Sugammadex versus neostigmine for routine reversal of rocuronium block in adult patients: A cost analysis

The effect of glycopyrrolate vs. atropine in combination with neostigmine on cardiovascular system for reversal of residual neuromuscular blockade in the elderly: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Glycopyrrolate-neostigmine (G/N) for reversing neuromuscular blockade (NMB) causes fewer changes in heart rate (HR) than atropine-neostigmine (A/N). This advantage may be especially beneficial for elderly patients. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the cardiovascular effects of G/N and A/N for the reversal of NMB in elderly patients.

METHODS

Elderly patients aged 65-80 years who were scheduled for elective non-cardiac surgery under general anesthesia were randomly assigned to the glycopyrrolate group (group G) or the atropine group (group A). Following the last administration of muscle relaxants for more than 30 min, group G received 4 ug/kg glycopyrrolate and 20 ug/kg neostigmine, while group A received 10 ug/kg atropine and 20 ug/kg neostigmine. HR, mean arterial pressure (MAP), and ST segment in lead II (ST-II) were measured 1 min before administration and 1-15 min after administration.

RESULTS

HR was significantly lower in group G compared to group A at 2-8 min after administration (P < 0.05). MAP was significantly lower in group G compared to group A at 1-4 min after administration (P < 0.05). ST-II was significantly depressed in group A compared to group G at 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 13, 14, and 15 min after administration (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

In comparison to A/N, G/N for reversing residual NMB in the elderly has a more stable HR, MAP, and ST-II within 15 min after administration.

Effect of neuromuscular blockade reversal on post-operative urinary retention following inguinal herniorrhaphy

PURPOSE

This study aims to define the risk of post-operative urinary retention (POUR) following inguinal hernia repair in those that received sugammadex compared to anticholinesterase.

METHODS

Adults undergoing inguinal herniorrhaphy from January 2019 to July 2022 with at least 30-day follow-up receiving rocuronium or edrophonium and reversed with an anticholinesterase or sugammadex were included. 1-to-2 propensity score matched models were fitted to evaluate the treatment of effect of sugammadex vs. anticholinesterase on POUR, adjusting for patient comorbidities, ASA class, wound class, operative laterality, urgency of case, and open versus minimally invasive repair.

RESULTS

3345 patients were included in this study with 1101 (32.9%) receiving sugammadex for neuromuscular blockade reversal. The 30-day rate of POUR was 2.8%; 1.4% in the sugammadex and 4.4% in the anticholinesterase group. After propensity score matching, patients receiving sugammadex had significantly lower risk of POUR compared to anticholinesterase overall (OR 0.340, p < 0.001, 95% CI 0.198-0.585), in open (OR 0.296, p = 0.013, 95% CI 0.113-0.775) and minimally invasive cases (OR 0.36, p = 0.002, 95% CI 0.188-0.693), unilateral (OR 0.371, p = 0.001, 95% CI 0.203-0.681) and bilateral repairs (OR 0.25, p = 0.025, 95% CI 0.074-0.838), elective (OR 0.329, p < 0.001, 95% CI 0.185-0.584) and clean cases (OR 0.312, p < 0.001, 95% CI 0.176-0.553).

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of 30-day new onset POUR was 2.8%. Sugammadex was associated with significantly lower risk of POUR after inguinal herniorrhaphy compared to anticholinesterase overall and when stratifying by operative modality, laterality, and wound class.

Sugammadex Reduced the Incidence of Postoperative Pulmonary Complications in Susceptible Patients Identified by ARISCAT Risk Index: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The efficacy of sugammadex on postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) in susceptible patients, compared with neostigmine, remains indeterminate. The Assess Respiratory Risk in Surgical Patients in Catalonia (ARISCAT) Group Investigators proposed a risk index for the early identification of susceptible patients, with excellent externally validated discrimination ability. Meta-analytical techniques were applied to evaluate the efficacy of sugammadex on PPCs in patients with ARISCAT-defined risk factors.

METHODS

The study is registered on PROSPERO, number CRD42021261156. We searched PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane library, GreyNet, and OpenGrey for eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) without restricting the language or year of publication.

RESULTS

Twelve RCTs consisting of 1182 patients susceptible to PPCs were included. A robust reduction was observed on the incidence of PPCs in susceptible patients who received sugammadex [RR 0.66; 95% CI (0.54, 0.80), p < 0.01], with a low level of between-study heterogeneity (I2 = 45.98%; H2 = 1.85). Similar protective effects were also proved in avoiding residual neuromuscular block (NMB) [RR 0.25; 95% CI (0.11, 0.56); p < 0.01], atelectasis [RR 0.74; 95% CI (0.59, 0.95); p = 0.02], pneumonia [RR 0.49; 95% CI (0.28, 0.88); p = 0.02], and respiratory failure [RR 0.61; 95% CI (0.39, 0.96); p = 0.03]. No difference was observed regarding adverse events [RR 0.85; 95% CI (0.72, 1.01); p = 0.06].

CONCLUSION

Low to moderate quality of evidence demonstrated the edge of sugammadex over neostigmine for NMB reversal in reducing the likelihood of PPCs and residual NMB in patients with ARISCAT-defined risk factors. Clinicians may reassess the type of reversal agent when treating patients susceptible to PPCs.

Effects of sugammadex versus neostigmine on postoperative nausea and vomiting after general anesthesia in adult patients:a single-center retrospective study

We aimed to compare the effect of sugammadex to that of neostigmine with respect to the occurrence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) during the first 24 h following general anesthesia. This retrospective cohort study included patients who underwent elective surgery under general anesthesia in 2020 at an academic medical center in Seoul, South Korea. The exposure groups were determined according to whether the patient received sugammadex or neostigmine as a reversal agent. The primary outcome was PONV occurrence during the first 24 h postoperatively (overall). The association between the type of reversal agent and primary outcome was investigated using logistic regression while adjusting for confounding variables using stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting (sIPTW). Of the 10,912 patients included in this study, 5,918 (54.2%) received sugammadex. Sugammadex was associated with a significantly lower incidence of overall PONV (15.8% vs. 17.7%; odds ratio, 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.79-0.97; P = 0.010) after sIPTW. In conclusion, compared with neostigmine/glycopyrrolate, sugammadex use has a lower risk of PONV during the first 24 h following general anesthesia.

Cost-Effectiveness of Sugammadex Versus Neostigmine to Reverse Neuromuscular Blockade in a University Hospital in Taiwan: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

Sugammadex has several pharmacological advantages over neostigmine, including faster reversal of neuromuscular blockade and fewer adverse effects. However, the economic impact of sugammadex remains controversial due to the considerable heterogeneity of study designs and clinical settings in previous studies. In a post-hoc analysis of a randomized controlled trial, we evaluated patients who underwent elective surgeries and general anesthesia with endotracheal intubation in a medical center in Taiwan between March 2020 and August 2020. Patients were divided into either the sugammadex or neostigmine group based on the neuromuscular blocking drug used. Propensity score matching was used to balance the baseline patient characteristics between the two groups. The patient’s recovery from anesthesia and the putative cost-effectiveness of sugammadex versus neostigmine was assessed. Derived cost-effectiveness using personnel costs in the operating room and the post-anesthesia care unit was estimated using multiple linear regression models. A total of 2587 and 1784 patients were included before and after matching, respectively. Time to endotracheal extubation was significantly shorter in the sugammadex group (mean 6.0 ± standard deviation 5.3 min) compared with the neostigmine group (6.6 ± 6.3 min; p = 0.0032). In addition, the incidence of bradycardia was significantly lower in the sugammadex group (10.2%) compared with the neostigmine group (16.9%; p < 0.001). However, the total costs were significantly lower in the neostigmine group (50.6 ± 21.4 United States dollars) compared with the sugammadex group (212.0 ± 49.5 United States dollars). Despite improving postoperative recovery, the benefits of sugammadex did not outweigh its higher costs compared with neostigmine, possibly due to the low costs of labor in Taiwan’s healthcare system.

Association between choice of reversal agent for neuromuscular block and postoperative pulmonary complications in patients at increased risk undergoing non-emergency surgery: STIL-STRONGER, a multicentre matched cohort study

BACKGROUND

Postoperative pulmonary complications are a source of morbidity after major surgery. In patients at increased risk of postoperative pulmonary complications we sought to assess the association between neuromuscular blocking agent reversal agent and development of postoperative pulmonary complications.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective matched cohort study, a secondary analysis of data collected in the prior STRONGER study. Data were obtained from the Multicenter Perioperative Outcomes Group. Included patients were aged 18 yr and older undergoing non-emergency surgery under general anaesthesia with tracheal intubation with neuromuscular block and reversal, who were predicted to be at elevated risk of postoperative pulmonary complications. This risk was defined as American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status 3 or 4 in patients undergoing either intrathoracic or intra-abdominal surgery who were either aged >80 yr or underwent a procedure lasting >2 h. Cohorts were defined by reversal with neostigmine or sugammadex. The primary composite outcome was the occurrence of pneumonia or respiratory failure.

RESULTS

After matching by institution, sex, age (within 5 yr), body mass index, anatomic region of surgery, comorbidities, and neuromuscular blocking agent, 3817 matched pairs remained. The primary postoperative pulmonary complications outcome occurred in 224 neostigmine cases vs 100 sugammadex cases (5.9% vs 2.6%, odds ratio 0.41, P<0.01). After adjustment for unbalanced covariates, the adjusted odds ratio for the association between sugammadex use and the primary outcome was 0.39 (P<0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

In a cohort of patients at increased risk for pulmonary complications compared with neostigmine, use of sugammadex was independently associated with reduced risk of subsequent development of pneumonia or respiratory failure.

2023 American Society of Anesthesiologists Practice Guidelines for Monitoring and Antagonism of Neuromuscular Blockade: A Report by the American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Neuromuscular Blockade

These practice guidelines provide evidence-based recommendations on the management of neuromuscular monitoring and antagonism of neuromuscular blocking agents during and after general anesthesia. The guidance focuses primarily on the type and site of monitoring and the process of antagonizing neuromuscular blockade to reduce residual neuromuscular blockade.

Risk factors for administration of additional reversal following neuromuscular blockade with rocuronium in children: A retrospective case-control study

BACKGROUND

The prevalence and risk factors for residual neuromuscular blockade in children remain poorly characterized. We hypothesize that specific patient and anesthetic risk factors may be associated with the administration of additional reversal in children following initial reversal of rocuronium with neostigmine.

METHODS

Our electronic health record was queried for patients <18 years of age who received rocuronium and reversal with neostigmine from 2017 through 2020. Patients receiving other nondepolarizing neuromuscular blocking drugs were excluded. The outcome of interest was defined as the administration of additional neostigmine or sugammadex following primary reversal with neostigmine. Time between the last dose of rocuronium and initial dose of neostigmine, and the cumulative dose of rocuronium were dichotomized. These were combined with other covariates including age, weight, sex, racial group, procedure type, ASA physical status, >1 rocuronium dose administered during the procedure, initial neostigmine dose <0.05 mg kg^-1 , use of train-of-four monitoring, duration of anesthesia, inpatient or outpatient, emergency case, neuromuscular disease, and extremes of weight, to assess possible associations with the primary outcome.

RESULTS

During the study period, 101/6373 (1.58%) patients received rocuronium and additional reversal. Dichotomization of time between last dose of rocuronium and neostigmine yielded <28 min since the last dose of rocuronium and cumulative dose of rocuronium >0.45 mg kg^-1  hr^-1 . These were associated with the administration of additional reversal with an OR 1.52 (95% CI, 1.08-2.35) and OR 1.71 (95% CI, 1.10-2.67), respectively. Other risk factors included an initial neostigmine dose <0.05 mg kg^-1 , OR 4.98 (95% CI, 2.84-6.49), and African American race, OR 1.78 (95% CI, 1.07-2.87).

CONCLUSION

Risk factors associated with the administration of additional reversal included time <28 min from the last dose of rocuronium to initial dose of neostigmine, cumulative dose of rocuronium >0.45 mg kg^-1  hr^-1 , initial neostigmine dose <0.05 mg kg^-1 , and African American race.

Appropriate dosing of sugammadex for reversal of rocuronium-/vecuronium-induced muscle relaxation in morbidly obese patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Objective

To conduct a meta-analysis to compare different dosing scalars of sugammadex in a morbidly obese population for reversal of neuromuscular blockade (NMB).

Methods

PubMed®, ClinicalTrials.gov, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and Google Scholar were searched for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing lower-dose sugammadex using ideal body weight (IBW) or corrected body weight (CBW) as dosing scalars with standard-dose sugammadex based on total body weight (TBW) among morbidly obese people after NMB. Mean difference with SD was used to estimate the results.

Results

The analysis included five RCT with a total of 444 morbidly obese patients. The reversal time was significantly longer in patients receiving sugammadex with dosing scalar based on IBW than in patients receiving sugammadex with dosing scalar based on TBW (mean difference 55.77 s, 95% confidence interval [CI] 32.01, 79.53 s), but it was not significantly different between patients receiving sugammadex with dosing scalars based on CBW versus TBW (mean difference 2.28 s, 95% CI –10.34, 14.89 s).

Conclusion

Compared with standard-dose sugammadex based on TBW, lower-dose sugammadex based on IBW had 56 s longer reversal time whereas lower-dose sugammadex based on CBW had a comparable reversal time.

Effects of Sugammadex and Neostigmine on Post-operative Nausea and Vomiting in ENT Surgery

We aim to compare the effects of sugammadex on postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) with those of neostigmine–atropine mixture. A total of 136 American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) I or II patients, aged 18 to 65 years who underwent ear, nose, and throat (ENT) surgery under general anesthesia, were recruited in this prospective, randomized, double-blind study to receive either sugammadex 2 mg/kg or neostigmine 2.5 mg with atropine 1 mg for reversal of neuromuscular blockade. PONV scores and the need for the rescue of anti-emetic were assessed upon arrival in the post-anesthesia recovery unit and at 1-, 6-, 12-, and 24-h post-reversal. The incidence of PONV was significantly lower in patients who received sugammadex (3%) compared to patients who received neostigmine–atropine mixture (20%) at 6 h postoperative (p = 0.013). The incidence of PONV was comparable at other time intervals. None of the sugammadex recipients require rescue antiemetic whereas two patients from the neostigmine–atropine group required rescue antiemetic at 1 and 6 h post-reversal, respectively. The need for the rescue antiemetic was not statistically significant. We concluded that reversal of neuromuscular blockade with sugammadex showed lower incidence of PONV compared to neostigmine–atropine combination in the first 6 h post-reversal.

A randomized trial evaluating the safety profile of sugammadex in high surgical risk ASA physical class 3 or 4 participants

BACKGROUND

The aim of this randomized, double-blind trial was to evaluate the safety and tolerability profile, including cardiac safety, of sugammadex-mediated recovery from neuromuscular block in participants undergoing surgery who met the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Physical Class 3 or 4 criteria. Specifically, this study assessed the impact of sugammadex on cardiac adverse events (AEs) and other prespecified AEs of clinical interest.

METHODS

Participants meeting ASA Class 3 and 4 criteria were stratified by ASA Class and NMBA (rocuronium or vecuronium) then randomized to one of the following: 1) Moderate neuromuscular block, sugammadex 2 mg/kg; 2) Moderate neuromuscular block, neostigmine and glycopyrrolate (neostigmine/glycopyrrolate); 3) Deep neuromuscular block, sugammadex 4 mg/kg; 4) Deep neuromuscular block, sugammadex 16 mg/kg (rocuronium only). Primary endpoints included incidences of treatment-emergent (TE) sinus bradycardia, TE sinus tachycardia and other TE cardiac arrhythmias.

RESULTS

Of 344 participants randomized, 331 received treatment (61% male, BMI 28.5 ± 5.3 kg/m², age 69 ± 11 years). Incidence of TE sinus bradycardia was significantly lower in the sugammadex 2 mg/kg group vs neostigmine/glycopyrrolate. The incidence of TE sinus tachycardia was significantly lower in the sugammadex 2 and 4 mg/kg groups vs neostigmine/glycopyrrolate. No significant differences in other TE cardiac arrythmias were seen between sugammadex groups and neostigmine/glycopyrrolate. There were no cases of adjudicated anaphylaxis or hypersensitivity reactions in this study.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with neostigmine/glycopyrrolate, incidence of TE sinus bradycardia was significantly lower with sugammadex 2 mg/kg and incidence of TE sinus tachycardia was significantly lower with sugammadex 2 mg/kg and 4 mg/kg. These results support the safety of sugammadex for reversing rocuronium- or vecuronium-induced moderate and deep neuromuscular block in ASA Class 3 or 4 participants.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03346057 .

Rocuronium Reversal in the Emergency Department: Retrospective Evaluation of Hemodynamic Instability Following Administration of Sugammadex Versus Neostigmine With Glycopyrrolate

BACKGROUND

Rocuronium is an intermediate-acting non-depolarizing neuromuscular blocking agent frequently used in the emergency department for rapid sequence intubation. The prolonged effects of rocuronium may prevent the ability to conduct a meaningful neurological examination, thereby delaying appropriate diagnosis and treatment. Sugammadex and neostigmine are pharmacologic agents commonly used to reverse rocuronium. The safety of sugammadex versus neostigmine with glycopyrrolate for the reversal of rocuronium in the emergency department has not been well described.

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate the occurrence of hemodynamic instability post-administration of sugammadex versus neostigmine with glycopyrrolate in the emergency department for the reversal of rocuronium.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study conducted among adult patients that received sugammadex or neostigmine with glycopyrrolate in the emergency department for the reversal of rocuronium. The primary outcome was occurrence of hemodynamic instability that required escalation of treatment. Secondary outcomes included occurrence of hypotensive, bradycardic, or cardiac arrest events.

RESULTS

A total of 37 patients met inclusion criteria (n = 10, sugammadex; n = 27, neostigmine). There was no difference between the two groups in regard to hemodynamic instability that required escalation of treatment within 30 minutes after receiving either sugammadex or neostigmine with glycopyrrolate (P = .557).

CONCLUSION

There was no difference between the two groups in regard to occurrence of hemodynamic instability that required escalation of treatment. Given the small sample size, future studies are warranted to further delineate the safety of sugammadex and neostigmine with glycopyrrolate for the reversal of rocuronium in the emergency department.

Earlier and lower dose administration of sugammadex: A randomised placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Sugammadex allows for rapid reversal of muscle relaxation after the use of rocuronium or vecuronium. The lowest recommended dose is 2 mg kg-1 intravenously when there are two twitches during the train-of-four stimulation.

OBJECTIVE

To study the efficacy and risks of a lower dose of sugammadex administered earlier.

DESIGN

Monocentric randomised controlled double-blind study.

SETTING

Academic hospital.

PATIENTS

Eighty patients were enrolled and randomised in 8 groups of 10 patients, 56 were finally evaluated.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were distributed in two clusters constituting four groups each. In the first cluster, injections were administered after the return of one twitch with the train-of-four (TOF1). In the second cluster, injections were delivered after the return of two twitches with the TOF (TOF2). We created four groups in each cluster for different dosages: placebo, 0.5, 1 or 2 mg kg-1.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Time between the injection of sugammadex and full recovery (TOF ratio > 0.9) that is expressed in minutes.

RESULTS

Fifty-six successive patients were assessed between February and August 2018. The difference to TOF greater than 0.9 was not statistically significant between groups with the same dose administered at different times (F value = 0.001, P value = 0.975). There was a significant difference between groups with a different dosage administered at the same time (F ratio = 28.34; P value <0.0001). Concerning the time to TOF greater than 0.9 from the time point of TOF1, the timing of the dosages were statistically significant using log rank test (P < 0.0001). No patient presented a reparalysis.

CONCLUSION

No difference between injecting sugammadex at TOF1 or TOF2 was found regarding time to full recovery. Difference regarding sugammadex quantity was found and compatible with other studies.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov: 'BRIDION_ERASME', EudraCT: 2017-005074-19.

Data and meta-analysis for choosing sugammadex or neostigmine for routine reversal of rocuronium block in adult patients

This meta-analysis was conducted to define clinical efficacy and side effects (bradycardia and post-operative nausea and vomiting [PONV]) in trials comparing sugammadex with neostigmine or placebo for reversal of rocuronium-induced neuromuscular blockade in adult patients. A search of PubMed, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Library electronic databases identified 111 clinical trials for potential inclusion. We performed a meta-analysis of 32 studies that quantitatively compared the efficacy and side effects of sugammadex with either neostigmine or placebo in adult patients requiring general anesthesia. Analyzed outcomes were reversal time, anesthesia time, duration of stay in the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU), and the occurrence of bradycardia or PONV. Odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for binary data. Mean differences and 95% CI were calculated for continuous outcome data. Meta-analyses were performed using random and fixed-effects models. Heterogeneity across studies was assessed using Cochran's Q test and the I2 statistic. Quantification of these outcomes can better inform anesthetists and health systems of the relative costs and benefits of the two reversal agents. This information also forms a basis for a comparative cost analysis in a co-submitted manuscript [1].