***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: Purpose We compared the prophylactic effects of intravenously administered azasetron ( 10 mg ) and ondansetron ( 8 mg ) on postoperative nausea and vomiting ( PONV ) in patients undergoing gynecological laparoscopic surgery under general anesthesia . Material s and Methods We studied 98 ASA physical status I or II 20 - 65 years old , female patients , in this prospect i ve , r and omized , double blind study . Patients were r and omly divided into two groups and received ondansetron 8 mg ( group O ) or azasetron 10 mg ( group A ) 5 min before the end of surgery . The incidence of PONV , Visual Analogue Scale ( VAS ) for pain , need for rescue antiemetic and analgesics , and adverse effects were checked at 1 , 6 , 12 , 24 , and 48 h postoperatively . Results The overall incidence of PONV was 65 % in group O and 49 % in group A. The incidence of PONV was significantly higher in group O than in group A at 12 - 24 h postoperatively ( nausea ; 24 % vs. 45 % , p = 0.035 , vomiting ; 2 % vs. 18 % , p = 0.008 ) , but there were no significant differences at 0 - 1 , 1 - 6 , 6 - 12 or 24 - 48 h. Conclusion In conclusion , azasetron ( 10 mg ) produced same incidence of PONV as ondansetron ( 8 mg ) in patients undergoing general anesthesia for gynecological laparoscopic surgery . Azasetron was more effective , in the intermediate post-operative period , between 12 and 24 The safety and efficacy of ondansetron were evaluated in the treatment of postoperative nausea and vomiting  . Five hundred patients who experienced nausea or vomiting in the Post-Anaesthesia Care Unit within the first 2 h of recovery were r and omized to receive either 1 , 4 , or 8 mg of ondansetron , or placebo .  All patients had undergone ambulatory surgery with general endotracheal anaesthesia .  Episodes of emesis , nausea scores , adverse events , vital signs , and laboratory values were assessed before and during the 24 h after study drug administration . Patients were evaluated for the first 2 h in the Post-Anaesthesia Care Unit then followed up for the next 22 h. Complete response was defined as no emetic episodes , no nausea or no rescue anti-emetic medication . For the 0 - 24 h study period , complete response occurred in only 15 % of the placebo group compared to 41 % , 47 % , and 47 % in the 1 , 4 , and 8 mg ondansetron groups , respectively . Mean nausea scores ( scale of 0 - 10 ) during the initial observation period ( 0 - 2 h ) were significantly lower for all doses of ondansetron [ 2.2 ( 1 mg ) , 1.7 ( 4 mg ) , and 2.1 ( 8 mg ) ] compared to placebo ( 3.0 ) . The optimal dose of ondansetron for the treatment of postoperative nausea and vomiting was found to be 4 mg . All doses of ondansetron were well tolerated . No clinical ly significant increases in laboratory parameters or alterations in haemodynamic stability occurred in the ondansetron groups compared to placebo BACKGROUND A combination of antiemetic drugs could be an effective method to prevent severe postoperative nausea and vomiting ( PONV ) . Therefore , we examined the prophylactic effect of haloperidol plus ondansetron on PONV . METHODS We enrolled 210 patients ( n = 70 in each of 3 groups ) undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy for this r and omized double-blind study . Patients were r and omized to intravenous saline 2 mL and intramuscular haloperidol 2 mg ( Group H ) , intravenous ondansetron 4 mg and intramuscular saline 2 mL ( Group O ) , or intravenous ondansetron 4 mg and intramuscular haloperidol 2 mg ( Group H+O ) , administered after induction of general anesthesia and 30 minutes before the conclusion of surgery . We compared the complete response rates , incidence of PONV , nausea scores , the need for rescue medication , patient satisfaction scores , and adverse events during the 24-hour study . RESULTS The H+O group had the highest complete response rate to treatment ( 79 % ) compared with group H ( 61 % ) and group O ( 62 % ) ( p < 0.05 for both ) . Patient satisfaction scores were significantly higher in the H+O group ( 8.3 + /- 1.8 ) than in the H ( 7.0 + /- 2.4 ) and O ( 7.2 + /- 2.5 ) groups ( p < 0.05 for both ) . In addition , nausea scores were significantly lower in the H+O group ( 1.2 + /- 2.6 ) than in the H ( 2.5 + /- 3.3 ) and O ( 2.2 + /- 3.1 ) groups ( p < 0.05 for both ) . CONCLUSION We conclude that the combination of prophylactic haloperidol ( 2 mg ) plus ondansetron ( 4 mg ) provides a higher complete response rate and greater patient satisfaction after laparoscopic cholecystectomy than either drug used alone Background Despite the development of a new class of antiemetics , postoperative nausea and vomiting ( PONV ) still remains a frequent and distressing complication . We compared the prophylactic antiemetic effect of administering dexamethasone 5 mg as an adjunct to ramosetron and ondansetron in patients at high-risk for PONV following lumbar spinal surgery . Methods In this r and omized , double-blind study , 120 female non-smoking patients with intravenous patient-controlled analgesia ( PCA ) received ramosetron 0.3 mg plus dexamethasone 5 mg ( group R + D ) or ondansetron 4 mg plus dexamethasone 5 mg ( group O + D ) intravenously . Fentanyl-based PCA was administered for 48 hr postoperatively ; ramosetron 0.3 mg or ondansetron 12 mg was added to the PCA regimen according to the allocated group . The incidence of PONV and rescue antiemetic were assessed for 48 hr postoperatively at 0 - 6 , 6 - 24 , and 24 - 48 hr . Results The overall incidence of PONV did not differ between the groups ( 50 % vs. 60 % , in groups R + D and O + D , respectively ) . The overall incidence of nausea was similar between groups ( 47 % vs. 60 % , in groups R + D and O + D , respectively ) . The overall frequency of vomiting was also similar between groups ( 8 % vs. 12 % , in groups R + D and O + D , respectively ) . The severity of nausea and the overall use of rescue antiemetic were not different between groups . Conclusions The antiemetic efficacy of ramosetron plus dexamethasone was similar to that of ondansetron plus dexamethasone on preventing PONV in high-risk patients undergoing lumbar spinal surgery Background This study was conducted to compare the efficacy of a combination of ondansetron and dexamethasone with that of metoclopramide and dexamethasone for prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting ( PONV ) in gynecologic patients receiving fentanyl IV-patient controlled analgesia . Methods One hundred patients were divided into two groups at r and om . In Group O , 5 mg of dexamethsone was administered after tracheal intubation , while 4 mg of ondansetron was administered at the end of surgery . In Group M , 5 mg of dexamethsone was administered after tracheal intubation and 20 mg metoclopromide was administered at the end of surgery . During the experiment , the PONV was evaluated at regular intervals . In addition , the incidence of nausea , and vomiting and the numerical rating scale ( NRS ) of nausea was measured ( range , 0 - 10 ) . Results The overall incidence of PONV in Group O was 22/50 ( 44 % ) while that in Group M was 19/50 ( 38 % ) . There were no significant differences in the incidence of nausea , moderate to severe nausea ( NRS of nausea , 4 - 10 ) , or vomiting between groups . Conclusions Treatment with a combination of 20 mg metoclopramide and 5 mg dexamethasone is an effective , safe , and inexpensive way to prevent PONV when compared to treatment with 4 mg ondansetron and 5 mg dexamethasone This placebo-controlled , r and omized , double-blind trial was design ed to evaluate the efficacy of three prophylactic antiemetic regimens on postoperative nausea and vomiting ( PONV ) during patient-controlled analgesia ( PCA ) with morphine . We studied 286 elective surgical patients for 36 h postoperatively . Group 1 was saline control . In Groups 2 and 3 , metoclopramide or droperidol was administered as an intravenous ( IV ) bolus and then added to morphine in the PCA device . In Group 4 , tropisetron , a long-acting investigational 5-hydroxytryptamine subtype 3 ( 5-HT3 ) antagonist was given as a single IV dose . We assessed the frequency and severity of PONV , as well as the need for rescue , frequency of side effects , and overall patient satisfaction . Severity of PONV was measured with a symptom-severity score ( STS ) which was based on both intensity and duration . The average total doses of antiemetics were metoclopramide 53.8 ± 2.2 mg , droperidol 5.99 ± 0.3 mg , and tropisetron 6.1 ± 0.2 mg . Control patients had a 54 % incidence of PONV . Droperidol reduced both the incidence ( P < 0.001 ) and severity ( P < 0.01 ) of PONV for the entire 36 h.  Tropisetron  reduced incidence and severity ( P < 0.05 ) , but the effect of the single bolus dose lasted only 18 h. Metoclopramide had a marginally significant effect under these conditions . Only droperidol decreased the need for rescue medication ( P < 0.01 ) , although rescue with tropisetron was highly effective . Side effects and patient satisfaction were comparable among the groups , but patients receiving droperidol were sleepier ( P < 0.05 ) than control patients and recalled somewhat more anxiety ( P = 0.03 ) . When used together with morphine PCA , droperidol is a highly effective antiemetic for 36 h.  Tropisetron is also effective , but more than one dose is required Background and objective : Patients undergoing total abdominal hysterectomy under general anaesthesia have a high risk of developing postoperative nausea and vomiting ( PONV ) . The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence of PONV in patients undergoing total abdominal hysterectomy under spinal anaesthesia with intravenous patient‐controlled analgesia ( PCA )  using morphine and to compare its incidence with and without antiemetic prophylaxis . Methods : Thirty‐four patients undergoing total abdominal hysterectomy under spinal anaesthesia with i.v . PCA morphine postoperatively were divided into two groups . The first ( n = 17 ) received ondansetron prophylaxis near the end of surgery while the second ( n = 17 ) received no prophylaxis . Morphine consumption , emetic episodes ( on a 3‐point scale ) , patient satisfaction ( visual analogue score ) , sedation and pruritus were evaluated 2 , 4 , 6 , 9 , 12 , 18 and 24 h postoperatively . Results : Patient characteristics , postoperative morphine consumption ( 43.3 ± 7.6 vs. 40.3 ± 12.3 mg ) and peristaltic recovery time ( 16.9 ± 5 vs. 18.4 ± 5.2 h ) were similar in both groups . Overall nausea and vomiting were significantly lower in the ondansetron prophylaxis group than in the group without prophylaxis ( 52.9 % vs. 88.2 % , P < 0.05 ) . Though nausea alone was higher in the prophylaxis group ( 41.2 % vs. 29.4 % ) , nausea with vomiting was significantly lower in the prophylaxis group ( 11.8 % vs. 58.8 % , P < 0.01 ) . Patients ' satisfaction scores were higher in the ondansetron group at all times and the difference was significant ( P < 0.05 ) 4 h postoperatively . Conclusions : The incidence of PONV in patients undergoing total abdominal hysterectomy under spinal anaesthesia with i.v . PCA morphine is very high ( 88.2 % ) . Antiemetic prophylaxis with ondansetron is highly recommended in this patients group result ing in a lower incidence of nausea and vomiting , and significantly impro 
    Output:
    
Conclusion Granisetron plus dexamethasone increases the risk of arrhythmia