Top Banner
journal reading Gastroenterohepatic subdivision Muh. Hayun Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Ondansetron, Droperidol, and Metoclopramide for Preventing Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting: A Meta-Analysis
31

PP hayun

Feb 02, 2016

Download

Documents

rahma_

bioetik kedokteran
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1: PP hayun

journal reading Gastroenterohepatic subdivision

Muh. Hayun

Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Ondansetron, Droperidol, and Metoclopramide for Preventing Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting: A Meta-Analysis

Page 2: PP hayun

ABSTRACT

Postoperative nausea and vomiting are important causes of morbidity after anesthesia and surgery. We performed a meta-analysis of published, randomized, controlled trials to determine the relative efficacy and safety of ondansetron, droperidol, and metoclopramide for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting. We performed a literature search of English references using both the MEDLINE database and a manual search.

Page 3: PP hayun

Double-blinded, randomized, controlled trials comparing the efficiency of the prophylactic administration of ondansetron, droperidol, and/or metoclopramide therapy during general anesthesia were included. A total of 58 studies were identified, of which 4 were excluded for methodological concerns. For each comparison of drugs, a pooled odds ratio (OR) with a 95% CI was calculated using a random effects model. Ondansetron (pooledOR0.43, 95% CI 0.31, 0.61; P,0.001) and droperidol (pooledOR0.68, 95% CI 0.54, 0.85; P , 0.001) were more effective than metoclopramide in preventing vomiting.

Page 4: PP hayun

Ondansetron was more effective than droperidol in preventing vomiting inchildren (pooled OR 0.49; P 5 0.004), but they wereequally effective in adults (pooled OR 0.87; P 5 0.45). The overall risk of adverse effects was not different among drug combinations. We conclude that ondansetron and droperidol are more effective than metoclopramide in reducing postoperative vomiting. Implications: We performed a systematic review of published, randomized, controlled trials to determine the relative efficacy and safety of ondansetron, droperidol, and metoclopramide for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting. Ondansetron and droperidol were moreeffective than metoclopramide in reducing postoperative vomiting. The overall risk of adverse effects did not differ.

Page 5: PP hayun

INTRODUCTION

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) are important causes of morbidity after anesthesia and surgery

No large-scale trials have been performed comparing ondansetron and droperidol with metoclopramide.

Page 6: PP hayun

METHODS

searching the MEDLINE database from January 1966

to May 1998,.”

using the terms (MeSH as well as text search) “prevention,”

“postoperative complications,” “nausea and

vomiting” separately for “ondansetron,” “droperidol,”

and “metoclopramide

The design, conduct, analysis, and presentation of

the studies were blindly evaluated by two authors (KBD, KLP) using a quality

score adapted from Chalmers et al.

Studies with scores of ,65 (of a total possible

score of 100) were excluded (score range of included studies 65–97).

Page 7: PP hayun

criteria were included in the meta-analysis:

1) the study was a double-blinded, randomized, controlled trial;

2) Patients underwent general anesthesia;

3) vomiting, nausea, or the use of rescue antiemetic therapy were identified as outcomes;

4) antiemetic therapy was administered prophylactically, not just in the treatment of PONV;

5) at least two drugs (metoclopramide, droperidol, or ondansetron) were compared.

Page 8: PP hayun

RESULTS

Appendix 1.

•54 articles involving a total of 7324 patients included in the meta-analyses

Table 1•Ondansetron (pooled OR 0.70) tended to be more effective than metoclopramide in reducing postoperative nausea; however, this difference was not statistically significant (P 5 0.125)

Table 1, Fig. 1

•Ondansetron was 57% more effective than metoclopramide in reducing postoperative vomiting (pooled OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.31, 0.61; P , 0.001)

Page 9: PP hayun

RESULTS

Fig. 2•Despite the overall reduction in pooled OR plot of ORs by studies demonstrated substantial variability•among studies in the relative efficacy of ondansetron•and droperidol

Table 2•revealed that ondansetron was significantly more effective than droperidol in preventing vomiting in children (pooled OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.30, 0.80; P 5 0.004) but not in adults (pooled OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.61, 1.25; P 5 0.45).

Table 1, Fig. 3

•Droperidol was 32% more effective than metoclopramide in reducing postoperative vomiting (pooled OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.54, 0.85; P , 0.001)

Page 10: PP hayun

DISCUSSION

Prophylactic administration of ondansetron and droperidol was more effective than that of metoclopramide in preventing postoperative vomiting.

The biases of individual studies are incorporated, results are pooled across heterogeneous studies, and potentially new biases are introduced with the selection of studies

Droperidol and ondansetron were similarly effective in preventing PONV in adults, although ondansetron was more effective than droperidol in preventing vomiting in children.

Page 11: PP hayun

TELAAH KRITIS JURNAL

PENELITIAN META-ANALISIS

Page 12: PP hayun

No

HAL YANG

DINILAI

CHECK LIST PENILAIAN YA TIDAK

1 Judul Makalah

a. Apakah judul tidak terlalu panjang atau pendek?

b. Apakah judul menggambarkan isi utama penilaian?

c. Apakah judul cukup menarik?d. Apakah judul menggunakan

singkatan selain yang baku?

2 Abstrak

a. Apakah merupakan abstrak satu paragraf, atau abstrak terstruktur?

b. Apakah sudah tercakup komponen IMRAC (Introduction, Methods, Results, Conclussion?)

c. Apakah secara keseluruhan abstrak informatif?

d. Apakah abstrak lebih dari 250 kata?

1 paragraf

249 kata

A. UMUM

Page 13: PP hayun

No HAL YANG DINILAI

CHECK LIST PENILAIAN YA TIDAK

3 Pendahuluan

a. Apakah mengemukakan alasan dilakukannya penelitian?

b. Apakah menyatakan hipotesis atau tujuan penelitian?

c. Apakah pendahuluan didukung oleh pustaka yang kuat & relevan?

4 Metode a. Apakah disebutkan desain, tempat & waktu penelitian?

b. Apakah disebutkan populasi sumber (populasi terjangkau)?

c. Apakah kriteria pemilihan (inklusi & eksklusi) dijelaskan?

d. Apakah cara pemilihan subjek (teknik sampling) disebutkan?

e. Apakah perkiraan besar sampel disebutkan & disebut pula alasannya?

f. Apakah perkiraan besar sampel dihitung dengan menggunakan rumus yang sesuai?

Page 14: PP hayun

No

HAL YANG

DINILAI

CHECK LIST PENILAIAN YA TIDAK

g. Apakah observasi, pengukuran, serta intervensi dirinci sehingga orang lain dapat mengulanginya?

h. Bila teknik pengukuran tidak dirinci, apakah disebutkan rujukannya?

i. Apakah definisi istilah & variabel penting dikemukakan?

j. Apakah ethical clearance diperoleh?

k. Apakah disebutkan rencana analisis, batas kemaknaan & power penelitian?

5 Hasil a. Apakah disertakan tabel deskripsi subjek penelitian?

b. Apakah karakteristik subjek yang penting (data awal) dibandingkan kesetaraannya?

c. Apakah dilakukan uji hipotesis untuk kesetaraan ini?

d. Apakah disebutkan jumlah subjek yang diteliti?

Page 15: PP hayun

No HAL YANG DINILAI

CHECK LIST PENILAIAN YA TIDAK

e. Apakah dijelaskan subyek yang drop out dengan alasannya?

f. Apakah semua hasil di dalam tabel disebutkan dalam naskah?

g. Apakah semua outcome yang penting disebutkan dalam hasil?

h. Apakah subyek yang drop out diikutkan dalam analisis?

i. Apakah disertakan hasil uji statistik (x2,t) derajat kebebasan (degree of freedom), dan nilai p?

j. Apakah dalam hasil disertakan komentar & pendapat?

(tidak ada)

6 Diskusi a. Apakah semua hal yang relevan dibahas?

b. Apakah dibahas keterbatasan penelitian, dan kemungkinan dampaknya terhadap hasil?

Page 16: PP hayun

No HAL YANG DINILAI

CHECK LIST PENILAIAN YA TIDAK

c. Apakah disebutkan kesulitan penelitian, penyimpangan dari protokol, dan kemungkinan dampaknya terhadap hasil?

d. Apakah pembahasan dilakukan dengan menghubungkannya dengan teori dan hasil penelitian terdahulu?

e. Apakah dibahas hubungan hasil dengan praktek klinis?

f. Apakah disertakan kesimpulan utama penelitian?

g. Apakah kesimpulan didasarkan pada data penelitian?

h. Apakah efek samping dikemukakan dan dibahas?

i. Apakah disebutkan hasil tambahan selama diobservasi?

j. Apakah disebutkan generalisasi hasil penelitian?

k. Apakah disertakan saran penelitian selanjutnya, dengan anjuran metodologis yang tepat?

Page 17: PP hayun

B. KHUSUSVALIDITY1. Apakah disebut latar belakang

dilakukan meta-analisis dengan jelas? Ya, latarbelakangnya adalah nausea dan vomiting adalah penyebab penting morbiditas pasien pasca anestesi dan bedah. Dan belum ada penelitian yang membandingkan efektifitas antara ondansetran, droperidol dan metoclopramid pasien pasca operasi.

Page 18: PP hayun

2. Apakah disebut kriteria inklusi studi yang disertakan dalam meta-analisis dan cara penelusuran pustaka yang relevan?

Ya, kriteria inklusi penelitian ini adalah ◦ Penelitian double blind, RCT◦ Pasien dilakukan general anestesi◦ Ada neusea dan vomiting dan diberikan terapi antiemetik◦ Terapi antiemetik profilaksis ◦ Minimal menggunakan dua jenis obat (metoclopramid,

droperidol, atau ondansetron Penelusuran pustaka relevan yaitu : pada MEDLINE

database dari januari 1996 sampai mei 1998 dengan menggunakan kata kunci dan medical subject headings (MeSH) “prevention,” “postoperative complications,” “nausea and vomiting,” “ondansetron,” “droperidol” dan “ metoclopramid”.

Page 19: PP hayun

3. Apakah dilakukan telaah validitas setiap studi yang disertakan?

Ya, telaah validitas dilakukan pada semua studi yang disertakan yang dievaluasi oleh dua orang ahli secara blind (KLB, KLP) dengan menggunakan skor kualitas dari Chalmers dkk. Total skor 100, jika skor <65 dikeluarkan dari penelitian.

Page 20: PP hayun

4. Apakah hasil masing-masing studi lebih kurang konsisten satu dengan yang lain ?

Ya, hasil masing-masing studi lebih kurang konsisten satu dengan yang lain dapat dilihat pada tabel karakteristik dan kualitas studi yang masuk dalam meta-analisis ini.

Page 21: PP hayun

IMPORTANT1. Apakah hasil total meta-analisis berarti secara klinis sehingga mempengaruhi tatalaksana pasien ?

Ya, hasil total secara klinis menunjukkan bahwa ondansetron dan droperidol lebih efektif dibandingkan dengan metoklopramid untuk mencegah muntah post operatif. Ondansetron lebih efektif daripada droperidol untuk mencegah muntah posoperatif pada anak. Secara umum resiko efek samping pada semua obat tidak bermakna.

Page 22: PP hayun
Page 23: PP hayun

Figure 1. Meta-analysis of the efficacy of ondansetron versus metoclopramidein the prevention of postoperative vomiting. The odds ratio (OR; f) and 95% CI (horizontal lines) for the individual studies included in the analysis are plotted, and the pooled OR and 95% CIare noted. The vertical line drawn at OR 1.0 indicates no difference between ondansetron and metoclopramide. An OR ,1.0 indicates that ondansetron is more effective than metoclopramide, whereas an OR .1.0 indicates that ondansetron is less effective than metoclopramide. Ondansetron is more effective than metoclopramide in the prevention of postoperative vomiting.

Page 24: PP hayun
Page 25: PP hayun

Figure 2. Meta-analysis of the efficacy of ondansetron versus droperidolin the prevention of postoperative vomiting. Overall, ondansetron is more effective than droperidol in the prevention of postoperative vomiting. However, there is significant heterogeneity among studies. Subgroup analysis demonstrated that ondansetron is more effective than droperidol in children but that both were equally effective in adults.

Page 26: PP hayun

Figure 3. Meta-analysis of the efficacy of droperidol versus metoclopramidein the prevention of postoperative vomiting. Droperidol is more effective than metoclopramide in the prevention of postoperative vomiting.

Page 27: PP hayun
Page 28: PP hayun
Page 29: PP hayun

APPLICABILITY

1. Apakah pasien kita mirip dengan karakteristik pasien penelitian yang dilakukan meta-analisis ?Ya, karakteristik pasien kita (anak-anak) mirip dengan pasien penelitian yang dilakukan pada meta-analisis ini yaitu anak-anak yang mendapat terapi profilaksis antiemetik postoperatif

Page 30: PP hayun

2. Apakah terapi tersebut tersedia, terjangkau dan dapat diterima pasien ?Ya, terapi atau obat (ondansetron, metoclopramid) yang diteliti pada studi ini tersedia dan terjangkau di Indonesia. Meskipun ondansetron lebih mahal daripada metoclopramid, tapi memiliki efektifitas lebih baik dan efek samping lebih sedikit dibandingkan antiemetik lain.

Page 31: PP hayun

Terima kasih