四肢手术	100	0，6，24
?	?	P	54	35	61	?	?	?
Bone et al.	B	G	20	40	63	混合	58	0，2，12，24
?	?	P	20	46	61	?	52	?
Visalyaputra et al.	B	G	27	32	51	腹腔镜	20	24
?	?	P	28	33	51	?	41	?

表1 纳入研究的基本信息

纳入研究	JADAD评分	干预	人数	患者一般信息		手术类型	手术时间(min)	数据采集的时间(h)
纳入研究	JADAD评分	干预	人数	年龄(Y)	体质量(kg)	手术类型	手术时间(min)	数据采集的时间(h)
Phillips and Hutchinson	B	G	40	35	67	腹腔镜	25	24
?	?	P	40	31	66	?	25	?
Pongprojpaw and Chiamchanya	B	G	40	32	53	腹腔镜	72	0，4，24
?	?	P	40	34	52	?	70	?
Eberhart et al.	A	G	57	57	N	腹腔镜	34	0，3，6，24
?	?	P	59	59	N	?	34	?
Nanthakomon et al.	A	G	60	41	58	开腹	127	0，2，6，12，24
?	?	P	60	41	54	?	128	?
Kalava et al.	A	G	116	33	N	剖宫产	45	2，2.5，24
?	?	P	123	33	N	?	45	?
Janngam et al.	A	G	54	37	61	四肢手术	100	0，6，24
?	?	P	54	35	61	?	?	?
Bone et al.	B	G	20	40	63	混合	58	0，2，12，24
?	?	P	20	46	61	?	52	?
Visalyaputra et al.	B	G	27	32	51	腹腔镜	20	24
?	?	P	28	33	51	?	41	?

表2 纳入研究的实验结果

纳入研究	术后呕吐(POV)		术后恶心呕吐(PONV)
Phillips and Hutchinson	4/40	9/40	19/40	25/40
Pongprojpaw and Chiamchanya	7/40	12/40	12/40	23/40
Eberhart et al.	23/57	16/59	30/57	29/59
Nanthakomon et al.	17/60	28/60	29/60	40/60
Kalava et al.	N	N	60/116	75/123
Janngam et al.	15/54	24/54	21/54	33/54
Bone et al.	9/20	14/20	N	N
Visalyaputra et al.	7/27	10/28	N	N

表2 纳入研究的实验结果

纳入研究	术后呕吐(POV)		术后恶心呕吐(PONV)
Phillips and Hutchinson	4/40	9/40	19/40	25/40
Pongprojpaw and Chiamchanya	7/40	12/40	12/40	23/40
Eberhart et al.	23/57	16/59	30/57	29/59
Nanthakomon et al.	17/60	28/60	29/60	40/60
Kalava et al.	N	N	60/116	75/123
Janngam et al.	15/54	24/54	21/54	33/54
Bone et al.	9/20	14/20	N	N
Visalyaputra et al.	7/27	10/28	N	N

图1 检索流程图

图2 术后0～2 h内两组恶心呕吐发生率的比较

图3 术后6～24 h内两组恶心呕吐发生率的比较

图4 术后24～48 h内两组恶心呕吐发生率的比较

表3 各组数据偏倚的评价

项目	0～2 h	6～24 h	24～48 h
Begg检验P值	0.3272	0.8806	0.2971
Egger检验P值	0.1943	0.3498	0.2391

表3 各组数据偏倚的评价

项目	0～2 h	6～24 h	24～48 h
Begg检验P值	0.3272	0.8806	0.2971
Egger检验P值	0.1943	0.3498	0.2391

[1]	Islam S, Jain PN. Post-operative nausea and vomiting (PONV)：a review article[J]. Indian Journal of Anaesth 2004；48：253-8.
[2]	Haynes G R, Bailey M K. Postoperative nausea and vomiting: review and clinical approaches[J]. Southern medical journal, 1996, 89(10): 940-949.
[3]	vanWijk MG, Smalhout B. A postoperative analysis of the patient′s viewof anaesthesia in a Netherlands′ teaching hospital.[J]. Anaesthesia, 1990，45(8)：679-682.
[4]	Gan TJ. Postoperative nausea and vomiting—Can it be eliminated？[J]．Jama, 2002, 287(10): 1233-1236.
[5]	Korttila K. The study of postoperative nausea and vomiting[J]. British journal of anaesthesia, 1992, 69(7): 20S-23S.
[6]	Apfel CC, Roewer N. Postoperative nausea and vomiting[J]. Der Anaesthesist, 2004, 53(4): 377-89; quiz 390-1.
[7]	McCracken G, Houston P, Lefebvre G. Guideline for the management of postoperative nausea and vomiting[J]. Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology Canada: JOGC＝ Journal d'obstetrique et gynecologie du Canada: JOGC, 2008, 30(7): 600-7, 608-16.
[8]	Tramèr MR. Treatment of postoperative nausea and vomiting: Betterdata, improved control have been achieved during recent years[J]. BMJ：British Medical Journal, 2003, 327(7418): 762.
[9]	Kenny GNC. Risk factors for postoperative nausea and vomiting[J]．Anaesthesia, 1994, 49(1): 6-10.
[10]	Alkaissi A, Gunnarsson H, Johnsson V, et al. Disturbing postoperative symptoms are not reduced by prophylactic antiemetic treatment in patients at high risk of post‐operative nausea and vomiting[J]. Acta anaesthesiologica scandinavica, 2004, 48(6): 761-771.
[11]	Jadad AR, Moore R A, Carroll D, et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary？[J]．Controlled clinical trials, 1996, 17(1): 1-12.
[12]	Kaja S, Giri RS, Tugave DV, et al. A randomized clinical trial comparing the efficacy and safety of ramosetron versus ondansetron in patients undergoing abdominal surgery under general anesthesia[J]. Saudi journal of anaesthesia, 2014, 8(1): 59.
[13]	Ryu JH, Lee JE, Lim YJ, et al. A prospective, randomized，double-blind, and multicenter trial of prophylactic effects of ramosetronon postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) after craniotomy：comparison with ondansetron[J]. BMC anesthesiology, 2014, 14(1): 1-8.
[14]	Choi YS, Shim JK, Ahn SH, et al. Efficacy comparison of ramosetron with ondansetron on preventing nausea and vomiting in high-risk patients following spine surgery with a single bolus of dexamethasone as an adjunct[J]. Korean journal of anesthesiology, 2012, 62(6): 543-547.
[15]	Lee JW, Park HJ, Choi J, et al. Comparison of ramosetron′s and ondansetron′s preventive anti-emetic effects in highly susceptible patients undergoing abdominal hysterectomy[J]. Korean journal of anesthesiology, 2011, 61(6): 488-492.
[16]	Choi DK, Chin JH, Lee EH, et al. Prophylactic control of post－operative nausea and vomiting using ondansetron and ramosetron after cardiac surgery[J]. Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica, 2010, 54(8)：962-969.
[17]	Ryu J, So YM, Hwang J, et al. Ramosetron versus ondansetron for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting after laparoscopic cholecystectomy[J]. Surgical endoscopy, 2010, 24(4): 812-817.
[18]	Ansari MM, Siddiqui OA, Haleem S, et al. Comparison of ramosetron and ondansetron for control of post-operative nausea and vomiting following laparoscopic cholecystectomy[J]. Indian journal of medical sciences, 2010, 64(6): 272.
[19]	Hahm TS, Ko JS, Choi SJ, et al. Comparison of the prophylactic anti－emetic efficacy of ramosetron and ondansetron in patients at high－risk for postoperative nausea and vomiting after total knee replacement[J]. Anaesthesia, 2010, 65(5): 500-504.
[20]	Kim SI, Kim SC, Baek YH, et al. Comparison of ramosetron with ondansetron for prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing gynaecological surgery[J]. British journal of anaesthesia, 2009, 103(4): 549-553.
[21]	Choi YS, Shim JK, Jeon DH, et al. Effect of ramosetron on patient-controlled analgesia related nausea and vomiting after spine surgery in highly susceptible patients: comparison with ondansetron[J]．Spine, 2008, 33(17): E602-E606.
[22]	Kim SH, Hong JY, Kim WO, et al. Palonosetron has superior prophylactic antiemetic efficacy compared with ondansetron or ramosetron in high-risk patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery: a prospective，randomized, double-blinded study[J]. Korean journal of anesthesiology，2013, 64(6): 517-523.
[23]	Swaika S, Pal A, Chatterjee S, et al. Ondansetron, ramosetron, or palonosetron: Which is a better choice of antiemetic to preventpostoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy？[J]. Anesthesia, Essays and Researches, 2011, 5(2): 182.

[1]	张思平, 刘伟, 马鹏程. 全膝关节置换术后下肢轻度内翻对线对疗效的影响[J]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 808-817.
[2]	罗旺林, 杨传军, 许国星, 俞建国, 孙伟东, 颜文娟, 冯志. 开放性楔形胫骨高位截骨术不同植入材料的Meta分析[J]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 818-826.
[3]	马鹏程, 刘伟, 张思平. 股骨髋臼撞击综合征关节镜手术中闭合关节囊的疗效影响[J]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 653-662.
[4]	陈宏兴, 张立军, 张勇, 李虎, 周驰, 凡一诺. 膝骨关节炎关节镜清理术后中药外用疗效的Meta分析[J]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 663-672.
[5]	邢阳, 何爱珊, 康焱, 杨子波, 孟繁钢, 邬培慧. 前交叉韧带单束联合前外侧结构重建的Meta分析[J]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(04): 508-519.
[6]	李雄雄, 周灿, 徐婷, 任予, 尚进. 初诊导管原位癌伴微浸润腋窝淋巴结转移率的Meta分析[J]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 466-474.
[7]	张再博, 王冰雨, 焦志凯, 檀碧波. 胃癌术后下肢深静脉血栓危险因素的Meta分析[J]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 475-480.
[8]	武慧铭, 郭仁凯, 李辉宇. 机器人辅助下经自然腔道取标本手术治疗结直肠癌安全性和有效性的Meta分析[J]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 395-400.
[9]	莫闲, 杨闯. 肝硬化患者并发门静脉血栓危险因素的Meta分析[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 678-683.
[10]	刘佳铭, 孙晓容, 文健, 何晓丽, 任茂玲. 有氧运动对成人哮喘肺功能、生活质量以及哮喘控制影响的Meta分析[J]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2023, 16(04): 592-595.
[11]	段文忠, 白延霞, 徐文亭, 祁虹霞, 吕志坚. 七氟烷和丙泊酚在肝切除术中麻醉效果比较Meta分析[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(06): 640-645.
[12]	杨海龙, 邓满军, 樊羿辰, 徐梦钰, 陈芳德, 吴威浩, 张生元. 腹腔镜胆总管探查术一期缝合术后胆漏危险因素Meta分析[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(05): 545-550.
[13]	阿依别克·吐尔得汉, 陈伦牮, 巴合体·卡力甫, 陈雄, 梦塬. 血清免疫抗原在包虫病诊断中的价值Meta分析[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(03): 300-304.
[14]	李乐, 陈聪, 史赢, 陈金明, 刘中华. 肝癌患者PD-1表达及其与预后关系的Meta分析[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(03): 305-311.
[15]	徐红莉, 杨钰琳, 薛清, 张茜, 马丽虹, 邱振刚. 体外冲击波治疗非特异性腰痛疗效的系统评价和Meta分析[J]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2023, 09(05): 307-314.

阅读次数

全文

摘要

选择文件类型/文献管理软件名称

选择包含的内容

Comparison of Ramosetron′s and Ondansetron′s Preventive Anti-emetic Effects: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

模态框（Modal）标题

选择文件类型/文献管理软件名称

选择包含的内容

Comparison of Ramosetron′s and Ondansetron′s Preventive Anti-emetic Effects: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis