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

An educational intervention to reduce the incidence of postoperative residual curarisation: a cluster randomised crossover trial in patients undergoing general anaesthesia

BACKGROUND

The incidence of postoperative residual curarisation remains unacceptably high. We assessed whether an educational intervention on perioperative neuromuscular block management can reduce it.

METHODS

In this multicentre, cluster randomised crossover trial, centres were allocated to receive an educational intervention either in a first or a second period. The educational intervention consisted of a lecture about neuromuscular management key points, including quantitative neuromuscular monitoring and use of reversal agents. The lecture was streamed to allow repetition. Additionally, memory cards were distributed in each operating theatre. The primary outcome was postoperative residual curarisation in the PACU. Secondary outcomes were frequency of quantitative neuromuscular monitoring, use of reversal agents, and incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications during hospital stay. Measurements were performed before randomisation and after the first and the second period. The effect of the educational intervention was estimated using multivariable mixed effects logistic regression models.

RESULTS

We included 2314 subjects in 34 Spanish centres. Postoperative residual curarisation incidence was not affected by the educational intervention (odds ratio [OR] 0.90 [95% confidence interval {CI}: 0.51-1.58]; P=0.717 and 1.30 [0.73-2.30]; P=0.371] for first and second time-period interaction). The educational intervention increased the quantitative neuromuscular monitor usage (OR 2.04 [95% CI: 1.31-3.19]; P=0.002), the use of reversal agents was unchanged (OR 0.79 [95% CI: 0.50-1.26]; P=0.322), and the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications decreased (OR 0.19 [95% CI: 0.10-0.35]; P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

An educational intervention on perioperative neuromuscular block management did not reduce the incidence of postoperative residual curarisation nor increase reversal, despite increased quantitative neuromuscular monitoring. Sugammadex reversal was associated with reduced postoperative residual curarisation. The educational intervention was associated with a decrease in postoperative pulmonary complications.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03128151.

Intraoperative Monitoring of Neuromuscular Blockade

There is a global trend of new guidelines highly recommending quantitative neuromuscular monitoring in the operating room. In fact, it is almost certain that quantitatively monitoring the depth of intraoperative muscle paralysis may permit the rational use of muscle relaxants and avoid some of the major related complications, namely postoperative pulmonary complications. A specific culture related to this issue is necessary to integrate quantitative monitoring of muscle relaxants as part of a major monitoring entity in anesthetized patients. For this purpose, it is necessary to fully understand the physiology, pharmacology and concept of monitoring as well as the choice of pharmacological reversal, including the introduction of sugammadex a decade ago.

Pro-Con Debate: Do We Need Quantitative Neuromuscular Monitoring in the Era of Sugammadex?

In this Pro-Con article, we debate the merits of using quantitative neuromuscular blockade monitoring. Consensus guidelines recommend their use to guide the administration of nondepolarizing neuromuscular blockade and reversal agents. A major impediment to this guideline is that until recently, reliable quantitative neuromuscular blockade monitors have not been widely available. Without them, anesthesia providers have been trained with and are adept at using a variety of qualitative neuromuscular blockade monitors otherwise known as peripheral nerve stimulators. Although perhaps less accurate, anesthesia providers find them reliable and easy to use. They have a long track record of using them with the perception that their use leads to effective neuromuscular blockade reversal and minimizes clinically significant adverse events from residual neuromuscular blockade. In the recent past, 2 disruptive developments have called upon anesthesia care providers to reconsider their practice in neuromuscular blockade administration, reversal, and monitoring. These include: (1) commercialization of more reliable quantitative neuromuscular monitors and (2) widespread use of sugammadex, a versatile reversal agent of neuromuscular blockade. Sugammadex appears to be so effective at rapidly and effectively reversing even the deepest of neuromuscular blockades, and it has left anesthesia providers wondering whether quantitative monitoring is indeed necessary or whether conventional, familiar, and less expensive qualitative monitoring will suffice? This Pro-Con debate will contrast anesthesia provider perceptions with evidence surrounding the use of quantitative neuromuscular blockade monitors to explore whether quantitative neuromuscular monitoring (NMM) is just another technology solution looking for a problem or a significant advance in NMM that will improve patient safety and outcomes.

Unanticipated Profound Paralysis and Sugammadex Dosing Implications After Videoscopic Thoracic Surgery

A bedridden patient with empyema presented for thoracoscopic decortication. During the procedure, despite a post-tetanic count (PTC) of 0 via calibrated quantitative neuromuscular monitoring, persistent diaphragmatic movement impaired operating conditions, so rocuronium was re-dosed. After surgery, the patient had 0 PTC. Sugammadex was titrated to achieve baseline neuromuscular strength, monitoring the effect of each 200-mg dose. Ultimately, 1200 mg was required to achieve baseline strength. We describe monitor troubleshooting, considerations with unexpectedly deep neuromuscular blockade, the importance of routine quantitative neuromuscular monitoring, and one strategy for sugammadex reversal in patients with profound paralysis outside of the standard dosing guidelines.

Association of neuromuscular reversal by sugammadex and neostigmine with 90-day mortality after non-cardiac surgery

Background

Reversing a neuromuscular blockade agent with sugammadex is known to lessen postoperative complications by reducing postoperative residual curarization. However, its effects on 90-day mortality are unknown. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the effects of sugammadex and neostigmine in terms of 90-day mortality after non-cardiac surgery.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study analyzed the medical records of adult patients aged 18 years or older who underwent non-cardiac surgery at a single tertiary care hospital between 2011 and 2016. Propensity score matching and Cox regression analysis were used to investigate the effectiveness of sugammadex and neostigmine in lowering 90-day mortality after non-cardiac surgery.

Results

A total of 65,702 patients were included in the analysis (mean age: 52.3 years, standard deviation: 15.7), and 23,532 of these patients (35.8%) received general surgery. After propensity score matching, 14,179 patients (3906 patients from the sugammadex group and 10,273 patients from the neostigmine group) were included in the final analysis. Cox regression analysis in the propensity score-matched cohort showed that the risk of 90-day mortality was 40% lower in the sugammadex group than in the neostigmine group (hazard ratio: 0.60, 95% confidence interval: 0.37, 0.98; P = 0.042). These results were similar in the multivariable Cox regression analysis of the entire cohort (hazard ratio: 0.62, 95% confidence interval: 0.39, 0.96; P = 0.036).

Conclusions

This retrospective cohort study suggested that reversing rocuronium with sugammadex might be associated with lower 90-day mortality after non-cardiac surgery compared to neostigmine. However, since this study did not evaluate quantitative neuromuscular function in the postoperative period due to its retrospective design, the results should be interpreted carefully. Future prospective studies with quantitative neuromuscular monitoring in the postoperative period should be performed to confirm these results.

[Deep neuromuscular blockade : Benefits and risks]

Neuromuscular blockade (TOF count = 0) can improve tracheal intubation and microlaryngeal surgery. It is also frequently used in many surgical fields including both nonlaparoscopic and laparoscopic surgery to improve surgical conditions and to prevent sudden muscle contractions. Currently there is a controversy regarding the need and the clinical benefits of deep neuromuscular blockade for different surgical procedures. Deep neuromuscular relaxation improves laparoscopic surgical space conditions only marginally when using low intra-abdominal pressure. There is no outcome-relevant advantage of low compared to higher intra-abdominal pressures, but worsen the surgical conditions. Postoperative, residual curarisation can be avoided by algorithm-based pharmacological reversing and quantitative neuromuscular monitoring.

Neuromuscular monitoring: an update

This review makes an advocacy for neuromuscular blockade monitoring during anaesthesia care, by: (i) describing the fundamental principles of the methods currently available, at the same time emphasizing quantitative recording measurements; (ii) describing the different ways in which muscles respond to the effect of neuromuscular blockade and their use in clinical practice; (iii) presenting results of different studies on timing and agents of neuromuscular block reversal, including a recommendation for sugammadex use and experimental results with calabadion and (iv) in the end emphasizing the need for implementing neuromuscular monitoring as a practice that should be used every time a neuromuscular block is required.