***TASK*** the task is to summarize an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***INPUT*** the input is a biomedical literature 
    ***OUTPUT*** the output is the summary of an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***DOCUMENTATION*** 
    ***EXAMPLES*** 
    Input: Background A prospect i ve r and omized study was performed to assess the value of some individual risk factors for postoperative nausea and vomiting ( PONV ) , and to compare the efficacy of ondansetron , metoclopramide , dexamethason , and combinations of these antiemetics in preventing PONV in patients after laparoscopic cholecystectomy . Methods The study enrolled 210 patients ( 157 women and 53 men ) scheduled for laparoscopic cholecystectomy . The patients were r and omly divided into seven groups . In groups 1 to 6 , antiemetic drugs were administered . Group 7 , the control group , received no antiemetic . For all the patients , individual risk factors for the incidence of nausea also were analyzed . Both nausea and vomiting were assessed separately 1 , 4 , 8 , and 12 h after the procedure . Results Postoperative nausea and vomiting were significantly less frequent in menopausal women and more frequent in patients with a history of motion sickness . A comparison of mean values for the incidence of nausea and vomiting in groups 1 to 6 with the same values in group 7 showed that the mean PONV incidences were highest in groups 3 and 7 , and the difference was significant . Conclusions Administration of antiemetic drugs significantly decreases the incidence of PONV in patients after laparoscopic cholecystectomy . The best decreases were achieved when ondansetron and dexamethason were applied together This prospect i ve clinical trial evaluates the feasibility and safety of  elective cholecystectomy  in a simulated outpatient protocol in 40 patients . Results were compared with a 19-patient control group managed by conventional postoperative methods . Oral liquids were begun in the recovery room , intravenous fluids were discontinued 4 hours after surgery , and enteral analgesics and antiemetics were provided on the ward . Protocol patients were r and omized in a double-blind fashion to receive metoclopramide or placebo after surgery to assess its influence on the early tolerance of oral intake . In the protocol group , nausea without emesis occurred in nine patients ( 23 % ) ; 11 others ( 28 % ) had nausea with emesis . This was not significantly different from the control group . Metoclopramide-treated patients did not demonstrate a lower incidence of nausea or emesis but did tolerate oral liquids earlier after surgery than the placebo group ( P less than 0.05 ) . After release from recovery , eight protocol patients ( 20 % ) requested parenteral narcotics for relief of pain . Postoperative urinary catheterization was required in nine protocol patients ( 23 % ) and five control patients ( 26 % ) . No major complications occurred . Outpatient cholecystectomy  is both feasible and safe .  Metoclopramide may allow earlier tolerance of enteral liquids postoperatively During the past decade the dem and for outpatient surgery has grown rapidly . Postoperative nausea and vomiting is one of the more common undesirable consequences of surgery , which may significantly delay the patient 's discharge from the ambulatory surgery center . None of the currently used antiemetic drugs is considered totally effective in abolishing nausea or vomiting . The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of ondansetron , a highly selective 5-hydroxytryptamine subtype-3 receptor antagonist , with that of metoclopramide for the prevention of postoperative emesis in patients undergoing cataract surgery . The incidence of postoperative nausea was significantly less in the ondansetron group than that in the metoclopramide group ( p = 0.046 ) . Although the incidence of vomiting was clinical ly less frequent in the ondansetron group , there were no significant differences between both treatment groups . To our knowledge , this is the first study to demonstrate that ondansetron is effective to prevent postoperative emesis after extracapsular cataract extraction OBJECTIVE To compare the clinical efficacy of acupressure with treatment induced by ondansetron and metoclopramide on reduction of the severity of postoperative nausea and vomiting ( PONV )  after strabismus surgery .  METHODS There were 200 patients with ASA classes I-II , ages 10 to 60 years old , who underwent strabismus surgery  that were included in this r and omized , prospect i ve , double-blind , placebo-controlled trial . Group I was the control , group II received metoclopramide 0.2 mg/kg , and group III received ondansetron 0.15 mg/kg intravenously immediately prior to anesthesia induction . In Group IV , acupressure wristb and s were applied at the P6 points . Acupressure wrist b and s were not placed appropriately for subjects of groups I-III . The acupressure wrist b and s were applied 30 minutes before anesthesia induction and removed six hours after surgery completion . Anesthesia was st and ardized . PONV was evaluated within 0 - 2 hours and 2 - 24 hours after surgery by a blinded observer . Results were analyzed by the Chi-square or Fisher exact test . A P value of < 0.05 was considered significant . RESULTS The incidence of PONV was not significantly different among acupressure , metoclopramide and ondansetron groups during 24 hours . Also , the severity of PONV was not significantly different between acupressure , metoclopramide , and ondansetron in the recovery and ward . CONCLUSION Acupressure at the P6 point causes a significant reduction in the incidence and severity of PONV 24 hours after strabismus surgery as well as metoclopramide ( 0.2 mg/kg ) and ondansetron ( 0.15 mg/kg ) intravenous for patients aged 10 or older . ( I rct ID : I RCT 138807152556N1 ) OBJECTIVE To compare the administration of sub hypnotic dose of propofol with metoclopramide and placebo in prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting ( PONV ) after middle ear surgery . METHODS This clinical research was performed in the Faculty of Medicine , Gazi University , Besevler , Ankara , Turkey , between December 2004 and October 2005 . Following approval by the hospital ethics committee , 60 adult patients scheduled for a middle ear operation were r and omly assigned into 3 groups . The patients in group P received 0.5 mg x kg(-1 ) propofol ; in group M , 0.2 mg x kg(-1 ) metoclopramide , and in group C , 0.9 % saline solution . The number of patients suffering from nausea and vomiting at 0 - 4 , 4 - 12 , and 12 - 24 hours postoperatively , and additional use of antiemetics was recorded . RESULTS Comparisons of the data showed that at 0 - 4th hours , the incidence of vomiting was 25 % in group P , 40 % in group M , and 75 % in group C. The incidence rate of group P was significantly lower than that of group C ( p=0.002 ) , and the rate of antiemetics use in group C was higher than that in group P ( p=0.028 ) . The Nausea Vomiting Scale scores of group C were also significantly higher than those of group P ( p=0.005 ) . There were no significant differences between the values at 4 - 12 and 12 - 24 hours . CONCLUSION The administration of a sub hypnotic dose of propofol at the end of surgery was found to be at least as effective as metoclopramide in preventing PONV in the early postoperative period in adult patients undergoing middle ear surgery 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 We enrolled 5199 patients at high risk for postoperative nausea and vomiting in a r and omized , controlled trial of factorial design that was powered to evaluate interactions among as many as three antiemetic interventions . Of these patients , 4123 were r and omly assigned to 1 of 64 possible combinations of six prophylactic interventions : 4 mg of ondansetron or no ondansetron ; 4 mg of dexamethasone or no dexamethasone ; 1.25 mg of droperidol or no droperidol ; propofol or a volatile anesthetic ; nitrogen or nitrous oxide ; and remifentanil or fentanyl . The remaining patients were r and omly assigned with respect to the first four interventions . The primary outcome was nausea and vomiting within 24 hours after surgery , which was evaluated blindly . RESULTS Ondansetron , dexamethasone , and droperidol each reduced the risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting by about 26 percent . Propofol reduced the risk by 19 percent , and nitrogen by 12 percent ; the risk reduction with both of these agents ( i.e. , total intravenous anesthesia ) was thus similar to that observed with each of the antiemetics . All the interventions acted independently of one another 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 . Absolute risk reduction , though , 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 This r and omized , double-blind , multicentre , parallel-group study compared the efficacy and safety of an intravenous dose of ondansetron 4 mg for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting ( PONV ) with metoclopramide 10 mg and placebo in patients undergoing major gynaecological surgery . A total of 1044 patients ( 465 ondansetron , 462 metoclopramide , 117 placebo ) received study medication immediately prior to induction of anaesthesia and were included in the analysis of data . The proportion of patients experiencing no emesis and no nausea or provided with rescue antiemetic medication , the number of emetic episodes , and the duration and severity of nausea were recorded during the 24-h period after recovery . Significantly more patients who received ondansetron had no emetic episodes ( 44 % ) than those who received metoclopramide ( 36 % , P = 0.049 ) or placebo ( 25 % , P < 0.001 ) . A higher proportion of patients receiving ondansetron ( 32 % ) did not experience nausea  ( metoclopramide 24 % , P = 0.009 ; placebo 16 % , P < 0.001 ) . Significantly fewer patients in the ondansetron group required rescue medication or were withdrawn due to treatment failure ( P < 0.05 ) . In the ondansetron group the total number of emetic episodes , the median time to the first emetic episode or treatment failure , and the duration and severity of nausea were reduced significantly compared with metoclopramide or placebo ( P < 0.05 ) . The safety profile was similar for each treatment group Background : Nausea and vomiting are the most common causes of postoperative complications , and they are seen most often after operations performed using general anesthesia and sedation . We design ed this study to compare the effects of droperidol , metoclopramide , tropisetron , and ondansetron for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing gynecologic operations . Methods : One hundred patients were r and omly assigned to 1 of 5 groups : group D was given 2.5 mg droperidol ; group M , 10 mg metoclopramide ; group T , 2.5 mg tropisetron ; group O , 4 mg ondansetron 5 min after induction , and group C was the control group and received no prophylactic antiemetic treatment . All patients were observed for sedation and postoperative nausea and vomiting for 48 h. Results : Within 24 h after the operation , severe postoperative nausea and vomiting were seen in 4 patients ( 20 % ) in group D , 8 ( 40 % ) in group M , 5 ( 25 % ) in group T , 3 ( 15 % ) in group O , and 12 patients ( 60 % ) in the control group . Patients receiving droperidol , tropisetron , and ondansetron had significantly less serious emesis than the control group ( p < 0.05 ) . Sedation was seen in 5 patients receiving droperidol ( 4 patients score 2 ; and 1 patient score 3 ) and tropisetron ( 2 patients score 2 ; and 3 patients score 3 ) 15 min after surgery ; this was significantly higher than in the control group ( p < 0.05 ) . Conclusion : We conclude that metoclopramide is not effective in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting after gynecologic operations . Droperidol , tropisetron , and ondansetron are effective ; however , the sedating effects of droperidol and tropisetron should be considered Abstract Objectives To determine whether 10 mg , 25 mg , or 50 mg metoclopramide combined with 8 mg dexamethasone , given intraoperatively , is more effective in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting 
    Output:
    
Our findings suggest that metoclopramide 10 mg i.v .
is effective to prevent PONV in patients having surgical procedures under general anaesthesia .
Metoclopramide seems to be a reasonable agent to prevent PONV