Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting Implications in Neostigmine versus Sugammadex

Purpose/Background: Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a frequent complaint in the postoperative period, which can delay discharge, result in readmission, and increase cost for patients and facilities. Inducing paralysis is common in anesthesia, as is utilizing the drugs neostigmine and sugammadex as reversal agents for non-depolarizing neuromuscular blockers. Many studies are available that compare these two drugs to determine if neostigmine increases the risk of PONV over sugammadex. Sugammadex has a more favorable pharmacologic profile and may improve patient outcomes by reducing PONV. Methods: This review included screening a total of 39 studies and peer-reviewed articles that looked at patients undergoing general anesthesia who received non-depolarizing neuromuscular blockers requiring either neostigmine or sugammadex for reversal, along with their respective PONV rates. 8 articles were included, while 31 articles were removed based on our exclusion criteria. These were published between 2014 and 2020 exclusively. The key words used were “neostigmine”, “sugammadex”, “PONV”, along with combinations “paralytic reversal agents and PONV”. This search was performed on the scholarly database MEDLINE. The data items were PONV rates in neostigmine group, PONV rates in sugammadex group, incidence of postoperative analgesic consumption in neostigmine group, and incidence of postoperative analgesic consumption in sugammadex group. Results: Despite numerical differences being noted in the incidence of PONV with sugammadex over reversal with neostigmine, there did not appear to be any statistically significant data in the multiple peer-reviewed trials included in our review, for not one of the 8 studies concluded that there was a higher incidence of PONV in one drug or the other of an y clinical relevance. Although the side-effect profile tended to be better in the sugammadex group than neostigmine in areas other than PONV, there was not sufficient evidence to conclude that one drug was superior to the other in causing a direct reduction of PONV. Implications for Nursing Practice: There were variable but slight differences noted between both drug groups in PONV rates, but it remained that none of the studies determined it was statically significant or clinically conclusive. This review did, however, note other advantages to sugammadex over neostigmine, including its pharmacologic profile of more efficiently reversing non-depolarizing neuromuscular blocking drugs and its more favorable pharmacokinetics. This lack of statistically significant evidence found within these studies consequentially does not support pharmacologic decision-making of one drug in favor of the other for reducing PONV; therefore, PONV alone is not a sufficient rationale for a provider to justify using one reversal over another at the current time until further research proves otherwise.

Review of Pharmacologic Considerations in the Use of Azole Antifungals in Lung Transplant Recipients

Mold-active azole antifungals are commonly prescribed for the prevention of invasive fungal infections in lung transplant recipients. Each agent exhibits a unique pharmacologic profile, an understanding of which is crucial for therapy selection and optimization. This article reviews pharmacologic considerations for three frequently-used azole antifungals in lung transplant recipients: voriconazole, posaconazole, and isavuconazole. Focus is drawn to analysis of drug-interactions, adverse drug reactions, pharmacokinetic considerations, and the role of therapeutic drug monitoring with special emphasis on data from the post-lung transplant population.

New Serotoninergic Ligands Containing Indolic and Methyl Indolic Nuclei: Synthesis and In Vitro Pharmacological Evaluation

Background: Serotonin is an important biogenic amine and is implicated in wideranging physiological and physiopathological processes. Pharmacological manipulation of the serotoninergic system is believed to have a great therapeutic potential. Objectives: In order to identify selective ligands for 5-HT1A, 5-HT2A and 5-HT2C receptors two series of 4-substituted piperazine derivatives, bearing indolic or methyl indolic nuclei, were synthesized. Methods: All the compounds, synthesized by standard solution methods, were evaluated for 5- HT1A, 5-HT2A and 5-HT2C receptors. The highest affine and selective compounds have been evaluated also on dopaminergic (D1 and D2) and adrenergic (α1A and α2A) receptors. Results: Several of the newly synthesized molecules showed affinity in the nanomolar range for 5- HT1A, 5-HT2A and 5-HT2C receptors and moderate to no affinity for other relevant receptors (D1, D2, α1A and α2A). Conclusion: Compounds 7f and 10a showed a nanomolar affinity towards 5-HT1A with an in vitro pharmacologic profile compatible with antipsychotic drugs.

Pharmacologic and clinical assessment of kratom: An update

Purpose This article presents updated information on kratom (Mitragyna speciosa), a natural opioid with stimulant properties that is currently sold in the United States without a prescription. Summary Kratom exerts opioid and alpha-2 agonistic effects, as well as anti-inflammatory and mild stimulant effects. Respiratory depression has not been commonly reported, but kratom does cause a host of adverse effects. While kratom may have a role in patients who are in chronic pain or dependent on opioid painkillers or heroin, this needs to be established in clinical trials. Kratom may have drug interactions as both a cytochrome P-450 system substrate and inhibitor. Kratom does not appear in normal drug screens and, especially when ingested with other substances of abuse, may not be recognized as an agent of harm. There are numerous cases of death in kratom users, but many involved polypharmaceutical ingestions. There are assessments where people have been unable to stop using kratom therapy and withdrawal signs/symptoms occurred in patients or their newborn babies after kratom cessation. Both banning and failure to ban kratom places people at risk; a middle-ground alternative, placing it behind the pharmacy counter, might be useful. Conclusion Kratom has a unique pharmacologic profile that might offer advantages over other opioids, but its high abuse liability, potential for drug interactions and adverse events, and inadequate research into the balance of benefits to harm are concerning. There is mounting information on the adverse events associated with kratom use and potential treatments that can be useful to clinicians.