None of the medications studied in the current trial, including ondansetron and vitamin B6, showed any significant difference in neonatal outcomes including neonatal anomaly and anthropometric parameters changes. Also, the two drugs had no side effects as congenital abnormalities. In fact, the prescription of both antiemetic drugs was safe in terms of neonatal early outcomes. Furthermore, ondansetron and vitamin B6 were both effective in relieving pregnancy-related nausea and vomiting and led to favorite pregnancy outcomes. The investigations by Pasternak and Ghahiri showed that ondansetron was superior to treat morning sickness but Koren G. was concerned about ondansetron’s unproven maternal and fetal safety (
7,
9,
12). However, the studies mostly focused on the efficacy of the two drugs on relieving morning sickness, not the outcomes of pregnancy. However to the best of the authors` knowledge, no study was previously published on neonatal outcomes following the use of ondansetron compared to that of vitamin B6. In a study by Oliveira et al. (
13) and in contrary to the current study observations, patients in the ondansetron group were more likely to have an improvement in their nausea compared with the ones in the vitamin B6 group, in the five-day treatment course. Females using ondansetron reported less vomiting, although the neonatal outcomes were not compared between the two groups. In this context, the neonatal consequences of two groups were assessed separately. While fetal safety data for vitamin B6 or its combination with doxylamine are based on more than a quarter of a million pregnancies, the fetal safety data for ondansetron are based on fewer than 200 births (
14). A recent case-control study suggested an increased risk of cleft palate associated with ondansetron. Recently, the FDA issued a warning about potentially serious QT prolongation and torsade de pointes associated with ondansetron use (
7). Importantly, a recent large control study by the Slone epidemiology center in Boston, MA, and the centers for disease control and prevention in Atlanta, GA, detected a 2-fold increased risk of cleft palate associated with ondansetron taken for nausea and vomiting of pregnancy (NVP) in the first trimester of pregnancy (
15). On the other hand, the safety of ondansetron was addressed by the mother risk program in 2004 through a prospective cohort study of 176 females, in whom they could not detect an increased teratogenic risk. However, this sample size ruled out only a five-fold increased risk of major malformations and not any specific malformation. Moreover, the lack of other similar cohort studies precluded conducting a meta-analysis to increase the sample size (
16). Besides, no previous reports were available on toxicity or teratogenicity of vitamin B6 during pregnancy. However, it seems that the high-dosage use may be accompanied by maternal toxicity. Its optimal efficacy and safety is indicated with the standard therapeutic doses up to 500 mg/day without increasing maternal adverse effect or jeopardizing fetal safety, but concerns about maternal toxicity are reported with dosages much higher than 500 mg/day, and in the 2000 - 6000 mg/day range (
17). Hence, although the use of doxylamine/vitamin B6 combination is recommended to relive morning sickness in pregnant females based on the large body of evidence that exists for their efficacy and safety; however, the lack of neonatal abnormalities especially on neonatal anthropometric indices following the use of both drugs, none of the drugs is superior regarding neonatal safety.
In conclusion, with respect to the neonatal safety of vitamin B6 and ondansetron, both drugs can be applied to relive morning sickness to ensure the absence of neonatal adverse outcomes. However, due to some cardiac-related adverse consequences of ondansetron or the probability of maternal toxicity in the use of high-dose vitamin B6, it is recommended to use both drugs cautiously.