4.4 Article

Effect of intravenous crystalloid infusion on postoperative nausea and vomiting after thyroidectomy: a prospective, randomized, controlled study

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIOLOGY
卷 26, 期 3, 页码 188-191

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/EJA.0b013e32831c8793

关键词

fluids; intravenous; nausea and vomiting; postoperative; surgery; therapy fluids; thyroidectomy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background and objective Intravenous administration of compound sodium lactate (CSL) 30 ml kg(-1) to women undergoing gynaecological laparoscopy reduced the incidence of vomiting, nausea and antiemetic use when compared with 10 ml kg-1. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of intravenous fluid administration on nausea and vomiting after thyroidectomy. Methods With ethics committee approval, 100 patients scheduled for thyroid surgery were included in this prospective, controlled, double blind study. Patients were randomized into two groups: the CSL-10 group (n = 50) received CSL 10 ml kg(-1) and the CSL-30 group received CSL 30 ml kg(-1); the administration of fluid was completed by the end of surgery. Standardized anaesthesia was performed. The incidence of nausea and vomiting and need for antiemetics and analgesic therapy were assessed by a blinded observer at 0.5, 2, 6,12,18 and 24 h after surgery. Patients' satisfaction was also recorded (0-100). Results The incidence of nausea (64%) was similar in both groups (P=0.1). The incidence of vomiting was 34% in the CSL-10 group and 32% in the CSL-30 group (P=0.83). Antiemetics (P=0.84) and analgesic consumption (P=0.72) did not differ significantly between the two groups. Patients' satisfaction was also comparable (P=0.39). Conclusion Intravenous administration of CSL 30 ml kg(-1) to patients undergoing thyroidectomy did not reduce the incidence of nausea, vomiting and antiemetic use when compared with CSL 10 ml kg(-1). Eur J Anaesthesiol 26:188-191 (C) 2009 European Society of Anaesthesiology.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据