Chau I, Horn K, Dullenkopf A. Neuromuscular monitoring during modified rapid sequence induction: A comparison of TOF-Cuff® and TOF-Scan®.
Australas Emerg Care 2020;
23:217-220. [PMID:
32173276 DOI:
10.1016/j.auec.2020.02.005]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/19/2019] [Revised: 02/17/2020] [Accepted: 02/23/2020] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Acceleromyometry is the clinical standard for quantitative neuromuscular monitoring, mostly using the stimulation pattern train-of-four (TOF). TOF-Cuff®, a recently introduced neuromuscular monitor with stimulating electrodes integrated within a blood pressure cuff, assesses the muscular response in the upper arm.
METHODS
The time from administration of a neuromuscular blocking agent to TOF-ratio 0% during modified rapid sequence induction was compared between TOF-Cuff® and acceleromyometry (TOF-Scan®). Included were 26 adults with body mass index <35 kg/m2. TOF-Scan® and TOF-Cuff® were simultaneously fitted on patients' opposite arms. The mean difference to TOF-ratio 0% was compared using the one sample t-test (p < 0.05) and Bland-Altman plots.
RESULTS
After anesthesia induction, atracurium 0.9 mg/kg (±0.08) i.v. was administered. The mean time to TOF ratio 0% for TOF-Scan® was 140.4 s (±34.3), and 132.7 s (±32.5) for TOF-Cuff®, with a mean difference of 5.4 (95% CI: -9.9 to 20.7, p = 0.472). The maximum difference between the two modalities was 135 s when the TOF-Cuff® was faster and 60 s when the TOF-Scan® was faster.
CONCLUSIONS
No statistically significant systematic difference was found between TOF-Scan® and TOF-Cuff®. However, there was high variability and wide limits of agreement. The two devices cannot be used interchangeably.
Collapse