-
Ondansetron-induced QT prolongation among various age groups: a systematic review and meta-analysis.The Egyptian Heart Journal : (EHJ) :... Jul 2023Ondansetron is a selective 5-hydroxytryptamine type 3 serotonin-receptor antagonist with antiemetic properties used inadvertently in the emergency department for...
BACKGROUND
Ondansetron is a selective 5-hydroxytryptamine type 3 serotonin-receptor antagonist with antiemetic properties used inadvertently in the emergency department for controlling nausea. However, ondansetron is linked with a number of adverse effects, including prolongation of the QT interval. Therefore, the purpose of this meta-analysis was to assess the occurrence of QT prolongation in pediatric, adult, and elderly patients receiving oral or intravenously administered ondansetron.
METHODS
A thorough electronic search was conducted on PubMed (Medline) and Cochrane Library from the databases' inception to August 10, 2022. Only those studies were considered in which ondansetron was administered orally or intravenously to participants for the treatment of nausea and vomiting. The prevalence of QT prolongation in multiple predefined age groups was the outcome variable. Analyses were conducted using Review manager 5.4 (Cochrane collaboration, 2020).
RESULTS
A total of 10 studies involving 687 ondansetron group participants were statistically analyzed. The administration of ondansetron was associated with a statistically significant prevalence of QT prolongation in all age groups. An age-wise subgroup analysis was conducted which revealed that the prevalence of QT prolongation among participants younger than 18 years was not statistically significant, whereas it was statistically significant among participants aged 18-50 years and among patients older than 50 years.
CONCLUSIONS
The present meta-analysis provides further evidence that oral or intravenous administration of Ondansetron may lead to QT prolongation, particularly among patients older than 18 years of age.
PubMed: 37395900
DOI: 10.1186/s43044-023-00385-y -
Cureus Jun 2023In a generation where advancements in research and understanding have led to remarkable achievements in medicine, it is still unfathomable that, after more than a... (Review)
Review
In a generation where advancements in research and understanding have led to remarkable achievements in medicine, it is still unfathomable that, after more than a century, the cause of schizophrenia is still a mystery. While antipsychotics, without a doubt, have brought on an exemplary revolution in the way psychiatric disorders are now treated, there are still imperative deficits that need to be addressed to ultimately enable individuals with schizophrenia to function normally in society. However, without a definite cause of schizophrenia, even though speculation has been made on its inflammatory and neurodegenerative nature, it has provided an unnecessary hindrance to finding further potential treatment modalities for these patients. Nevertheless, some trials are investigating potential adjunctive treatment regimens to antipsychotics, which can help achieve complete remission. Exploring these drugs will have significant implications for managing schizophrenia in future clinical practices. This systematic review was conducted between January 2012 to July 2022 according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis guidelines to evaluate the safety and efficacy of ondansetron and simvastatin as adjunctive treatment to antipsychotics in adult patients with schizophrenia. This review included nine randomized controlled trials. Overall, both simvastatin and ondansetron, when used as adjunctive treatment in schizophrenia, appear to be safe. Ondansetron showed promising results, with all studies on this drug showing positive overall results on schizophrenia symptoms. On the other hand, simvastatin demonstrated mixed results, which can be attributed to the limited participants in the studies and the shorter duration of the trials. However, more extensive trials with uniform assessment tools are needed to demonstrate concrete evidence of the effectiveness of these drugs, whether alone or in combination with each other or perhaps another drug such as aspirin in schizophrenia.
PubMed: 37456496
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.40474 -
Medicine Sep 2023Propofol is the most commonly used intravenous anesthetic medication and is most commonly associated with post-operative pain. Several drugs are investigated to reduce... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
Propofol is the most commonly used intravenous anesthetic medication and is most commonly associated with post-operative pain. Several drugs are investigated to reduce post-operative pain caused by propofol injection. Ondansetron is a potent anti-emetic drug showing promising results as an analgesic. This meta-analysis aims to compare the efficacy of ondansetron to placebo and lidocaine in reducing post-operative pain caused by propofol injection.
METHODS
PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) till May 2022. We conducted a meta-analysis using RevMan software version 5.4, and we assessed the quality of included RCTs using the Cochrane risk of bias tool.
RESULTS
In our study, we included 23 RCTs with 2957 participants. Compared to placebo, ondansetron significantly increased the rate of no pain [risk ratio (RR) = 2.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) (1.39-4.01)], and reduced moderate [RR = 0.39, 95% CI (0.30-0.52)] and severe pain [RR = 0.34, 95% CI (0.24-0.50)]. Furthermore, ondansetron significantly reduced PONV [RR = 0.73, 95% CI (0.58, 0.91)]. On the other hand, ondansetron showed an inferior efficacy to lidocaine regarding the incidence of no, moderate, and severe pain.
CONCLUSION
Ondansetron is effective in reducing post-operative propofol-induced pain. However, lidocaine is more effective than it.
Topics: Humans; Propofol; Lidocaine; Ondansetron; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Pain, Postoperative
PubMed: 37746949
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000035021 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2017Drugs can prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting, but their relative efficacies and side effects have not been compared within one systematic review. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Drugs can prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting, but their relative efficacies and side effects have not been compared within one systematic review.
OBJECTIVES
The objective of this review was to assess the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting by drugs and the development of any side effects.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, Issue 2, 2004), MEDLINE (January 1966 to May 2004), EMBASE (January 1985 to May 2004), CINAHL (1982 to May 2004), AMED (1985 to May 2004), SIGLE (to May 2004), ISI WOS (to May 2004), LILAC (to May 2004) and INGENTA bibliographies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized controlled trials that compared a drug with placebo or another drug, or compared doses or timing of administration, that reported postoperative nausea or vomiting as an outcome.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted outcome data.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 737 studies involving 103,237 people. Compared to placebo, eight drugs prevented postoperative nausea and vomiting: droperidol, metoclopramide, ondansetron, tropisetron, dolasetron, dexamethasone, cyclizine and granisetron. Publication bias makes evidence for differences among these drugs unreliable. The relative risks (RR) versus placebo varied between 0.60 and 0.80, depending upon the drug and outcome. Evidence for side effects was sparse: droperidol was sedative (RR 1.32) and headache was more common after ondansetron (RR 1.16).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Either nausea or vomiting is reported to affect, at most, 80 out of 100 people after surgery. If all 100 of these people are given one of the listed drugs, about 28 would benefit and 72 would not. Nausea and vomiting are usually less common and, therefore, drugs are less useful. For 100 people, of whom 30 would vomit or feel sick after surgery if given placebo, 10 people would benefit from a drug and 90 would not. Between one to five patients out of every 100 people may experience a mild side effect, such as sedation or headache, when given an antiemetic drug. Collaborative research should focus on determining whether antiemetic drugs cause more severe, probably rare, side effects. Further comparison of the antiemetic effect of one drug versus another is not a research priority.
Topics: Antiemetics; Humans; Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 28715610
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004125.pub3 -
Neuropsychopharmacology : Official... Mar 2022Ondansetron is a selective serotonin (5HT3) receptor antagonist that is under evaluation as an adjunctive treatment for schizophrenia, and a novel treatment for...
Ondansetron is a selective serotonin (5HT3) receptor antagonist that is under evaluation as an adjunctive treatment for schizophrenia, and a novel treatment for hallucinations in Parkinson's disease. Ondansetron reverses sensory gating deficits and improves visuoperceptual processing in animal models of psychosis, but it is unclear to what extent preclinical findings have been replicated in humans. We systematically reviewed human studies that evaluated the effects of ondansetron and other 5HT3 receptor antagonists on sensory gating deficits or sensory processing. Of 11 eligible studies, eight included patients with schizophrenia who were chronically stable on antipsychotic medication; five measured sensory gating using the P50 suppression response to a repeated auditory stimulus; others included tests of visuoperceptual function. Three studies in healthy participants included tests of visuoperceptual and sensorimotor function. A consistent and robust finding (five studies) was that ondansetron and tropisetron (5HT3 antagonist and α7-nicotinic receptor partial agonist) improved sensory gating in patients with schizophrenia. Tropisetron also improved sustained visual attention in non-smoking patients. There was inconsistent evidence of the effects of 5HT3 antagonists on other measures of sensory processing, but interpretation was limited by the small number of studies, methodological heterogeneity and the potential confounding effects of concomitant medication in patients. Despite these limitations, we found strong evidence that selective 5HT3 antagonists (with or without direct α7-nicotinic partial agonist effects) improved sensory gating. Future studies should investigate how this relates to potential improvement in neurocognitive symptoms in antipsychotic naive patients with prodromal or milder symptoms, in order to understand the clinical implications.
Topics: Antipsychotic Agents; Humans; Perception; Schizophrenia; Sensory Gating; alpha7 Nicotinic Acetylcholine Receptor
PubMed: 35017671
DOI: 10.1038/s41386-021-01255-4 -
Drugs & Aging Dec 2023To reduce prescribing cascades occurring in clinical practice, healthcare providers require information on the prescribing cascades they can recognize and prevent. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
To reduce prescribing cascades occurring in clinical practice, healthcare providers require information on the prescribing cascades they can recognize and prevent.
OBJECTIVE
This systematic review aims to provide an overview of prescribing cascades, including dose-dependency information and recommendations that healthcare providers can use to prevent or reverse them.
METHODS
The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) was followed. Relevant literature was identified through searches in OVID MEDLINE, OVID Embase, OVID CINAHL, and Cochrane. Additionally, Web of Science and Scopus were consulted to analyze reference lists and citations. Publications in English were included if they analyzed the occurrence of prescribing cascades. Prescribing cascades were included if at least one study demonstrated a significant association and were excluded when the adverse drug reaction could not be confirmed in the Summary of Product Characteristics. Two reviewers independently extracted and grouped similar prescribing cascades. Descriptive summaries were provided regarding dose-dependency analyses and recommendations to prevent or reverse these prescribing cascades.
RESULTS
A total of 95 publications were included, resulting in 115 prescribing cascades with confirmed adverse drug reactions for which at least one significant association was found. For 52 of these prescribing cascades, information regarding dose dependency or recommendations to prevent or reverse prescribing cascades was found. Dose dependency was analyzed and confirmed for 12 prescribing cascades. For example, antipsychotics that may cause extrapyramidal syndrome followed by anti-parkinson drugs. Recommendations focused on dosage lowering, discontinuing medication, and medication switching. Explicit recommendations regarding alternative options were given for three prescribing cascades. One example was switching to ondansetron or granisetron when extrapyramidal syndrome is experienced using metoclopramide.
CONCLUSIONS
In total, 115 prescribing cascades were identified and an overview of 52 of them was generated for which recommendations to prevent or reverse them were provided. Nonetheless, information regarding alternative options for managing prescribing cascades was scarce.
Topics: Humans; Health Personnel; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions
PubMed: 37863868
DOI: 10.1007/s40266-023-01072-y -
PloS One 2015Gastroenteritis remains a leading cause of childhood morbidity. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
CONTEXT
Gastroenteritis remains a leading cause of childhood morbidity.
OBJECTIVE
Because prior reviews have focused on isolated symptoms and studies conducted in developing countries, this study focused on interventions commonly considered for use in developed countries. Intervention specific, patient-centered outcomes were selected.
DATA SOURCES
MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, trial registries, grey literature, and scientific meetings.
STUDY SELECTION
Randomized controlled trials, conducted in developed countries, of children aged <18 years, with gastroenteritis, performed in emergency department or outpatient settings which evaluated oral rehydration therapy (ORT), antiemetics, probiotics or intravenous fluid administration rate.
DATA EXTRACTION
The study was conducted in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and the PRISMA guidelines. Data were independently extracted by multiple investigators. Analyses employed random effects models.
RESULTS
31 trials (4,444 patients) were included. ORT: Compared with intravenous rehydration, hospitalization (RR 0.80, 95%CI 0.24, 2.71) and emergency department return visits (RR 0.86, 95%CI 0.39, 1.89) were similar. Antiemetics: Fewer children administered an antiemetic required intravenous rehydration (RR 0.40, 95%CI 0.26, 0.60) While the data could not be meta-analyzed, three studies reported that ondansetron administration does increase the frequency of diarrhea. Probiotics: No studies reported on the primary outcome, three studies evaluated hospitalization within 7 days (RR 0.87, 95%CI 0.25, 2.98). Rehydration: No difference in length of stay was identified for rapid vs. standard intravenous or nasogastric rehydration. A single study found that 5% dextrose in normal saline reduced hospitalizations compared with normal saline alone (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.53, 0.92).
CONCLUSIONS
There is a paucity of patient-centered outcome evidence to support many interventions. Since ORT is a low-cost, non-invasive intervention, it should continue to be used. Routine probiotic use cannot be endorsed at this time in outpatient children with gastroenteritis. Despite some evidence that ondansetron administration increases diarrhea frequency, emergency department use leads to reductions in intravenous rehydration and hospitalization. No benefits were associated with ondansetron use following emergency department discharge.
Topics: Adolescent; Age Factors; Antiemetics; Child; Child, Preschool; Combined Modality Therapy; Developed Countries; Fluid Therapy; Gastroenteritis; Humans; Infant; Morbidity; Odds Ratio; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Probiotics; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 26075617
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0128754 -
The American Journal of Emergency... May 2024Traumatic brain injury (TBI) results in 2.5 million emergency department (ED) visits per year in the US, with mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) accounting for 90% of... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Traumatic brain injury (TBI) results in 2.5 million emergency department (ED) visits per year in the US, with mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) accounting for 90% of cases. There is considerable evidence that many experience chronic symptoms months to years later. This population is rarely represented in interventional studies. Management of adult mTBI in the ED has remained unchanged, without consensus of therapeutic options. The aim of this review was to synthesize existing literature of patient-centered ED treatments for adults who sustain an mTBI, and to identify practices that may offer promise.
METHODS
A systematic review was conducted using the PubMed and Cochrane databases, while following PRISMA guidelines. Studies describing pediatric patients, moderate to severe TBI, or interventions outside the ED were excluded. Two reviewers independently performed title and abstract screening. A third blinded reviewer resolved discrepancies. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) was employed to assess the methodological quality of the studies.
RESULTS
Our search strategy generated 1002 unique titles. 95 articles were selected for full-text screening. The 26 articles chosen for full analysis were grouped into one of the following intervention categories: (1) predictive models for Post-Concussion Syndrome (PCS), (2) discharge instructions, (3) pharmaceutical treatment, (4) clinical protocols, and (5) functional assessment. Studies that implemented a predictive PCS model successfully identified patients at highest risk for PCS. Trials implementing discharge related interventions found the use of video discharge instructions, encouragement of daily light exercise or bed rest, and text messaging did not significantly reduce mTBI symptoms. The use of electronic clinical practice guidelines (eCPG) and longer leaves of absence from work following injury reduced symptoms. Ondansetron was shown to reduce nausea in mTBI patients. Studies implementing ED Observation Units found significant declines in inpatient admissions and length of hospital stay. The use of tablet-based tasks was found to be superior to many standard cognitive assessments.
CONCLUSION
Validated instruments are available to aid clinicians in identifying patients at risk for PCS or serious cognitive impairment. EDOU management and evidence-based modifications to discharge instructions may improve mTBI outcomes. Additional research is needed to establish the therapeutic value of medications and lifestyle changes for the treatment of mTBI in the ED.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Child; Brain Concussion; Post-Concussion Syndrome; Brain Injuries, Traumatic; Emergency Service, Hospital; Patient-Centered Care
PubMed: 38460465
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajem.2024.02.038 -
Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics Sep 2016Vomiting in children with acute gastroenteritis is a common symptom, and it is considered to be the main cause of failure of oral rehydration therapy. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Vomiting in children with acute gastroenteritis is a common symptom, and it is considered to be the main cause of failure of oral rehydration therapy.
AIM
To systematically update evidence on the effects of ondansetron (5-HT3 serotonin antagonist) for vomiting in children with acute gastroenteritis.
METHODS
The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched up to April 2016, with no language restrictions, for randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Reference lists of reviews and included studies were examined.
RESULTS
Ten RCTs involving 1215 participants were included. Treatment with ondansetron compared with placebo increased the chance for vomiting cessation up to 1 h after drug administration, relative risk, RR, 1.49 (95% confidence interval 1.17-1.89), but there was no difference between the groups after 4, 24 and 48 h. Treatment with ondansetron compared with placebo reduced the risk of failure of oral rehydration therapy, RR 0.5 (0.37-0.69), increased the intake of oral rehydration solution in 1 h and 4 h, mean difference: 43 mL/1 h (15.5-70.5), and 91 mL/4 h (35-147), respectively, reduced the risk of hospitalisation, RR 0.53 (0.29-0.97), and reduced the need for intravenous rehydration, RR 0.45 (0.31-0.63); however, it had no effect on the need for return visits to the emergency department, RR 1.14 (0.72-1.8). Adverse effects were similar in both groups.
CONCLUSIONS
Compared with placebo, ondansetron administration for vomiting in children with acute gastroenteritis can improve the efficacy of oral rehydration therapy.
Topics: Acute Disease; Administration, Intravenous; Administration, Oral; Antiemetics; Child; Child, Preschool; Databases, Factual; Fluid Therapy; Gastroenteritis; Hospitalization; Humans; Infant; Ondansetron; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Serotonin 5-HT3 Receptor Antagonists; Vomiting
PubMed: 27401959
DOI: 10.1111/apt.13728 -
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2022Hyperemesis gravidarum is a serious pregnancy complication that affects approximately 1% of pregnancies worldwide. To determine whether the use of ondansetron during...
Hyperemesis gravidarum is a serious pregnancy complication that affects approximately 1% of pregnancies worldwide. To determine whether the use of ondansetron during pregnancy is associated with abnormal pregnancy outcomes. PubMed, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Embase, CNKI, CBM, WANFANG, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for citations published in any language from inception to 15 December 2021. Eligible studies included any observational study. Odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were used as indicators to examine the association between ondansetron and abnormal pregnancy outcomes. Twenty articles from 1,558 citations were included. Our preliminary analysis showed that compared with the unexposed group, the use of ondansetron during pregnancy may be associated with an increased incidence of cardiac defects (OR = 1.06, 95% CI: 1.01-1.10), neural tube defects (OR = 1.12, 95% CI: 1.05-1.18), and chest cleft (OR = 1.21, 95% CI: 1.07-1.37). Further sensitivity analysis showed no significant association between ondansetron and cardiac defects (OR = 1.15,95% CI: 0.94-1.40) or neural tube defects (OR = 0.87,95% CI: 0.46-1.66). When controversial studies were eliminated, the results for the chest defects disappeared. Simultaneously, we found that the use of ondansetron was associated with a reduced incidence of miscarriage (OR = 0.53, 95% CI: 0.31-0.89). Ondansetron was not associated with orofacial clefts (OR = 1.09,95% CI: 0.95-1.25), spinal limb defects (OR = 1.14,95% CI: 0.89-1.46), urinary tract deformities (OR = 1.06,95% CI: 0.97-1.15), any congenital malformations (OR = 1.03,95% CI: 0.98-1.09), stillbirth (OR = 0.97,95% CI: 0.83-1.15), preterm birth (OR = 1.22,95% CI: 0.80-1.85), neonatal asphyxia (OR = 1.05,95% CI: 0.72-1.54), or neonatal development (OR = 1.18,95% CI: 0.96-1.44) in our primary analysis. In our analysis, using ondansetron during pregnancy was not associated with abnormal pregnancy outcomes. Although our study did not find sufficient evidence of ondansetron and adverse pregnancy outcomes, future studies including the exposure period and dose of ondansetron, as well as controlling for disease status, may be useful to truly elucidate the potential risks and benefits of ondansetron.
PubMed: 36120333
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2022.951072