Postoperative residual block after intermediate-acting neuromuscular blocking drugs

Residual neuromuscular block in the postanaesthesia care unit: a single-centre prospective observational study and systematic review

BACKGROUND

Concerns regarding residual neuromuscular block (RNMB) have persisted since the introduction of neuromuscular blocking agents, with reported incidences in the 21st century up to 50%. Advances in neuromuscular transmission (NMT) monitoring and the introduction of sugammadex have addressed this issue, but the impact of these developments remains unclear.

METHODS

This prospective observational study evaluated RNMB in 500 surgical patients in a large Dutch teaching hospital with readily available quantitative NMT monitoring and reversal agents. The anaesthetic technique and intraoperative NMT monitoring were independently chosen by the attending anaesthesiologist. Acceleromyography was performed upon arrival in the PACU for patients who received nondepolarising neuromuscular blocking agents. RNMB was defined as a train-of-four ratio (TOFR) <0.9. A systematic review was conducted to analyse trends in RNMB in contemporary practice.

RESULTS

Out of 500 patients, 11 (2.2%) had a TOFR <0.9. Intraoperative NMT monitoring was performed in 77.6% of patients, and sugammadex was administered to 38% of patients. No patient received neostigmine. The only difference was an automatically recorded TOFR ≥0.9 at the end of surgery in 61.1% in the non-RNMB group compared with 18.2% in the RNMB group (P=0.009). Our systematic review identified incidences ranging from 3.5% to 53.3% since 2000, with a decreasing trend in Europe and North America.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of residual neuromuscular block in the PACU was 2.2%. This suggests significant improvement in the prevention of residual neuromuscular block and stresses the importance of rigorous neuromuscular transmission monitoring and adequate use of reversal agents.

Neuromuscular block: Monitoring, reversal, and residual blockade in small animals

Nondepolarizing neuromuscular blocking agents are used frequently during ophthalmic surgery of dogs and cats. Residual neuromuscular block (NMB)-impaired neuromuscular function at recovery from anesthesia-is a main concern when these agents are used in small animals. In humans, residual NMB reduces the ability to protect the airway (swallow and cough) and increases the incidence of hypoxia and upper airway collapse after recovery from anesthesia. In dogs, impaired neuromuscular function of the larynx can be detected even after common indicators of neuromuscular function suggest that recovery from NMB is complete. Objective monitoring of NMB is a simple, cost-effective strategy to minimize the risk of residual NMB. This review summarizes relevant aspects of monitoring and reversal of NMB, and strategies to minimize the risk of residual NMB in clinical practice of small animals.

Postoperative pulmonary complications after sugammadex reversal of neuromuscular blockade: a systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis

BACKGROUND

Sugammadex has been reported to lower the incidence of postoperative residual neuromuscular blockade. Despite the advantages, until recently the effects of sugammadex on postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) were controversial. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine whether reversal with sugammadex was associated with a lower risk of PPCs compared with neostigmine.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception to May 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing PPCs in patients receiving sugammadex or neostigmine as reversal agent at the end of surgery were included. The primary outcomes focused on PPCs including desaturation, pneumonia, atelectasis, noninvasive ventilation (NIV) and reintubation. Trial sequential analysis was performed on the primary outcomes to confirm whether firm evidence was reached.

RESULTS

Meta-analysis of included studies showed that the rate of desaturation (43.2% vs 45.0%, RR = 0.82; 95% CI 0.63 to 1.05; p = 0.11) were comparable between the two groups. When looking at other primary outcomes, significantly lower risk of pneumonia (1.37% vs 2.45%, RR = 0.65; 95% CI 0.49 to 0.85; p = 0.002), atelectasis (24.6% vs 30.4%, RR = 0.64; 95% CI 0.42 to 0.98; p = 0.04), NIV (1.37% vs 2.33%, RR = 0.65; 95% CI 0.43 to 0.98; p = 0.04) and reintubation (0.99% vs 1.65%, RR = 0.62; 95% CI 0.43 to 0.91; p = 0.01) in the sugammadex group were detected compared with the neostigmine group.

CONCLUSIONS

We concluded that sugammadex is more effective at reducing the incidence of PPCs including pneumonia, atelectasis, NIV and reintubation compared with neostigmine. Further evidence, preferably from RCTs, is required to confirm these findings.

Comparison of neostigmine and sugammadex for hemodynamic parameters in neurointerventional anesthesia

Introduction

Hemodynamic stability is important during neurointerventional procedures. However, ICP or blood pressure may increase due to endotracheal extubation. The aim of this study was to compare the hemodynamic effects of sugammadex and neostigmine with atropine in neurointerventional procedures during emergence from anesthesia.

Methods

Patients undergoing neurointerventional procedures were allocated to the sugammadex group (Group S) and the neostigmine group (Group N). Group S was administered IV 2 mg/kg sugammadex when a train-of-four (TOF) count of 2 was present, and Group N was administered neostigmine 50 mcg/kg with atropine 0.2 mg/kg at a TOF count of 2. We recorded heart rate, systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, mean blood pressure (MAP), and peripheral arterial oxygen saturation during administration of the reverse agent and at 2, 5, 10, 15, 30, 120 min, and 24 h thereafter. The primary outcome was blood pressure and heart rate change after the reversal agent was given. The secondary outcomes were systolic blood pressure variability standard deviation (a measure of the amount of variation or dispersion of a set of values), systolic blood pressure variability-successive variation (square root of the average squared difference between successive blood pressure measurements), nicardipine use, time-to-TOF ratio ≥0.9 after the administration of reversal agent, and time from the administration of the reversal agent to tracheal extubation.

Results

A total of 31 patients were randomized to sugammadex, and 30 patients were randomized to neostigmine. Except for anesthesia time, there were no significant differences in any of the clinical characteristics between the two groups. The results demonstrated that the increase in MAP from period A to B was significantly greater in Group N than in Group S (regression coefficient = -10, 95% confidence interval = -17.3 to -2.7, P = 0.007). The MAP level was significantly increased from period A to B in the neostigmine group (95.1 vs. 102.4 mm Hg, P = 0.015), but it was not altered in Group S. In contrast, the change in HR from periods A to B was not significantly different between groups.

Conclusion

We suggest that sugammadex is a better option than neostigmine in interventional neuroradiological procedures due to the shorter extubation time and more stable hemodynamic change during emergence.

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.

Feasibility of Nonintubated Anesthesia for Lumboperitoneal Shunt Implantation

Lumboperitoneal shunt (LPS) implantation is a cerebrospinal fluid diversion therapy for the communicating type of normal-pressure hydrocephalus (NPH); NPH mainly affects older adults. However, endotracheal intubation for mechanical ventilation with muscle relaxant increases perioperative and postoperative risks for this population. Based on knowledge from nonintubated thoracoscopic surgery, which has been widely performed in recent years, we describe a novel application of nonintubated anesthesia for LPS implantation in five patients. Anesthesia without muscle relaxants, with a laryngeal mask in one patient and a high-flow nasal cannula in four patients, was used to maintain spontaneous breathing during the surgery. The mean anesthesia time was 103.8 min, and the mean operative duration was 55.8 min. All patients recovered from anesthesia uneventfully. In our experience, nonintubated LPS surgery appears to be a promising and safe surgical technique for appropriately selected patients with NPH.

The Use of Muscle Relaxants and Reversal Agents in a Setting Without Cost Restrictions: Experience from a Tertiary Academic Hospital in the Netherlands

Introduction

Material and Methods

Results

Conclusion

Quantitative Neuromuscular Monitoring With Train-of-Four Ratio During Elective Surgery: A Prospective, Observational Study

OBJECTIVES

Postoperative residual neuromuscular block (PRNB) is a serious problem that can cause death after surgery. It was aimed to evaluate the adequacy of neuromuscular block (NMB) during endotracheal intubation and the adequacy of neuromuscular recovery during clinically extubation decision and follow-up with the train-of-four ratio (TOFR) using quantitative monitoring.

METHODS

This study has a prospective-observational single-blind study design. A total of 205 adult patients who underwent elective surgery, who had American Society of Anesthesiologists physical statuses I to III, and who were intubated with neuromuscular blocking agent under general anesthesia were included in the study. Train-of-four ratio measurements were provided single-blindly by another anesthesiologist outside the team. The TOFRs were measured at the time of intubation (TOFRind), before reversal agent administration (TOFRpre-rev) and after (TOFRpost-rev), at the time of extubation (TOFRext), and on admission to the postoperative care unit (TOFRPACU). If clinical signs of PRNB appeared, the recovery protocol was applied and then TOFRrec was measured. Postoperative respiratory complications were also evaluated for the first 24 hours after surgery.

RESULTS

Endotracheal intubation was performed in 41.5% of the patients (n = 85) without adequate NMB. In 48.8% (n = 100) of the patients, adequate recovery (TOFRext ˂0.9) was not available at the time of extubation. Adequate TOFRPACU rate was found to be significantly higher in those who did not receive additional neuromuscular blocking agent doses (P < 0.001). In the recovery protocol, low-dose sugammadex administered to patients with clinical signs of PRNB significantly increased the TOFRrec rate compared with neostigmine (P ˂ 0.001). The first 24 hours, postoperative respiratory complication rate was 5.4% (n = 11), and the most common hypoxemia was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately half of the patients are intubated without sufficient NMB and extubated without sufficient neuromuscular recovery. This suggests that routine use of quantitative neuromuscular monitoring is necessary for patient safety.

Vigilance: the behavioral impact of quantitative monitoring on administration and antagonism of neuromuscular blocking agents

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to determine whether use of acceleromyography (1) changes dosing of neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBAs), and (2) increases the time between neostigmine administration and extubation, when compared with subjective assessment of neuromuscular blockade.

METHODS

For this retrospective study, data were collected from patient electronic medical records. Patients were included if they had received an NMBA as part of a general anesthetic in 2013 and 2014. Data were analyzed by category of monitoring device: quantitative monitor (acceleromyograph [AMG]) or subjective device (peripheral nerve stimulator [PNS]). Outcomes measured were the total dose of NMBA administered and, the timing of the last dose of NMBA and anticholinesterase relative to tracheal extubation.

RESULTS

Results from multivariate models showed that use of acceleromyography was not associated with a change in the total dose of NMBA administered. In contrast, the number of times any monitor was used, as determined by the frequency with which the train-of-four count (TOFC) was recorded, correlated with the administration of greater amounts of rocuronium (P < 0.01) and vecuronium (P < 0.01). The use of acceleromyography did not prolong the time interval between neostigmine administration and tracheal extubation. The number of times any monitor was used during an anesthetic was associated with a decrease in this time interval. The interval decreased an average of 2.7 min each successive time the TOFC was recorded (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The data presented provides insight about the behavioral engineering inherent to the practice of anesthesiology. Introduction of neuromuscular blockade assessment appeared to increase provider vigilance in dosing of NMBAs-regardless of assessment method. The frequency of intraoperative monitoring (quantitative or subjective) was associated with an increased total dose of NMBA administered and decreased time interval between the last dose of neostigmine and extubation.

Provider variability in the intraoperative use of neuromuscular blocking agents: a retrospective multicentre cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To assess variability in the intraoperative use of non-depolarising neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBAs) across individual anaesthesia providers, surgeons and hospitals.

DESIGN

Retrospective observational cohort study.

SETTING

Two major tertiary referral centres, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.

PARTICIPANTS

265 537 adult participants undergoing non-cardiac surgery between October 2005 and September 2017.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

We analysed the variances in NMBA use across 958 anaesthesia and 623 surgical providers, across anaesthesia provider types (anaesthesia residents, certified registered nurse anaesthetists, attendings) and across hospitals using multivariable-adjusted mixed effects logistic regression. Intraclass correlations (ICC) were calculated to further quantify the variability in NMBA use that was unexplained by other covariates. Procedure-specific subgroup analyses were performed.

RESULTS

NMBAs were used in 183 242 (69%) surgical cases. Variances in NMBA use were significantly higher among individual surgeons than among anaesthesia providers (variance 1.32 (95% CI 1.06 to 1.60) vs 0.24 (95% CI 0.19 to 0.28), p<0.001). Procedure-specific subgroup analysis of hernia repairs, spine surgeries and mastectomies confirmed our findings: the total variance in NMBA use that was unexplained by the covariate model was higher for surgeons versus anaesthesia providers (ICC 37.0% vs 13.0%, 69.7% vs 25.5%, 69.8% vs 19.5%, respectively; p<0.001). Variances in NMBA use were also partially explained by the anaesthesia provider's hospital network (Massachusetts General Hospital: variance 0.35 (95% CI 0.27 to 0.43) vs Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center: 0.15 (95% CI 0.12 to 0.19); p<0.001). Across provider types, surgeons showed the highest variance, and anaesthesia residents showed the lowest variance in NMBA use.

CONCLUSIONS

There is wide variability across individual surgeons and anaesthesia providers and institutions in the use of NMBAs, which could not sufficiently be explained by a large number of patient-related and procedure-related characteristics, but may instead be driven by preference. Surgeons may have a stronger influence on a key aspect of anaesthesia management than anticipated.

First genome-wide association study on rocuronium dose requirements shows association with SLCO1A2

Background

Rocuronium, a common neuromuscular blocking agent, is mainly excreted unchanged in urine (10–25%) and bile (>70%). Age, sex, liver blood flow, smoking, medical conditions, and ethnic background can affect its pharmacological actions. However, reasons for the wide variation in rocuronium requirements are mostly unknown. We hypothesised that pharmacogenetic factors might explain part of the variation.

Methods

One thousand women undergoing surgery for breast cancer were studied. Anaesthesia was maintained with propofol (50–100 μg kg⁻¹ min⁻¹) and remifentanil (0.05–0.25 μg kg⁻¹ min⁻¹). Neuromuscular block was maintained with rocuronium to keep the train-of-four ratio at 0–10%. DNA was extracted from peripheral blood and genotyped with a next-generation genotyping array. The genome-wide association study (GWAS) was conducted using an additive linear regression model with PLINK software. The FINEMAP tool and data from the Genotype-Tissue Expression project v8 were utilised to study the locus further.

Results

The final patient population comprised 918 individuals. Of the clinical variables tested, age, BMI, ASA physical status, and total dose of propofol correlated significantly (all P<0.001) with the rocuronium dose in a linear regression model. The GWAS highlighted one genome-wide significant locus in chromosome 12. The single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) with the most significant evidence of association were located in or near SLCO1A2. The two top SNPs, rs7967354 (P=5.3e⁻¹¹) and rs11045995 (P=1.4e⁻¹⁰), and the clinical variables accounted for 41% of the variability in rocuronium dosage.

Conclusions

Genetic variation in the gene SLCO1A2, encoding OATP1A2, an uptake transporter, accounted for 4% of the variability in rocuronium consumption. The underlying mechanism remains unknown.

The future of neuromuscular blocking agents

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The present review provides a summary of the literature on recent development of new neuromuscular blocking agents and presents clinically well established and new reversal agents.

RECENT FINDINGS

Anesthesiologists are still waiting for the ideal neuromuscular blocking agent with a succinylcholine-like rapid onset and offset without side effects. Recent drug development led to a new series of neuromuscular compounds, called the chlorofumarates such as gantacurium, CW002, and CW011. These drugs have a promising pharmacodynamic profile; importantly, they can rapidly be reversed by L-cysteine adduction without relevant side effects. In addition, a new spectrum of reversal agents are currently examined in preclinical studies: adamgammadex sodium, a modified γ-cyclodextrin derivate that forms an inactive tight inclusion complex with rocuronium or vecuronium and calabadions, capable of reversing both benzylisoquinolines and steroidal neuromuscular blocking agents.

SUMMARY

Although the recent advancements in neuromuscular research are very promising, to date, the presented drugs are currently not available for clinical use. Clinical studies will determine the role of these developments in anesthesia practice. Therefore, well established combinations such as rocuronium-sugammadex are popular in clinical practice to offer quick paralysis for intubation and to optimize surgical conditions, while providing a fast neuromuscular recovery at the end of surgery.

Thirty-Day Postoperative Outcomes Following Sugammadex Use in Colorectal Surgery Patients; Retrospective Study

Purpose: Sugammadex rapidly reverses muscle relaxation compared to acetylcholinesterase inhibitors. The long-term outcomes of sugammadex, however, are not well known. We compared 30-day postoperative outcomes following sugammadex and acetylcholinesterase inhibitor use in colorectal surgery patients. Patients and methods: Colorectal surgical patients older than 21 were included in this retrospective study, and were dichotomized according to use of reversal agents, sugammadex (group S), and acetylcholinesterase inhibitor (group A). We assessed 30-day postoperative outcomes, including total length of hospital stay, length of postoperative hospital stay, readmission rate, and delayed discharge rate. Additional parameters included postanesthetic care unit stay time, time to first successful oral intake, unforeseen intensive care unit (ICU) admission rate, postoperative pulmonary complications, and mortality. Results: Among a total of 585 patients, 157 patients remained in each group after propensity score matching. Total length of hospital stay, length of postoperative hospital stay, and readmission rates did not differ between the two groups, while the incidence of delayed discharge was significantly lower in group S (23 (15%) vs. 40 (25%), p = 0.017). Other outcomes did not differ between the two groups. Conclusion: We found no difference in 30-day postoperative outcomes following sugammadex and acetylcholinesterase inhibitor use. The only difference between these treatments was the associated incidence of delayed discharge, which was lower in group S.

Neuromuscular blockers and reversal agents and their impact on anesthesia practice

Neuromuscular blockers have long been an intricate part of the anesthesia regimen. The scientific progress in pharmacology and physiology has strengthened their clinical relevance, has helped to delineate with precision their medical role, and has enhanced the safety and effectiveness of their use. New frontiers in research will define further the role of these agents in modern anesthesia practice and guide their expanding and discrete clinical applications.

Reversal agents: do we need to administer with neuromuscular monitoring - an observational study

Background and Aims

In clinical practice, in the majority of patients, recovery from the effect of muscle relaxants is assessed using subjective methods such as head lift, eye-opening, or by sustained hand grip after giving anticholinesterases (neostigmine) at the end of surgery. We planned a prospective observational cohort study to test the hypothesis that objective neuromuscular monitoring can help us in avoiding the use of anticholinesterases for reversal.

Methods

The patients posted for surgery of <2 h duration were included in the study. The cohort of patients was formed on the basis of those who were exposed to objective neuromuscular monitoring of recovery (train-of-four [TOF] ratio of 0.9 or more; exposed group) and the patients who were not exposed to objective neuromuscular monitoring (non-exposed group) acting as a control. Using objective neuromuscular monitoring, the time required for recovery from muscle relaxation when neostigmine was not given for reversal was noted and it was then compared with that of the control group.

Results

A total of 190 patients were enrolled over a period of 3 years. With the use of TOF ratio of 0.9 for extubation, patients safely recovered from neuromuscular blockade, without using neostigmine, with no difference in the mean recovery time (14.48 ± 1.138 min) as compared to the control group (12.14 ± 1.067 min, P = 0.139). There was no incidence of reintubation in post-operative period.

Conclusion

With objective neuromuscular monitoring, we can ensure complete recovery from the neuromuscular blockade while avoiding the use of anticholinesterases.

Clinically suspected anaphylaxis induced by sugammadex in a patient with Weaver syndrome undergoing restrictive mammoplasty surgery: A case report with the literature review

RATIONALE

Sugammadex is a cylodextrin derivate that encapsulates steroidal neuromuscular blocker agents and is reported as a safe and well-tolerated drug. In this case report, we present a patient who developed grade 3 anaphylaxis just after sugammadex administration.

PATIENT CONCERNS

A 22-year-old woman with diagnosis of Weaver syndrome was scheduled for bilateral mammoplasty and resection of unilateral accessory breast tissue resection. Anesthesia was induced and maintained by propofol, rocuronium, and remifentanil. At the end of the operation, sugammadex was administered and resulted in initially hypotension and bradycardia then the situation worsened by premature ventricular contraction and bigeminy with tachycardia, bronchospasm, and hypoxia.

DIAGNOSIS

The Ring and Messmer clinical severity scale grade 3 anaphylactic reaction occurred just after sugammadex injection and the patient developed prolonged hypotension with recurrent cardiac arrhythmias in postoperative 12 hours.

INTERVENTIONS

Treatment was initiated bolus injections of ephedrine, epinephrine, lidocaine, steroids and antihistaminic and continued with lidocaine bolus dosages and norepinephrine infusion for the postoperative period.

OUTCOMES

The general condition of the patient improved to normal 3 hours after the sugammadex injection, and she was moved to the intensive care unit. At 2nd and 8th hours of intensive care unit follow-up, she developed premature ventricular contraction and bigeminy with the heart rate of 130 to 135 beats/min, which returned to sinus rhythm with 50 mg lidocaine. After that, no symptoms were observed and the patient was discharged to plastic surgery clinic at the following day.

LESSONS

Sugammadex may result in life-treating anaphylactic reaction even in a patient who did not previously expose to drug. Moreover, prolonged cardiovascular collapse and cardiac arrhythmias may occur.

Preparing for the unexpected: special considerations and complications after sugammadex administration

Sugammadex, a modified gamma-cyclodextrin, has changed clinical practice of neuromuscular reversal dramatically. With the introduction of this selective relaxant binding agent, rapid and reliable neuromuscular reversal from any depth of block became possible. Sugammadex can reverse neuromuscular blockade without the muscarinic side effects typically associated with the administration of acetylcholinesterase inhibitors. However, what remained unchanged is the incidence of residual neuromuscular blockade. It is known that sugammadex cannot always prevent its occurrence, if appropriate dosing is not chosen based on the level of neuromuscular paralysis prior to administration determined by objective neuromuscular monitoring. Alternatively, excessive doses of sugammadex administered in an attempt to ensure full and sustained reversal may affect the effectiveness of rocuronium in case of immediate reoperation or reintubation. In such emergent scenarios that require onset of rapid and reliable neuromuscular blockade, the summary of product characteristics (package insert) recommends using benzylisoquinolinium neuromuscular blocking agents or a depolarizing agent. However, if rapid intubation is required, succinylcholine has a significant number of side effects, and benzylisoquinolinium agents may not have the rapid onset required. Therefore, prior administration of sugammadex introduces a new set of potential problems that require new solutions. This novel reversal agent thus presents new challenges and anesthesiologists must familiarize themselves with specific issues with its use (e.g., bleeding risk, hypermagnesemia, hypothermia). This review will address sugammadex administration in such special clinical situations.

Respiratory events with sugammadex vs. neostigmine following laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: a prospective pilot study assessing neuromuscular reversal strategies

Abdominal surgery in obese patients may be associated with pulmonary morbidity, and mortality. Some patients may arrive in the PACU with residual paralysis. The purpose of this study was to find out if there was an association between the type of muscle relaxant reversal agent and the development of postoperative respiratory events in patients undergoing laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy surgery.

METHODS

From September 2012 to February 2013, in a prospective randomized pilot study, two different muscle relaxant reversal agents were administered at the end of surgery in 57 patients undergoing laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: sugammadex 2 mg/kg (32 patients) vs. neostigmine 2.5 mg (25 patients). We compared the occurrence of early and late respiratory events/complications by the type of reversal agent. Postoperative respiratory rate, oxyhemoglobin saturation (SpO₂), number of patients with SpO₂ lower than 95% in PACU, the minimum value of SpO₂ in PACU, train-of four counts (TOF) before reversal, unexpected ICU admissions, duration of hospitalization and incidence of reintubation were recorded.

RESULTS

SpO₂ in the PACU was significantly lower in the neostigmine group - 95.80 (± 0.014)) vs. in sugammadex group - 96.72 (± 0.011) (p < 0.01), despite a lower TOF count measured in the sugammadex group before reversal, meaning a deeper level of residual relaxation in this group before the administration of the reversal agent (2.53 ± 0.98 vs. 3.48 ± 0.58 p < 0.01). Also, the minimal SpO₂ was significantly lower in the PACU in the neostigmine group: 93% vs. 94% (p = 0.01). Respiratory rates were not different. After the administration of reversal, both groups had TOF counts of 4 with no fade assessed visually. There were no postoperative respiratory events or complications.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of sugammadex (as compared to neostigmine) as a reversal agent following laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy surgery was associated with higher postoperative SpO₂ despite the lower TOF count before the administration of reversal agent. Despite the statistical difference in SpO₂, its clinical importance seems to be minimal. The lack of difference in the other measured variables may stem from the small number of patients studied (pilot).

Efficacy and safety of sugammadex versus neostigmine in reversing neuromuscular blockade in adults

BACKGROUND

Acetylcholinesterase inhibitors, such as neostigmine, have traditionally been used for reversal of non-depolarizing neuromuscular blocking agents. However, these drugs have significant limitations, such as indirect mechanisms of reversal, limited and unpredictable efficacy, and undesirable autonomic responses. Sugammadex is a selective relaxant-binding agent specifically developed for rapid reversal of non-depolarizing neuromuscular blockade induced by rocuronium. Its potential clinical benefits include fast and predictable reversal of any degree of block, increased patient safety, reduced incidence of residual block on recovery, and more efficient use of healthcare resources.

OBJECTIVES

The main objective of this review was to compare the efficacy and safety of sugammadex versus neostigmine in reversing neuromuscular blockade caused by non-depolarizing neuromuscular agents in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases on 2 May 2016: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); MEDLINE (WebSPIRS Ovid SP), Embase (WebSPIRS Ovid SP), and the clinical trials registries www.controlled-trials.com, clinicaltrials.gov, and www.centerwatch.com. We re-ran the search on 10 May 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) irrespective of publication status, date of publication, blinding status, outcomes published, or language. We included adults, classified as American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) I to IV, who received non-depolarizing neuromuscular blocking agents for an elective in-patient or day-case surgical procedure. We included all trials comparing sugammadex versus neostigmine that reported recovery times or adverse events. We included any dose of sugammadex and neostigmine and any time point of study drug administration.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened titles and abstracts to identify trials for eligibility, examined articles for eligibility, abstracted data, assessed the articles, and excluded obviously irrelevant reports. We resolved disagreements by discussion between review authors and further disagreements through consultation with the last review author. We assessed risk of bias in 10 methodological domains using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and examined risk of random error through trial sequential analysis. We used the principles of the GRADE approach to prepare an overall assessment of the quality of evidence. For our primary outcomes (recovery times to train-of-four ratio (TOFR) > 0.9), we presented data as mean differences (MDs) with 95 % confidence intervals (CIs), and for our secondary outcomes (risk of adverse events and risk of serious adverse events), we calculated risk ratios (RRs) with CIs.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 41 studies (4206 participants) in this updated review, 38 of which were new studies. Twelve trials were eligible for meta-analysis of primary outcomes (n = 949), 28 trials were eligible for meta-analysis of secondary outcomes (n = 2298), and 10 trials (n = 1647) were ineligible for meta-analysis.We compared sugammadex 2 mg/kg and neostigmine 0.05 mg/kg for reversal of rocuronium-induced moderate neuromuscular blockade (NMB). Sugammadex 2 mg/kg was 10.22 minutes (6.6 times) faster then neostigmine 0.05 mg/kg (1.96 vs 12.87 minutes) in reversing NMB from the second twitch (T2) to TOFR > 0.9 (MD 10.22 minutes, 95% CI 8.48 to 11.96; I2 = 84%; 10 studies, n = 835; GRADE: moderate quality).We compared sugammadex 4 mg/kg and neostigmine 0.07 mg/kg for reversal of rocuronium-induced deep NMB. Sugammadex 4 mg/kg was 45.78 minutes (16.8 times) faster then neostigmine 0.07 mg/kg (2.9 vs 48.8 minutes) in reversing NMB from post-tetanic count (PTC) 1 to 5 to TOFR > 0.9 (MD 45.78 minutes, 95% CI 39.41 to 52.15; I2 = 0%; two studies, n = 114; GRADE: low quality).For our secondary outcomes, we compared sugammadex, any dose, and neostigmine, any dose, looking at risk of adverse and serious adverse events. We found significantly fewer composite adverse events in the sugammadex group compared with the neostigmine group (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.74; I2 = 40%; 28 studies, n = 2298; GRADE: moderate quality). Risk of adverse events was 28% in the neostigmine group and 16% in the sugammadex group, resulting in a number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) of 8. When looking at specific adverse events, we noted significantly less risk of bradycardia (RR 0.16, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.34; I2= 0%; 11 studies, n = 1218; NNTB 14; GRADE: moderate quality), postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.97; I2 = 0%; six studies, n = 389; NNTB 16; GRADE: low quality) and overall signs of postoperative residual paralysis (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.57; I2 = 0%; 15 studies, n = 1474; NNTB 13; GRADE: moderate quality) in the sugammadex group when compared with the neostigmine group. Finally, we found no significant differences between sugammadex and neostigmine regarding risk of serious adverse events (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.13 to 2.25; I2= 0%; 10 studies, n = 959; GRADE: low quality).Application of trial sequential analysis (TSA) indicates superiority of sugammadex for outcomes such as recovery time from T2 to TOFR > 0.9, adverse events, and overall signs of postoperative residual paralysis.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Review results suggest that in comparison with neostigmine, sugammadex can more rapidly reverse rocuronium-induced neuromuscular block regardless of the depth of the block. Sugammadex 2 mg/kg is 10.22 minutes (˜ 6.6 times) faster in reversing moderate neuromuscular blockade (T2) than neostigmine 0.05 mg/kg (GRADE: moderate quality), and sugammadex 4 mg/kg is 45.78 minutes (˜ 16.8 times) faster in reversing deep neuromuscular blockade (PTC 1 to 5) than neostigmine 0.07 mg/kg (GRADE: low quality). With an NNTB of 8 to avoid an adverse event, sugammadex appears to have a better safety profile than neostigmine. Patients receiving sugammadex had 40% fewer adverse events compared with those given neostigmine. Specifically, risks of bradycardia (RR 0.16, NNTB 14; GRADE: moderate quality), PONV (RR 0.52, NNTB 16; GRADE: low quality), and overall signs of postoperative residual paralysis (RR 0.40, NNTB 13; GRADE: moderate quality) were reduced. Both sugammadex and neostigmine were associated with serious adverse events in less than 1% of patients, and data showed no differences in risk of serious adverse events between groups (RR 0.54; GRADE: low quality).

Development of an algorithm using clinical tests to avoid post-operative residual neuromuscular block

BACKGROUND

Quantitative neuromuscular monitoring is the gold standard to detect postoperative residual curarization (PORC). Many anesthesiologists, however, use insensitive, qualitative neuromuscular monitoring or unreliable, clinical tests. Goal of this multicentre, prospective, double-blinded, assessor controlled study was to develop an algorithm of muscle function tests to identify PORC.

METHODS

After extubation a blinded anesthetist performed eight clinical tests in 165 patients. Test results were correlated to calibrated electromyography train-of-four (TOF) ratio and to a postoperatively applied uncalibrated acceleromyography. A classification and regression tree (CART) was calculated developing the algorithm to identify PORC. This was validated against uncalibrated acceleromyography and tactile judgement of TOF fading in separate 100 patients.

RESULTS

After eliminating three tests with poor correlation, a model with four tests (r = 0.844) and uncalibrated acceleromyography (r = 0.873) were correlated to electromyographical TOF-values without losing quality of prediction. CART analysis showed that three consecutively performed tests (arm lift, head lift and swallowing or eye opening) can predict electromyographical TOF. Prediction coefficients reveal an advantage of the uncalibrated acceleromyography in terms of specificity to identify the EMG measured train-of-four ratio < 0.7 (100% vs. 42.9%) and <0.9 (89.7% vs. 34.5%) compared to the algorithm. However, due to the high sensitivity of the algorithm (100% vs. 94.4%), the risk to overlook an awake patient with a train-of-four ratio < 0.7 was minimal. Tactile judgement of TOF fading showed poorest sensitivity and specifity at train of four ratio < 0.9 (33.7%, 0%) and <0.7 (18.8%, 16.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

Residual neuromuscular blockade can be detected by uncalibrated acceleromyography and if not available by a pathway of four clinical muscle function tests in awake patients. The algorithm has a discriminative power comparable to uncalibrated AMG within TOF-values >0.7 and <0.3.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical Trials.gov (principal investigator's name: CU, and identifier: NCT03219138) on July 8, 2017.

Dose-reversal effect relationship of three different doses of neostigmine in obese patients: A randomised clinical trial

Background and Aims:

Previous studies suggest that administration of vecuronium based on total body weight rather than ideal body weight (IBW) in obesity results in overdosing with prolonged recovery times. We hypothesised that larger doses of neostigmine could result in faster recovery in obese patients administered vecuronium based on total body weight.

Methods:

Forty-five obese American Society of Anesthesiologists' II patients undergoing elective surgery under general anaesthesia were randomised into 3 groups to receive neostigmine 30, 40 and 50 μg/kg. Following induction, patients were paralysed with vecuronium 0.1 mg/kg based on total body weight. Reversal was achieved with neostigmine based on the patient's group, and time to train-of-four (TOF) ratios of 0.5, 0.7 and 0.9 measured. The primary outcome variable was time to achieve TOF ratio >0.9.

Results:

Neostigmine 50 μg/kg achieved faster recovery to TOF 0.7 than neostigmine 30 and 40 μg/kg. There was no significant difference in recovery times to TOF 0.7 in patients receiving either 30 or 40 μg/kg of neostigmine. However, neostigmine 40 μg/kg attained TOF ratio 0.9 faster than 30 μg/kg. We did not note a significant difference between the 40 and 50 μg/kg dose with regard to recovery of TOF to 0.9.

Conclusion:

Facilitated recovery from neuromuscular blockade to TOF of 0.7 was faster with neostigmine 50 μg/kg compared to 40 or 30 μg/kg. Recovery to TOF ratio of 0.9 was not significantly different with 40 or 50 μg/kg doses although such time was faster as compared to 30 μg/kg dose.

Qualitative Neuromuscular Monitoring: How to Optimize the Use of a Peripheral Nerve Stimulator to Reduce the Risk of Residual Neuromuscular Blockade

This review provides recommendations for anesthesia providers who may not yet have quantitative monitoring and sugammadex available and thus are providing care within the limitations of a conventional peripheral nerve stimulator (PNS) and neostigmine. In order to achieve best results, the provider needs to understand the limitations of the PNS. The PNS should be applied properly and early. All overdosing of neuromuscular blocking drugs should be avoided and the intraoperative neuromuscular blockade should be maintained only as deep as necessary. The adductor pollicis is the gold standard site and must be used for the pre-reversal assessment, also when the ulnar nerve and thumb were not accessible intraoperatively. Spontaneous recovery should be maximized and neostigmine should be administered after a TOF count of 4 has been confirmed at the adductor pollicis. Extubation should not occur within 10 min after administration of an appropriate dose of neostigmine.

Postoperative awake paralysis in the intensive care unit after cardiac surgery due to residual neuromuscular blockade: a case report and prospective observational study

PURPOSE

We report a case of awake paralysis due to residual neuromuscular blockade (NMB) in the intensive care unit (ICU) in a patient following fast-track cardiac surgery. As a result of this case, we performed a prospective quality assurance audit to investigate the incidence of residual paralysis in the ICU in a similar population of cardiac surgery patients.

CLINICAL FEATURES AND AUDIT METHODS

A 73-yr-old woman (69 kg) underwent coronary artery bypass surgery under anesthesia induced with intravenous sufentanil 25 µg, midazolam 5 mg, ketamine 25 mg, and rocuronium 100 mg (followed by two additional 50-mg doses during surgery) and maintained with sevoflurane. Postoperatively in the ICU, the patient was initially sedated with propofol (50 mg·hr(-1)) but failed to awaken 90 min after its cessation. As train-of-four neurostimulation showed residual paralysis, she was re-sedated. Neostigmine 3 mg and glycopyrrolate 0.6 mg were administered, and she was extubated 30 min later. During this episode of residual paralysis, the patient was conscious and reported explicit memory of the events. She was discharged on day 7 without psychological distress related to her postoperative awake paralysis. We subsequently performed a prospective audit in 50 consecutive patients to determine the timing of NMB dosing and to quantify the incidence of residual paralysis after fast-track cardiac surgery.

RESULTS

Of the 50 patients studied, 24 (48%) had received an NMB during the last hour of surgery and 33 (66%) had evidence of residual paralysis during the immediate postoperative period.

CONCLUSION

Postoperative residual paralysis after fast-track cardiac surgery was common in our institution and likely contributed to the reported case of postoperative awake paralysis. We suggest that an NMB not be administered after intubation in fast-track patients. If given, however, it must be well communicated to the ICU team upon ICU admission. We further recommend routine assessment of neuromuscular function before sedation is weaned prior to extubation.

A Comparision of the Effect of Sugammadex on the Recovery Period and Postoperative Residual Block in Young Elderly and Middle-Aged Elderly Patients

BACKGROUND

The importance of the characteristics of anesthesia and postoperative residual curarization (PORC) in the elderly population should be a growing concern in this century.

AIMS

To investigate the effect of sugammadex on the duration of the recovery from neuromuscular blocking agents and postoperative residual curarization in the young elderly and middle-aged elderly patients who underwent elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy, followed by a train of four (TOF) watch monitorization.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective clinical trial study.

METHODS

Sixty patients over the age of 65 with American Society of Anesthesiologists I-III were divided into two groups according to their age (65-74 years old and ≥75 years old). Patients received sugammadex (2.0 mg/kg iv) at the reappearance of the second twitch of the TOF as an agent for reversal of neuromuscular blockage at the end of surgery. Patients were extubated at the time of TOF ≥0.9. The patients' TOF responses were evaluated with regards to PORC in at the 5th minute and were followed up for one hour in the recovery room. Reintubation was applied for those patients who developed PORC and had peripheric oxygen saturation <90% despite being given 6 L oxygen per min with a face mask.

RESULTS

The onset time of neuromuscular blocking agent and time from T2 to achieve TOF ratio 90% (the duration of sugammadex effect) or over were found to be longer in the middle-aged elderly group than in the young elderly group. A statistically significant relationship was found between age and the duration of TOF ratio to reach 0.9 in the same direction. The PORC incidence and rate of reintubation were found to be 1.7% in all patients.

CONCLUSION

In our opinion, it is necessary to remember that the duration of sugammadex effect on the recovery period is prolonged for patients who are aged ≥75 years compared to patients aged between 65-74 years. (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: ACTRN12615000758505).

Sugammadex for reversal of neuromuscular blockade: a retrospective analysis of clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness in a single center

Objective

The aim of the study is to evaluate the clinical and economic impact of introducing a rocuronium–neostigmine–sugammadex strategy into a cisatracurium–neostigmine regimen for neuromuscular block (NMB) management.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective analysis of clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness in five operating rooms at University Hospital of Padova. A clinical outcome evaluation after sugammadex administration as first-choice reversal drug in selected patients (rocuronium–sugammadex) and as rescue therapy after neostigmine reversal (rocuronium–neostigmine–sugammadex) compared to control was performed. A cost-analysis of NMB management accompanying the introduction of a rocuronium–neostigmine–sugammadex strategy into a cisatracurium–neostigmine regimen was carried out. To such purpose, two periods were compared: 2011–2012, without sugammadex available; 2013–2014, with sugammadex available. A subsequent analysis was performed to evaluate if sugammadex replacing neostigmine as first choice reversal drug is cost-effective.

Results

The introduction of a rocuronium–neostigmine–sugammadex strategy into a cisatracurium–neostigmine regimen reduced the average cost of NMB management by 36%, from €20.8/case to €13.3/case. Patients receiving sugammadex as a first-choice reversal drug (3%) exhibited significantly better train-of-four ratios at extubation (P<0.001) and were discharged to the surgical ward (P<0.001) more rapidly than controls. The cost-saving of sugammadex as first-choice reversal drug has been estimated to be €2.9/case. Patients receiving sugammadex as rescue therapy after neostigmine reversal (3.2%) showed no difference in time to discharge to the surgical ward (P=0.44) compared to controls. No unplanned intensive care unit (ICU) admissions with rocuronium–neostigmine–sugammadex strategy were observed. The potential economic benefit in avoiding postoperative residual curarization (PORC)-related ICU admission in the 2013–2014 period was estimated at an average value of €13,548 (€9,316–€23,845).

Conclusion

Sugammadex eliminated PORC and associated morbidities. In our center, sugammadex reduced the costs of NMB management and promoted rapid turnover of patients in operating rooms, with total cost-effectiveness that counteracts the disadvantages of its high cost.

Effects of sugammadex on incidence of postoperative residual neuromuscular blockade: a randomized, controlled study

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to investigate whether reversal of rocuronium-induced neuromuscular blockade with sugammadex reduced the incidence of residual blockade and facilitated operating room discharge readiness.

METHODS

Adult patients undergoing abdominal surgery received rocuronium, followed by randomized allocation to sugammadex (2 or 4 mg kg(-1)) or usual care (neostigmine/glycopyrrolate, dosing per usual care practice) for reversal of neuromuscular blockade. Timing of reversal agent administration was based on the providers' clinical judgement. Primary endpoint was the presence of residual neuromuscular blockade at PACU admission, defined as a train-of-four (TOF) ratio <0.9, using TOF-Watch® SX. Key secondary endpoint was time between reversal agent administration and operating room discharge-readiness; analysed with analysis of covariance.

RESULTS

Of 154 patients randomized, 150 had a TOF value measured at PACU entry. Zero out of 74 sugammadex patients and 33 out of 76 (43.4%) usual care patients had TOF-Watch SX-assessed residual neuromuscular blockade at PACU admission (odds ratio 0.0, 95% CI [0-0.06], P<0.0001). Of these 33 usual care patients, 2 also had clinical evidence of partial paralysis. Time between reversal agent administration and operating room discharge-readiness was shorter for sugammadex vs usual care (14.7 vs. 18.6 min respectively; P=0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

After abdominal surgery, sugammadex reversal eliminated residual neuromuscular blockade in the PACU, and shortened the time from start of study medication administration to the time the patient was ready for discharge from the operating room.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov:NCT01479764.

The RECITE Study: A Canadian Prospective, Multicenter Study of the Incidence and Severity of Residual Neuromuscular Blockade

BACKGROUND

Postoperative residual neuromuscular blockade (NMB), defined as a train-of-four (TOF) ratio of <0.9, is an established risk factor for critical postoperative respiratory events and increased morbidity. At present, little is known about the occurrence of residual NMB in Canada. The RECITE (Residual Curarization and its Incidence at Tracheal Extubation) study was a prospective observational study at 8 hospitals in Canada investigating the incidence and severity of residual NMB.

METHODS

Adult patients undergoing open or laparoscopic abdominal surgery expected to last <4 hours, ASA physical status I-III, and scheduled for general anesthesia with at least 1 dose of a nondepolarizing neuromuscular blocking agent for endotracheal intubation or maintenance of neuromuscular relaxation were enrolled in the study. Neuromuscular function was assessed using acceleromyography with the TOF-Watch SX. All reported TOF ratios were normalized to the baseline values. The attending anesthesiologist and all other observers were blinded to the TOF ratio (T4/T1) results. The primary and secondary objectives were to determine the incidence and severity of residual NMB (TOF ratio <0.9) just before tracheal extubation and at arrival at the postanesthesia care unit (PACU).

RESULTS

Three hundred and two participants were enrolled. Data were available for 241 patients at tracheal extubation and for 207 patients at PACU arrival. Rocuronium was the NMB agent used in 99% of cases. Neostigmine was used for reversal of NMB in 73.9% and 72.0% of patients with TE and PACU data, respectively. The incidence of residual NMB was 63.5% (95% confidence interval, 57.4%-69.6%) at tracheal extubation and 56.5% (95% confidence interval, 49.8%-63.3%) at arrival at the PACU. In an exploratory analysis, no statistically significant differences were observed in the incidence of residual NMB according to gender, age, body mass index, ASA physical status, type of surgery, or comorbidities (all P > 0.13).

CONCLUSIONS

Residual paralysis is common at tracheal extubation and PACU arrival, despite qualitative neuromuscular monitoring and the use of neostigmine. More effective detection and management of NMB is needed to reduce the risks associated with residual NMB.