Gene/Protein Disease Symptom Drug Enzyme Compound
Pivot Concepts:   Target Concepts:
Query: UMLS:C0042963 (vomiting)
 31,883 document(s) hit in 31,850,051 MEDLINE articles (0.00 seconds)

We insist about the following notions: contra-indications: epilepsy, papillary stasis, important ethylism, folliculitis in the lumbar punction area; preparation by intra-venous hydrocortisone and Primperan in two different syringes (to prevent lipothymia and vomiting); localisation by TV of the space L2-L3; cytology and albumin in the cerebrospinal fluid; localised X-rays on the suspected intervertebral disk.
 ...
PMID:[Technical notes about radiculosaccography (author's transl)]. 22 21

Dopamine antagonists are effective anti-emetics. Domperidone does not readily cross the blood-brain barrier and is less likely to cause central nervous system side-effects than metoclopramide. However, a direct comparison of the safety and efficacy of the two drugs has not hitherto been made. Ninety-five patients, with symptoms of nausea and vomiting due to a variety of oesophageal or gastric disorders, were recruited into a randomised, double-blind, three-part, parallel-group comparative study of controlled release metoclopramide 15 mg (Gastrobid Continus tablets, Napp Laboratories) given twice daily, and domperidone 10 mg or 20 mg given three times daily. Assessments for nausea, vomiting, reflux symptoms and adverse events were made on entry to the study. Patients were randomly allocated to one of the three treatment regimes for a period of seven days, throughout which daily symptomatology and use of escape medication were recorded on a diary card. At the end of the treatment period, nausea, vomiting and reflux symptoms, adverse events and a global assessment of patients' symptom control were recorded by the investigator. Both controlled release metoclopramide and high and low dose domperidone significantly reduced symptoms of belching, flatulence, distension, heartburn, regurgitation, reflux, nausea and vomiting compared to baseline. There were no significant differences between the three treatments in efficacy or in the number and severity of side-effects.
 ...
PMID:A comparison of controlled release metoclopramide and domperidone in the treatment of nausea and vomiting. 181 Mar 56

The efficiency of antiemetic drugs was investigated in 36 children with neoplasia (mainly of hematopoietic system) in the course of 83 cycles of chemotherapy. The following antiemetic drugs were investigated: Fenactil (brand of chlorpromazine), Torecan (brand of thienylpromazine maleate), Aviomarin (brand of dimenhydrinate), Decadron (brand of dexamethasone), Primperan (brand of metoclopramid), and placebo. The most efficient was dexamethasone which prevented vomiting in 54% cycles of chemotherapy and diminished their intensity in the remaining cycles. No adverse reactions were noted. Efficacy of Fenactil, Torecan, Aviomarin, and Primperan was similar to that of placebo.
 ...
PMID:[Assessment of the efficacy of drugs used in prevention of vomiting during anticancer therapy in children]. 226 93

Delayed nausea and emesis are common after cancer chemotherapy, especially cisplatin-containing regimens. Often no, or inadequate, prophylactic antiemetic cover is prescribed in these usually ambulant patients. Metoclopramide is a very effective drug in preventing the acute emetic and nauseating effects of cisplatin. The long-acting metoclopramide formulations (in the present study: Gastrosil retard) may be effective in preventing the delayed toxicity. 12-hourly dosing of 60 mg long-acting metoclopramide in a typical oncology ward situation led to stable metoclopramide levels of approximately 100ng/ml in the observed 74 h in 18 patients, with the well-known wide plasma concentration variability. The clinical efficacy of long-acting metoclopramide in this indication remains to be evaluated.
 ...
PMID:Suitability of long-acting metoclopramide for prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced delayed nausea and vomiting. 261 81

The current case study illustrates the innovative potential of combined medical and psychological treatment of postchemotherapy nausea and vomiting for cancer patients. A 58-yr-old male patient diagnosed with leukemia and on a weekly cytosine arabinoside (Ara-C) treatment protocol, experienced violent vomiting episodes approximately 3 hr. after each injection. Emesis was so severe that the patient considered terminating treatment. Control was attempted with antiemetics (Compazine, Reglan), an antianxiety agent (Valium), an hypnotic (Dalmane), canabinol, hypnosis, and relaxation training without success. A re-examination of these strategies employing experimental rigor and data-responsive experimental designs indicated how success can be achieved without the necessity of new interventions. The patient experienced complete emetic relief and at 3-yr. follow-up remained symptom-free.
 ...
PMID:Combined medical and psychological treatment of postchemotherapy nausea and vomiting: a case study. 278 Sep 30

The influence of fluid intake and hydration rate on the frequency of vomiting was evaluated during 254 outpatient cisplatin infusions administered to 60 patients. The basic antiemetic regimen was consistent and used metoclopramide hydrochloride (Reglan) 2 mg/kg/dose (means = 150 mg) starting 30 minutes before cisplatin for a total of three doses; dexamethasone (Decadron) mean - 15 mg - and lorazepam (Ativan) 1 mg intravenous bolus before cisplatin, along with thiethlperazine maleate (Torecan) given routinely throughout the treatment beginning the evening before. Only 20% (38/192) of patients experienced symptoms of vomiting when hydrated at a rate of greater than 333 cc/hour as opposed to 44% (27/62) patients hydrated at a rate of 300 cc/hour or less (p = 0.01). Patients whose oral intake ranged from 400 cc to 1000 cc experienced noticeably less vomiting (14%) than patients who either refused fluids (39%, p = 0.001) or exceeded 1000 cc oral intake (36%, p less than 0.05) during treatment. Manipulation of total fluid intake (IV plus oral), although not statistically significant, seemed to affect the incidence of vomiting. By maintaining a positive intake/output ratio greater than 1, patients were able to decrease their vomiting episodes. Patients who gained weight during the treatment experienced significantly fewer episodes of vomiting (29%) than those who either lost or maintained their weight (71%). Findings suggest that manipulating both oral and IV fluid intake as well as the IV fluid rate may reduce symptoms of vomiting in the outpatient cisplatin setting.
 ...
PMID:Effects of fluid manipulation on the incidence of vomiting during outpatient cisplatin infusion. 292 70

The antiemetic effects of the benzamide metoclopramide (MCL, Paspertin) and of the butyrophenone droperidol (DRO, Dehydrobenzperidol) were compared by two sequential analytical trials in cisplatin treated patients. In the first trial (cisplatin 60-90 mg/m2) the drugs were given as loading infusions (MCL 0.5 mg/kg, and DRO 0.05 mg/kg, each per b.w./h over 2 hr), beginning 2 hr before cisplatin administration; this was followed by the maintenance infusion at half the dose, over 24 hr (total dose of MCL 7 mg/kg, and DRO 0.7 mg/kg b.w. per cycle, resp.). During the second trial (cisplatin 90-120 mg/m2) the antiemetic dosages were doubled (total dose of 14 or 1.4 mg/kg per cycle. After 12 and 14 treatment pairs, resp., MCL was significantly (P less than 0.05) more effective than DRO. Clinically antiemetic protection (i.e. less than three vomiting episodes) were seen in 9 of 12 and 13 of 14 patients, resp., compared with only 5 of 12 and 5 of 14 patients on DRO. The incidence of major extrapyramidal side-effects was more than 2-fold higher at DRO. The benefit/risk relationships (i.e. the relation between the prevented emetic episodes and the number of extrapyramidal reactions seen) of MCL were 2.7-3.0-fold better than those of DRO. The relatively higher antiemetic efficacy of MCL may be due to its additional gastrointestinal mechanisms.
 ...
PMID:High doses of metoclopramide or droperidol in the prevention of cisplatin-induced emesis. 354 51

The antiemetic effect of two benzamides, metoclopramide (MCL; Paspertin) and alizapride (AZP; Vergentan), was compared in two double-blind sequential analytical trials in cisplatin-treated patients (60-90 mg/m2). In the first trial, the drugs were given as loading infusions (0.5 mg/kg of body weight/hour over 2 hours) beginning 2 hours before cisplatin administration; the maintenance infusion (0.25 mg/kg/hour) given over 24 hours was half the dose (total dose, 7 mg/kg of body weight per treatment cycle). In the second trial, the dose of AZP was doubled. After nine and ten treatment pairs, MCL was significantly (2P less than 0.10) more effective than AZP: three of nine and four of ten patients receiving MCL remained totally free from vomiting, compared with only none of nine and one of ten patients receiving AZP. The incidence of extrapyramidal reactions was similar in all treatments. However, the administration of AZP was much more unfavorable because of moderate to severe hypotensive side effects.
 ...
PMID:Comparison of the antiemetic efficacy of two high-dose benzamides, metoclopramide and alizapride, against cisplatin-induced emesis. 391 40

The indications for Primperan during pregnancy are presented: vomiting and pyrosis, prevention of Mendelsohn's syndrome when general anaesthesia is required during pregnancy or labour. 20 years of pharmacovigilance confirm the good maternal and foetal tolerance of this drug.
 ...
PMID:[Primperan during pregnancy]. 403 9

The antiemetic efficacy of metoclopramide (MCL, Paspertin, loading infusion 0.5 mg/kg body wt./h over 2 h, maintenance infusion 0.25 mg/kg/h over 24 h) has been compared with haloperidol (HAL, Haldol, 1/10 of MCL dosage) and with triflupromazine (TFP, Psyquil, 1/2 of MCL dosage) in two sequential analyses, against the emetic effects of cisplatin (60-90 mg/m2). After treating 14 and 8 pairs of patients respectively, MCL was significantly (alpha = 0.05) more effective than HAL or TFP. Only 1 of the 14 patients in the HAL group and 0 of 8 in the TFP group were totally protected against emesis, in contrast to 6 of 14 patients and 3 of 8 in the MCL groups. In order to quantify the benefit/risk relationship of the antiemetic drugs studied the number of prevented emetic episodes (in comparison to previous insufficient treatment) was related to the incidence of major undesired effects (i.e. dystonia and/or akathisia). This relationship was 17.8 and 12.1 for the two MCL groups; for HAL and TFP it was only 5.8 and 4.6, respectively. The high antiemetic selectivity of MCL against cisplatin-induced emesis is probably related to the still unknown action of MCL on the gastrointestinal motility. A high neuroleptic potency, with or without additional anticholinergic activity, is apparently not essential for high antiemetic protection against cisplatin.
 ...
PMID:[Benefit and risk of high-dose metoclopramide in comparison to high-dose haloperidol or triflupromazine in cisplatin-induced vomiting]. 403 75


1 2 Next >>