Search

Context: Dexamethasone is widely used to prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in pediatric tonsillectomy.Objective: To assess whether dexamethasone dose-dependently reduces the risk of PONV at 24 hours after tonsillectomy.Design, Setting, and Patients: Randomized placebo-controlled trial conducted among 215 children undergoing elective tonsillectomy at a major public teaching hospital in Switzerland from February 2005 to December 2007.Interventions: Children were randomly assigned to receive dexamethasone (0.05, 0.15, or 0.5 mg/kg) or placebo intravenously after induction of anesthesia. Acetaminophen-codeine and ibuprofen were given as postoperative analgesia. Follow-up continued until the 10th postoperative day.Main Outcome Measures: The primary end point was prevention of PONV at 24 hours; secondary end points were decrease in the need for ibuprofen at 24 hours and evaluation of adverse effects.Results: At 24 hours, 24 of 54 participants who received placebo (44%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 31%-59%) had experienced PONV compared with 20 of 53 (38%; 95% CI, 25%-52%), 13 of 54 (24%; 95% CI, 13%-38%), and 6 of 52 (12%; 95% CI, 4%-23%) who received dexamethasone at 0.05, 0.15, and 0.5 mg/kg, respectively (P<.001 for linear trend). Children who received dexamethasone received significantly less ibuprofen. There were 26 postoperative bleeding episodes in 22 children. Two of 53 (4%; 95% CI, 0.5%-13%) children who received placebo had bleeding compared with 6 of 53 (11%; 95% CI, 4%-23%), 2 of 51 (4%; 95% CI, 0.5%-13%), and 12 of 50 (24%; 95% CI, 13%-38%) who received dexamethasone at 0.05, 0.15, and 0.5 mg/kg, respectively (P = .003). Dexamethasone, 0.5 mg/kg, was associated with the highest bleeding risk (adjusted relative risk, 6.80; 95% CI, 1.77-16.5). Eight children had to undergo emergency reoperation because of bleeding, all of whom had received dexamethasone. The trial was stopped early for safety reasons.Conclusion: In this study of children undergoing tonsillectomy, dexamethasone decreased the risk of PONV dose dependently but was associated with an increased risk of postoperative bleeding.Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00403806. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVES: To examine the efficacy of respiratory physiotherapy for prevention of pulmonary complications after abdominal surgery. METHODS: We searched in databases and bibliographies for articles in all languages through November 2005. Randomized trials were included if they investigated prophylactic respiratory physiotherapy and pulmonary outcomes, and if the follow-up was at least 2 days. Efficacy data were expressed as risk differences (RDs) and number needed to treat (NNT), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Thirty-five trials tested respiratory physiotherapy treatments. Of 13 trials with a 'no intervention' control group, 9 studies (n = 883) did not report on significant differences, and 4 studies (n = 528) did: in 1 study, the incidence of pneumonia was decreased from 37.3 to 13.7% with deep breathing, directed cough, and postural drainage (RD, 23.6%; 95% CI, 7 to 40%; NNT, 4.3; 95% CI, 2.5 to 14); in 1 study, the incidence of atelectasis was decreased from 39 to 15% with deep breathing and directed cough (RD, 24%; 95% CI, 5 to 43%; NNT, 4.2; 95% CI, 2.4 to 18); in 1 study, the incidence of atelectasis was decreased from 77 to 59% with deep breathing, directed cough, and postural drainage (RD, 18%; 95% CI, 5 to 31%; NNT, 5.6; 95% CI, 3.3 to 19); in 1 study, the incidence of unspecified pulmonary complications was decreased from 47.7% to 21.4 to 22.2% with intermittent positive pressure breathing, or incentive spirometry, or deep breathing with directed cough (RD, 25.5 to 26.3%; NNT, 3.8 to 3.9). Twenty-two trials (n = 2,734) compared physiotherapy treatments without no intervention control subjects; no conclusions could be drawn. CONCLUSIONS: There are only a few trials that support the usefulness of prophylactic respiratory physiotherapy. The routine use of respiratory physiotherapy after abdominal surgery does not seem to be justified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Oral lyophilized extracts of bacteria species have been used since the early 1970s to improve symptoms and to prevent exacerbations in COPD patients. The value of these treatments, which are thought to be immunomodulating, is poorly understood. Our aim was to quantify the efficacy of oral bacteria extracts in patients with chronic bronchitis and COPD. DESIGN: Systematic review of randomized trials. DATA SOURCES: Electronic databases, bibliographies, and contact with authors and manufacturers. REVIEW METHODS: Randomized comparisons of oral purified bacterial (active) extracts with placebo or no treatment (control) were selected. Meta-analyses were performed using fixed and random-effects models, and the results were expressed as relative risk (RR), odds ratio (OR), number needed to treat for one to benefit (NNTB), or number needed to treat for one to be harmed (NNTH), with 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: Thirteen trials (1,971 patients), most of which were of low quality, tested OM-85BV (Broncho-Vaxom; OM Pharma; Geneva, Switzerland), LW-50020 (Luivac; ALTANA Pharma; Bad Homburg, Germany), or SL-04. Two trials (731 patients) had appropriate methodologies and reported on exacerbations. The RR in favor of the oral bacterial extract (active) was 0.83 (95% CI, 0.55 to 1.25), and the NNTB was 15.4 (95% CI, 5.5 to infinity; NNTH, 27.5). Five trials (591 patients) reported on observer-assessed improvement of symptoms RR in favor of active extracts was 0.57 (95% CI, 0.49 to 0.66), and the NNTB was 4 (95% CI, 2.8 to 5.4). Two trials (n = 344), reported on patient-assessed improvement (RR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.31 to 0.61) [NNTB, 4; 95% CI, 3.0 to 5.9]. In two trials (163 patients), the average duration of an exacerbation was shorter with the active extracts (weighted mean difference, -2.7 days; 95% CI, -3.5 to -1.8). Itching or cutaneous eruptions was reported in 3.3% of patients (four trials; 802 patients) who received active extracts compared with 1.0% of control subjects (OR, 2.94 95% CI, 1.12 to 7.69) [NNTH, 50; 95% CI, 14 to 161]. Urologic problems (two trials; 671 patients) were reported in 8% of patients who received active extracts compared with 3.0% of control subjects (OR, 2.62; 95% CI, 1.35 to 5.11) [NNTH, 22; 95% CI, 10 to 61]. CONCLUSIONS: Oral purified bacterial extracts improve symptoms in patients with chronic bronchitis and COPD. There is not enough evidence to suggest that they prevent exacerbations. Cutaneous and urologic adverse effects are common. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]