Preoperative Administration of Aprepitant to Prevent Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting in Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Aprepitant (Emend ® ), a neurokinin-receptor antagonist, has seen increased use in the treatment of nausea and vomiting in various clinical scenarios. To date, there are limited data regarding its use in the pediatric population. We retrospectively reviewed our experience with aprepitant after its addition to the operating room formulary for prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). Methods: The anesthetic records of patients who received aprepitant were retrospectively reviewed. Demographic, surgical, medication, and efficacy data were retrieved. Results: The study cohort included 144 patients ranging in age from 7 to 17 years and in weight from 24.7 to 208.9 kg. The most common surgical procedures included gastrointestinal surgery, orthopedic surgery, and otolaryngologic procedures. Reasons for the administration of aprepitant included PONV prophylaxis due to risk factors such as type of surgery, duration of surgery, previous history of significant PONV, female gender, and family history of PONV. The majority of the patients (98.6%) received aprepitant in capsule form in a dose of 40 mg (97.9%). Seventeen patients (11.8%) had PONV or received antiemetic agents postoperatively. There were no unplanned admissions related to PONV. No adverse effects related to aprepitant were noted. Conclusions: Aprepitant was effectively introduced to the preoperative regimen as an additional agent for the prevention of PONV. The overall tolerability and efficacy of aprepitant was similar to previous studies, even in a patient population at high risk for PONV. J Curr Surg. 2022;12(1):1-6 doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/jcs457
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".