-
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2023Ondansetron is a selective antagonist of the serotonin 5-HT3 receptor that is commonly used to treat morning sickness. It is estimated that 70%-80% of pregnant women...
Ondansetron is a selective antagonist of the serotonin 5-HT3 receptor that is commonly used to treat morning sickness. It is estimated that 70%-80% of pregnant women suffer from morning sickness, a condition characterized by nausea and vomiting. However, it is still controversial regarding its safety during pregnancy, and continued research will be necessary to fully understand the risks and benefits associated with its use. Therefore, we aimed to identify and provide details of the efficacy and safety of ondansetron in clinical trials. A search was conducted of the ClinicalTrials.gov database on 13 April 2023, using the search term "ondansetron and pregnancy." Inclusion and exclusion criteria were defined to identify relevant clinical trials. The inclusion criteria encompassed clinical trials related to pregnancy that utilized ondansetron as a treatment, while other clinical trials were excluded from consideration. All data extractions such as study title, study status, study type, intervention details, and outcome were collected. A total of 18 clinical trials were identified, of which only 6 focused on studying the effects of ondansetron. Their respective study titles, statuses, conditions, interventions, outcome measures, and enrollment sizes have been written in detail. The information collected from these trials will contribute to our understanding of the potential benefits and risks of ondansetron in the context of pregnancy and its complications. Ondansetron has been shown to be an effective treatment for nausea and vomiting, including pregnancy-related morning sickness. Further research is needed to better understand the potential risks and benefits associated with its use in pregnant women. ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier.
PubMed: 37936910
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2023.1291235 -
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 -
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 -
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 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2024Postburn pruritus (itch) is a common and distressing symptom experienced on healing or healed burn or donor site wounds. Topical, systemic, and physical treatments are... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Postburn pruritus (itch) is a common and distressing symptom experienced on healing or healed burn or donor site wounds. Topical, systemic, and physical treatments are available to control postburn pruritus; however, it remains unclear how effective these are.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of interventions for treating postburn pruritus in any care setting.
SEARCH METHODS
In September 2022, we searched the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Ovid MEDLINE (including In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations), Ovid Embase, and EBSCO CINAHL Plus. We also searched clinical trials registries and scanned references of relevant publications to identify eligible trials. There were no restrictions with respect to language, publication date, or study setting.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that enrolled people with postburn pruritus to compare an intervention for postburn pruritus with any other intervention, placebo or sham intervention, or no intervention.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 25 RCTs assessing 21 interventions with 1166 randomised participants. These 21 interventions can be grouped into six categories: neuromodulatory agents (such as doxepin, gabapentin, pregabalin, ondansetron), topical therapies (such as CQ-01 hydrogel, silicone gel, enalapril ointment, Provase moisturiser, beeswax and herbal oil cream), physical modalities (such as massage therapy, therapeutic touch, extracorporeal shock wave therapy, enhanced education about silicone gel sheeting), laser scar revision (pulsed dye laser, pulsed high-intensity laser, fractional CO2 laser), electrical stimulation (transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, transcranial direct current stimulation), and other therapies (cetirizine/cimetidine combination, lemon balm tea). Most RCTs were conducted at academic hospitals and were at a high risk of performance, attrition, and detection bias. While 24 out of 25 included studies reported change in burn-related pruritus, secondary outcomes such as cost-effectiveness, pain, patient perception, wound healing, and participant health-related quality of life were not reported or were reported incompletely. Neuromodulatory agents versus antihistamines or placebo There is low-certainty evidence that doxepin cream may reduce burn-related pruritus compared with oral antihistamine (mean difference (MD) -2.60 on a 0 to 10 visual analogue scale (VAS), 95% confidence interval (CI) -3.79 to -1.42; 2 studies, 49 participants). A change of 2 points represents a minimal clinically important difference (MCID). Due to very low-certainty evidence, it is uncertain whether doxepin cream impacts the incidence of somnolence as an adverse event compared to oral antihistamine (risk ratio (RR) 0.64, 95% CI 0.32 to 1.25; 1 study, 24 participants). No data were reported on pain in the included study. There is low-certainty evidence that gabapentin may reduce burn-related pruritus compared with cetirizine (MD -2.40 VAS, 95% CI -4.14 to -0.66; 1 study, 40 participants). A change of 2 points represents a MCID. There is low-certainty evidence that gabapentin reduces the incidence of somnolence compared to cetirizine (RR 0.02, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.38; 1 study, 40 participants). No data were reported on pain in the included study. There is low-certainty evidence that pregabalin may result in a reduction in burn-related pruritus intensity compared with cetirizine with pheniramine maleate (MD -0.80 VAS, 95% CI -1.24 to -0.36; 1 study, 40 participants). A change of 2 points represents a MCID. There is low-certainty evidence that pregabalin reduces the incidence of somnolence compared to cetirizine (RR 0.04, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.69; 1 study, 40 participants). No data were reported on pain in the included study. There is moderate-certainty evidence that ondansetron probably results in a reduction in burn-related pruritus intensity compared with diphenhydramine (MD -0.76 on a 0 to 10 numeric analogue scale (NAS), 95% CI -1.50 to -0.02; 1 study, 38 participants). A change of 2 points represents a MCID. No data were reported on pain and adverse events in the included study. Topical therapies versus relevant comparators There is moderate-certainty evidence that enalapril ointment probably decreases mean burn-related pruritus compared with placebo control (MD -0.70 on a 0 to 4 scoring table for itching, 95% CI -1.04 to -0.36; 1 study, 60 participants). No data were reported on pain and adverse events in the included study. Physical modalities versus relevant comparators Compared with standard care, there is low-certainty evidence that massage may reduce burn-related pruritus (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.86, 95% CI -1.45 to -0.27; 2 studies, 166 participants) and pain (SMD -1.32, 95% CI -1.66 to -0.98). These SMDs equate to a 4.60-point reduction in pruritus and a 3.74-point reduction in pain on a 10-point VAS. A change of 2 VAS points in itch represents a MCID. No data were reported on adverse events in the included studies. There is low-certainty evidence that extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) may reduce burn-related pruritus compared with sham stimulation (SMD -1.20, 95% CI -1.65 to -0.75; 2 studies, 91 participants). This equates to a 5.93-point reduction in pruritus on a 22-point 12-item Pruritus Severity Scale. There is low-certainty evidence that ESWT may reduce pain compared with sham stimulation (MD 2.96 on a 0 to 25 pressure pain threshold (PPT), 95% CI 1.76 to 4.16; 1 study, 45 participants). No data were reported on adverse events in the included studies. Laser scar revision versus untreated or placebo controls There is moderate-certainty evidence that pulsed high-intensity laser probably results in a reduction in burn-related pruritus intensity compared with placebo laser (MD -0.51 on a 0 to 1 Itch Severity Scale (ISS), 95% CI -0.64 to -0.38; 1 study, 49 participants). There is moderate-certainty evidence that pulsed high-intensity laser probably reduces pain compared with placebo laser (MD -3.23 VAS, 95% CI -5.41 to -1.05; 1 study, 49 participants). No data were reported on adverse events in the included studies.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is moderate to low-certainty evidence on the effects of 21 interventions. Most studies were small and at a high risk of bias related to blinding and incomplete outcome data. Where there is moderate-certainty evidence, practitioners should consider the applicability of the evidence for their patients.
Topics: Humans; Pruritus; Burns; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Bias; Antipruritics
PubMed: 38837237
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013468.pub2 -
Child's Nervous System : ChNS :... Jul 2023Mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) is a global public health problem and its current management is limited to rest and symptom management. Despite frequent use of drugs... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) is a global public health problem and its current management is limited to rest and symptom management. Despite frequent use of drugs for symptom control, there is a lack of consensus on the optimal pharmacological management of post-concussive symptoms. We reviewed the relevant literature to compile the evidence about the pharmaceutical management of pediatric mTBI.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review of the literature available in PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.Gov as well as through citation tracing. A modified PICO framework was used for the construction of search strategy and eligibility criteria. Risk of bias was assessed using RoB-2 tool for randomized and ROBINS-I for non-randomized studies.
RESULTS
A total of 6260 articles were screened for eligibility. After exclusions, a total of 88 articles received full text review. A total of 15 reports representing 13 studies (5 randomized clinical trials, 1 prospective randomized cohort study, 1 prospective cohort study, and 6 retrospective cohort studies) met the eligibility criteria and were included in the review. We identified 16 pharmacological interventions in a total of 931 pediatric patients with mTBI. Amytriptiline (n = 4), ondansetron (n = 3), melatonin (n = 3), metoclopramide (n = 2), magnesium (n = 2), and topiramate (n = 2) were investigated in multiple studies. All RCTs were relatively of small size (n ≤ 33/group).
CONCLUSION
The available evidence supporting pharmacological intervention in pediatric mild traumatic brain injury is scarce. We propose a framework to facilitate future collaborative research efforts to test and validate various pharmacological interventions for acute and persistent post-concussive symptoms in children.
Topics: Humans; Child; Brain Concussion; Post-Concussion Syndrome; Prospective Studies; Cohort Studies; Retrospective Studies; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37208486
DOI: 10.1007/s00381-023-05960-x -
Scientific Reports Nov 2023Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) is the fourth most common mental disorder, and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are the cornerstone of its... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Efficacy and safety of 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 (5-HT3) receptor antagonists in augmentation with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) in the treatment of moderate to severe obsessive-compulsive disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.
Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) is the fourth most common mental disorder, and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are the cornerstone of its pharmacological treatment. About 40-60% of the cases are treatment-refractory, and this makes searching for second-line treatment necessary. 5-Hydroxytryptamine-3 (5-HT3) antagonists are among the many medications that have been used in augmentation with SSRIs. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we assessed the efficacy and safety of 5-HT3 receptor antagonists in augmentation with SSRIs in treating moderate to severe OCD. We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane library, and Google Scholar for relevant trials published up to December 2022. The effect size was the mean difference in Yale-Brown obsessive compulsive scale (Y-BOCS) scores before and after receiving 5-HT3 receptor antagonist drugs in augmentation with SSRIs in moderate to severe OCD patients. We included 6 randomized-controlled trails (RCTs) with 334 patients assessing the effect of the augmentation of SSRIs with ondansetron, granisetron, and tropisetron on treating moderate to severe OCD. Our results were in favor of the experimental group in total (Z = 8.37, P < 0.00001), in the compulsion subgroup (Z = 5.22, P < 0.00001), and in the obsession subgroup (Z = 8.33, P < 0.00001). They are well-tolerated, and have mild side effects and do not result in withdrawal. Augmentation of 5-HT3 antagonists with SSRIs can be beneficial in treating moderate to severe OCD. Further multi-center trials under adequate conditions in longer periods are needed to help come up with a comprehensive action plan.
Topics: Humans; Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors; Serotonin; Receptors, Serotonin, 5-HT3; Treatment Outcome; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder; Drug Therapy, Combination
PubMed: 38012263
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-47931-x -
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2023Cancer is a neoplastic transformation that affects tissue. Among the many complications associated with cancer treatment, managing the distressing side effects of...
Cancer is a neoplastic transformation that affects tissue. Among the many complications associated with cancer treatment, managing the distressing side effects of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is of main concern. Ondansetron is a selective serotonin 5-HT3 receptor antagonist that has emerged as an essential medication against CINV in adult cancer patients. Ondansetron efficacy and tolerability have made it a primary medication in CINV prophylaxis and treatment regimens. The study aims to offer a detailed overview of ondansetron's effectiveness, safety, and impact on patients' lives, ultimately contributing to the ongoing research to enhance the quality of cancer care. On 4 September 2023, a search was conducted of the ClinicalTrials.gov database using the search terms "cancer," "ondansetron," and "Zofran." Inclusion and exclusion criteria were defined to select relevant clinical trials. Included trials were completed with results and interventional studies that assessed the preventive effects of ondansetron on CINV in adult cancer patients. A total of 23 clinical trials were identified, with only 13 of them focusing on investigating the preventive effects of ondansetron on CINV in adult cancer patients. The collective findings from these trials showed an effective management of CINV using ondansetron. Through a comprehensive overview of clinical trials, the use of ondansetron in adult cancer patients represents a significant improvement in CINV management.
PubMed: 38074143
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2023.1310455 -
Anesthesia and Analgesia Jan 2024Pruritus is a frequently reported and unpleasant side effect following intrathecal opioid use with frequency further increased among parturients. We have performed a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Pruritus is a frequently reported and unpleasant side effect following intrathecal opioid use with frequency further increased among parturients. We have performed a systematic review to assess the overall efficacy of ondansetron for the prevention of pruritus in patients receiving intrathecal opioid as part of spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery.
METHODS
A literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases was conducted from date of inception to September 2022. Studies that included patients undergoing cesarean delivery with spinal anesthesia using intrathecal opioid were included. The primary outcome was the presence of pruritus, and the secondary outcome was time to onset of pruritus. Data from included studies were pooled for analysis using an appropriately determined random-effects model. Outcomes were presented using forest plots and 95% confidence intervals. Additional sensitivity and subgroup analysis were performed. Trial sequential analysis was conducted for the primary outcome.
RESULTS
Twenty-three randomized controlled trials with a total of 2586 patients were included: 1219 received ondansetron, 1030 received a placebo, and a further 337 received a different study drug and were excluded from analysis. Opioids used in the included studies were morphine, fentanyl, and sufentanil. Patients who received ondansetron showed a significant reduction in the incidence of pruritus compared to the control group (RR, 0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71-0.92; I 2 = 64%). There was no significant difference in pruritus onset between the groups (mean difference [MD], 17.54 minutes; 95% CI, -2.18 to 37.26; I 2 = 83%). The overall Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) assessment of quality of evidence was low.
CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review has demonstrated a significant reduction in the incidence of pruritus following the use of ondansetron. This is in contrast to previously published meta-analyses. Studies included were of varying quality and some at high risk of bias with a high degree of statistical heterogeneity. Furthermore, high-quality and well-powered studies are required to confirm these findings.
Topics: Pregnancy; Humans; Female; Ondansetron; Analgesics, Opioid; Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting; Pruritus; Fentanyl; Morphine; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37167702
DOI: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000006526 -
Emergency Medicine Australasia : EMA Apr 2024Ketamine is commonly used for procedural sedation anaesthesia in paediatric patients undergoing painful procedures in the ED. Ketamine's safety profile is excellent, but... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Review article: Efficacy of prophylactic ondansetron versus placebo or control in reducing vomiting in children undergoing ketamine procedural sedation in the emergency department: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Ketamine is commonly used for procedural sedation anaesthesia in paediatric patients undergoing painful procedures in the ED. Ketamine's safety profile is excellent, but ketamine-associated vomiting (KAV) is common. Routine ondansetron prophylaxis could reduce KAV incidence. This literature review evaluated the efficacy of prophylactic ondansetron in reducing KAV incidence. A systematic literature review was performed on databases and trial registries on 14 January 2023 to identify randomised controlled trials. The primary outcome was reduction in KAV incidence, for any route of prophylactic ondansetron, in ED and up to 24 h post-discharge. ED length of stay, parental satisfaction and time to resumption of normal diet were secondary outcomes. Data analysis was performed using Revman 5.3. Meta-analysis was performed using random effects modelling. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias 2 tool. Evidence quality was assessed using Grading of Recommendation, Assessment Development and Evaluation methodology. Five trials with 920 participants met the eligibility criteria. Prophylactic ondansetron resulted in a reduction in KAV incidence overall odds ratio of 0.51 (95% confidence interval: 0.36-0.73). Intravenous and intramuscular prophylactic ondansetron showed benefit whereas the effect of oral administration was unclear. There was no difference between groups for secondary outcomes overall. The quality of evidence was deemed to be low overall because of high risk of bias and imprecision in outcome measures. This review found low to moderate certainty evidence that prophylactic ondansetron reduces KAV incidence. Methodologically rigorous research, with appropriately timed prophylactic ondansetron based on the route of administration, would further elucidate prophylactic oral ondansetron's efficacy.
Topics: Humans; Child; Ondansetron; Ketamine; Antiemetics; Aftercare; Patient Discharge; Vomiting; Anesthesia; Emergency Service, Hospital; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 38220580
DOI: 10.1111/1742-6723.14372