Gene/Protein Disease Symptom Drug Enzyme Compound
Pivot Concepts:   Target Concepts:
Query: UMLS:C0027497 (nausea)
 23,468 document(s) hit in 31,850,051 MEDLINE articles (0.00 seconds)

A double-blind random study compared the effects of lorazepam and pantopon an intra-muscular premedication in healthy women for uterine curettage (D & C). Anxiety, as assessed by a self-rating test by the patient and by a trained observer, showed a significant reduction at one and one-half hours after lorazepam and a smaller reduction after pantopon, which was not significant. Sedation was satisfactory with no significant difference between the two drugs in the change before and after the premedication. Lorazepam showed much more amnesia than pantopon (p less than 0.001). The patients who had lorazepam required higher doses of thiopentone for the operation, and this, in part, led to longer intervals in recovery times after lorazepam. However, it is suggested that lorazepam itself was partly responsible for the longer recovery. Pantopon was followed by more nausea, vomiting and headaches, than lorazepam. The intra-muscular injection of lorazepam hurt more patients than did pantopon, but other local complications were negligible and comparable in both groups. The results of this study show that lorazepam produces better reduction of anxiety and much more amnesia than pantopon, with comparable sedation and much less nausea and vomiting. The only disadvantage of lorazepam is the lack of analgesia and, therefore, the need for more anaesthesia during the operation. The conclusion is that lorazepam is a very satisfactory premedication and warrants more use as such.
 ...
PMID:Lorazepam as a premedication. 0 77

An open evaluation of a combination of butorphanol (1 or 2 mg), promethazine (25 or 50 mg) and atropine (0.5 mg) in 109 adult consenting patients was carried out to determine their safety and efficacy for preanaesthetic medication. All patients were kept under direct surveillance from before intramuscular medication until they were in satisfactory condition post-operatively for discharge from the recovery room. The medications employed did not disturb the blood pressure, pulse rate or respiration rate in any of the patients. None complained of nausea or dizziness while only one was slightly excited. Sedation was rated as satisfactory in 97 per cent, and 90 per cent were free of apprehension. In addition, global evaluation of the premedication by the investigator was rated good to excellent in 99 per cent of the patients. On the basis of these observations, the combination of butorphanol with promethazine and atropine appears safe and useful for pre-anaesthetic medication.
 ...
PMID:Butorphanol and promethazine as pre-anaesthetic medication. 36 82

One hundred and forty-two pediatric patients between age 1 month and 20 years had 163 endoscopic procedures. Of 66 with chronic abdominal pain, 21 had a source identified endoscopically that was seen in only 15 by esophagogram and upper gastrointestinal series. Of 31 with nausea, vomiting, dysphagia, and/or odynophagia and retrosternal pain, endoscopy demonstrated the source in 19 patients and radiographic studies in 14. Of 34 with hematemesis and/or melena, 26 had a bleeding site identified endoscopically but only 4 of 28 had an identified source by radiographic studies. Duodenal and gastric ulcers and hemorrhagic gastritis were the commonest cases of upper gastrointestinal bleeding and organically of chronic adbominal pain. Functional abdominal pain was the commonest cause of chronic abdominal pain in those endoscoped. Foreign bodies were removed from the esophagus and stomach of 6 patients and dislodged in 2 others. Caustic ingestion was recognized in the esophagus and stomach of 2 patients who did not have mouth burns. The GIF-P2-prototype with four-way tip control and ability to retroflex 180 degree up, 60 degree down, and 100 degree right and left was superior to GIF-P1 and CF-P-prototype for visualization of the entire esophagus, stomach, duodenal bulb, and postbulbar area in patients less than 10 years old. Visualization of the duodenal bulb was possible in 28 of 29 pediatric patients, and of the postbulbar area in 25 of 26 in whom it was attempted. Infants who weighed as little as 3 to 5 kg were successfully examined. Retroflexion was possible in 29 of 30 to see the fundus and cardioesophageal junction. Patients older than 10 years were better examined with the GIF-D because of its increased ability to transmit light. Sedation for the school-age child with 0.5 to 1.0 mg per kg of diazepam and 1 to 2 mg per kg of meperidine given intravenously provides excellent sedation in most instances. General anesthesia is preferable for the preschooler and infant. Minor complications occurred in 2 patients who received less than adequate sedation and in 1 patient with general anesthesia.
 ...
PMID:Upper gastrointestinal fiberoptic endoscopy in pediatric patients. 87 Mar 72

Because evidence from uncontrolled, unblinded studies suggested fewer side effects from epidural hydromorphone than from epidural morphine, we employed a randomized, blinded study design to compare the side effects of lumbar epidural morphine and hydromorphone in 55 adult, non-obstetric patients undergoing major surgical procedures. A bolus dose of epidural study drug was given at least 1 h prior to the conclusion of surgery, followed by a continuous infusion of the same drug for two postoperative days. Infusions were titrated to patient comfort. Visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores, VAS sedation scores, and subjective ratings of nausea and pruritus were assessed twice daily. The two treatments provided equivalent analgesia. Sedation scores and prevalence of nausea did not differ significantly between groups. Prevalence of pruritus, however, differed significantly on postoperative day 1, with moderate to severe pruritus reported by 44.4% of patients in the morphine group versus 11.5% in the hydromorphone group (P < .01). On post-operative day 2, reports of pruritus by patients receiving morphine remained higher than those among the hydromorphone-treated subjects, although this difference was no longer statistically significant (32% vs. 16.7%, P = .18). We conclude that lumbar epidural morphine and hydromorphone afford comparable analgesia, but the occurrence of moderate to severe pruritus on the first postoperative day is reduced by the use of hydromorphone.
 ...
PMID:Morphine and hydromorphone epidural analgesia. A prospective, randomized comparison. 128 25

The efficacy and safety of a new benzodiazepine antagonist, flumazenil, were assessed in a double-blind multicenter study. Flumazenil (mean dose, 0.76 mg) or placebo (mean dose, 8.9 ml) was administered intravenously to 130 and 67 patients, respectively, who had been given diazepam in conjunction with an opioid (fentanyl, meperidine, or morphine) for the induction and maintenance of intravenous conscious sedation for diagnostic or therapeutic surgical procedures. The group assessable for efficacy comprised 122 patients treated with flumazenil and 64 patients given placebo. After 5 minutes, 80/115 (70%) flumazenil-treated patients, compared with 21/63 (33%) placebo-treated patients, were completely awake and alert, as indicated by a score of 5 on the Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Scale. Ninety-five percent of patients in each group who attained a score of 5 at the 5-minute assessment showed no loss of alertness throughout the 180-minute assessment period. Flumazenil-treated patients also performed significantly better on the Finger-to-Nose Test and the recall of pictures shown at the 5-minute assessment. Flumazenil was well tolerated, with no serious adverse effects reported. Thirty-nine (30%) of flumazenil-treated patients, compared with 17 (25%) of placebo-treated patients had one or more drug-related adverse experiences. The most common adverse effects were nausea and vomiting in the flumazenil group and nausea and injection-site pain in the placebo group. Flumazenil was found to promptly reverse sedation induced by diazepam in the presence of opioids.
 ...
PMID:Reversal of central benzodiazepine effects by flumazenil after intravenous conscious sedation with diazepam and opioids: report of a double-blind multicenter study. The Flumazenil in Intravenous Conscious Sedation with Diazepam Multicenter Study Group II. 128 98

A double-blind clinical trial was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of flumazenil, a benzodiazepine antagonist, in 146 hospitalized patients, who had had general anesthesia induced by midazolam and a long-acting opioid. Ninety-eight patients received flumazenil and 48 received placebo. Administered postoperatively at a mean intravenous dose of 0.84 mg (range: 0.2 mg to 1 mg), flumazenil reversed benzodiazepine-induced sedation to a greater extent than did placebo. At 5 minutes posttreatment, 61 (76%) of 80 flumazenil-treated patients and 7 (18%) of 40 placebo-treated patients had attained a score of 4 or 5 on the Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Scale, indicating that they were drowsy or fully awake and alert. This level of arousal was maintained for the full 180-minute posttreatment assessment period in 79% of flumazenil-treated patients. Between-group differences in mean change from baseline in level of alertness were statistically significant (P < 0.01) until 60 minutes posttreatment, when the spontaneous recovery of placebo-treated patients resulted in declining intergroup differences. The global efficacy rating (based on the physician's general impression of the effectiveness of the reversal of sedation 5 minutes after test drug administration) was good or excellent in 64 (80%) of the 80 flumazenil-treated patients and 5 (13%) of the 40 placebo-treated patients evaluated. Flumazenil, compared with placebo, was not associated with an increased frequency of operative-site pain, and no serious adverse effects of this benzodiazepine antagonist were reported. The most frequent adverse experiences in both treatment groups were nausea, shivering, and operative-site pain. Vomiting, dizziness, and injection-site reactions were also reported in > or = 5% of patients treated with flumazenil.
 ...
PMID:Reversal of the central effects of midazolam by intravenous flumazenil after general anesthesia and use of a long-acting opioid in hospitalized patients: report of a multicenter double-blind clinical study. The Flumazenil in General Anesthesia in Hospitalized Patients Study Group II. 128

Flumazenil was studied in a double-blind multicenter trial to confirm its efficacy and safety in antagonizing the central effects of benzodiazepines after general anesthesia (midazolam, short-acting narcotic, nitrous oxide) with muscle relaxants and selected potent volatile anesthetics as needed. One hundred seventy-two outpatients were randomly assigned to receive either flumazenil or placebo titrated to the point of reversal of sedation or a maximum dose of 1 mg of flumazenil or 10 ml of placebo. The test drug was given intravenously (0.2 mg flumazenil or 2 ml placebo) at 1-minute intervals. Tests of alertness, psychomotor function, and memory were conducted prestudy and at baseline before the administration of flumazenil and at 5-, 15-, 30-, 60-, 120-, and 180-minute intervals after administration. The changes from prestudy or baseline scores were analyzed to compare differences between treatment groups. Seventy-five percent of the 105 flumazenil-treated patients and 14% of the 55 placebo-treated patients who met the qualifications for efficacy evaluations obtained a criterion level of response as measured by the Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Scale. Most (76%) patients who were alert at 5 minutes maintained their level of wakefulness throughout the 180-minute observation period. All 172 patients were included in evaluations of safety. Fifty percent of 113 flumazenil-treated patients and 31% of 59 placebo-treated patients reported one or more adverse experiences. The most frequently reported were nausea, vomiting, and dizziness. Only 6 adverse effects in the flumazenil group and 1 in the placebo group were considered severe; the remainder were mild or moderate. None were considered serious or potentially serious. Postoperative administration of flumazenil (mean dose, 0.85 mg) safely provided a prompt, controlled reversal of the sedative and psychomotor effects of midazolam in most patients.
 ...
PMID:Reversal of the central effects of midazolam by intravenous flumazenil after general anesthesia in outpatients premedicated with an opioid and a muscle relaxant: report of a multicenter double-blind clinical study. The Flumazenil in General Anesthesia in Outpatients Study Group II. 128 1

In a US double-blind, multicenter study, flumazenil, a benzodiazepine antagonist, administered postoperatively in a mean intravenous dose of 0.67 mg (range, 0.2 to 1 mg), was superior to placebo in reversing sedation and other central nervous system effects of benzodiazepines in outpatients recovering from general anesthesia induced by midazolam, fentanyl or sufentanil, and nitrous oxide. Within 5 minutes after administration of flumazenil, sedation was reversed in 94% (87 of 93) of flumazenil-treated patients, compared with 13% (6 of 46) of placebo-treated patients. The criterion response (Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Scale score of 4 or 5) that was achieved at 5 minutes was maintained in 79 (93%) of 85 patients throughout the 180-minute observation period. Psychomotor performance, measured by the Finger-to-Nose Test, was rated as normal at 5 minutes posttreatment for 77% (71 of 92) of flumazenil-treated patients, and 4% (2 of 46) of placebo-treated patients. The reversal of amnesia, as determined by the Picture Recall Test was less consistent. Patients given flumazenil did not experience more pain at the operative site or require more analgesic medication than did those given placebo. Nausea (flumazenil 24%; placebo 15%), dizziness (flumazenil 12%; placebo 2%), and vomiting (flumazenil 10%; placebo 9%) were the most frequent adverse effects in each group. In conclusion, flumazenil provided prompt arousal from benzodiazepine-induced sedation and was well tolerated.
 ...
PMID:Reversal of the central effects of midazolam by intravenous flumazenil after general anesthesia in outpatients: a multicenter double-blind clinical study. The Flumazenil in General Anesthesia in Outpatients Study Group I. 128 2

This study compared naloxone and nalbuphine when administered for treatment of side effects after epidural morphine, 5 mg, given for postcesarean analgesia. Patients requesting treatment for pruritus or nausea randomly received, in a double-blind fashion, up to three intravenous doses of either naloxone 0.2 mg (group 1; n = 20) or nalbuphine 5 mg (group 2; n = 20). The incidence of vomiting, the severity of nausea and pruritus, and the degree of sedation and pain were assessed before and 30 min after each dose. The first dose of nalbuphine decreased the incidence of vomiting (P < 0.005) and the severity of nausea and pruritus (P < 0.01), whereas naloxone caused no significant changes. Sedation scores increased after nalbuphine (P < 0.05) and remained unchanged after naloxone, whereas pain scores increased after naloxone (P < 0.01) and were unchanged after nalbuphine. Eighteen patients in group 1 and 12 in group 2 received a second dose, and 8 and 4 patients, respectively, a third dose. Other than decreased pruritus after the second dose with both drugs, no further changes occurred. We conclude that nalbuphine is superior to naloxone for the treatment of side effects after epidural morphine. However, persistent symptoms may require supplemental therapy, as repeated doses proved less effective than the initial dose.
 ...
PMID:Nalbuphine is better than naloxone for treatment of side effects after epidural morphine. 141 28

Sedation is frequently required in children undergoing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). 172 Paediatric patients (82 female and 90 male, age 42 +/- 26 months, weight 14.7 +/- 5.6 kg) entered an open, non-comparative, prospective study to assess the utilization of oral chloral hydrate. Chloral hydrate syrup (70 mg/ml) was administered 20-30 min prior to the procedure. Effective sedation was reached in 80.3% with an average initial dose of 55 mg/kg and in 93.6% with an average total dose of 65 mg/kg. Significant differences in effectivity were correlated with the dose (54 +/- 11 mg/kg in failure cases versus 66 +/- 16 mg/kg in effective cases; p < 0.05) and diagnosis (effectivity falls to 62.5% and 76.0% in children with medullar tumours and encephalic white matter alterations, respectively; p < 0.01). Average sleep induction time was 30 +/- 19 min, and average duration of sleep was 62 +/- 24 min. Adverse reactions occurred in 4.7%, with nausea, vomiting and stomach pain being the most common side-effects (3.5%). Multivariate statistical analysis selects total dose and age into the discriminant function, with a 100% relative percentage of correct classification. A simple method for optimizing the chloral hydrate dose in children is proposed: the dose in mg/kg is calculated as half the age in months + 50.
 ...
PMID:Administration of oral chloral hydrate to paediatric patients undergoing magnetic resonance imaging. 147 73


1 2 3 4 5 6 Next >>