Impact of Sugammadex Versus Neostigmine/Glycopyrrolate on Perioperative Efficiency

Impact of sugammadex and neostigmine on outcome after major orthopaedic surgery: A population-based analysis

BACKGROUND

Residual neuromuscular blockade after surgery remains a major concern given its association with pulmonary complications. However, current clinical practices with and the comparative impact on perioperative risk of various reversal agents remain understudied.

OBJECTIVE

We investigated the use of sugammadex and neostigmine in the USA, and their impact on postoperative complications by examining national data.

DESIGN

This population-based retrospective study used national Premier Healthcare claims data.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Patients undergoing total hip/knee arthroplasty (THA, TKA), or lumbar spine fusion surgery between 2016 and 2019 in the United States who received neuromuscular blocking agents.

INTERVENTION

The effects of sugammadex and neostigmine for pharmacologically enhanced reversal were compared with each other and with controls who received no reversal agent.

MAIN OUTCOMES

included pulmonary complications, cardiac complications, and a need for postoperative ventilation. Mixed-effects regression models compared the outcomes between neostigmine, sugammadex, and controls. We report odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Bonferroni-adjusted P values of 0.008 were used to indicate significance.

RESULTS

Among 361 553 patients, 74.5% received either sugammadex (20.7%) or neostigmine (53.8%). Sugammadex use increased from 4.4% in 2016 to 35.4% in 2019, whereas neostigmine use decreased from 64.5% in 2016 to 43.4% in 2019. Sugammadex versus neostigmine or controls was associated with significantly reduced odds for cardiac complications (OR 0.86, 95% CI, 0.80 to 0.92 and OR 0.83, 95% CI, 0.78 to 0.89, respectively). Both sugammadex and neostigmine versus controls were associated with reduced odds for pulmonary complications (OR 0.85, 95% CI, 0.77 to 0.94 and OR 0.91, CI 0.85 to 0.98, respectively). A similar pattern of sugammadex and neostigmine was observed for a reduction in severe pulmonary complications, including the requirement of invasive ventilation (OR 0.54, 95% CI, 0.45 to 0.64 and OR 0.53, 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.6, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Population-based data indicate that sugammadex and neostigmine both appear highly effective in reducing the odds of severe life-threatening pulmonary complications. Sugammadex, especially, was associated with reduced odds of cardiac complications.

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.

Perioperative neuromuscular blockade. 2020 update of the SEDAR (Sociedad Española de Anestesiología y Reanimación) recommendations

We present an update of the 2020 Recommendations on neuromuscular blockade of the SEDAR. The previous ones dated 2009. A modified Delphi consensus analysis (experts, working group, and previous extensive bibliographic revision) 10 recommendations were produced1: neuromuscular blocking agents were recommended for endotracheal intubation and to avoid faringo-laryngeal and tracheal lesions, including critical care patients.2 We recommend not to use neuromuscular blocking agents for routine insertion of supraglotic airway devices, and to use it only in cases of airway obstruction or endotracheal intubation through the device.3 We recommend to use a rapid action neuromuscular blocking agent with an hypnotic in rapid sequence induction of anesthesia.4 We recommend profound neuromuscular block in laparoscopic surgery.5 We recommend quantitative monitoring of neuromuscular blockade during the whole surgical procedure, provided neuromuscular blocking agents have been used.6 We recommend quantitative monitoring through ulnar nerve stimulation and response evaluation of the adductor pollicis brevis, acceleromyography being the clinical standard.7 We recommend a recovery of neuromuscular block of at least TOFr ≥ 0.9 to avoid postoperative residual neuromuscular blockade.8 We recommend drug reversal of neuromuscular block at the end of general anesthetic, before extubation, provided a TOFr ≥ 0.9 has not been reached.9 We recommend to choose anticholinesterases for neuromuscular block reversal only if TOF≥2 and a TOFr ≥ 0.9 has not been attained.10 We recommend to choose sugammadex instead of anticholinesterases for reversal of neuromuscular blockade induced with rocuronium.

Sugammadex versus neostigmine for neuromuscular blockade reversal in outpatient surgeries: A randomized controlled trial to evaluate efficacy and associated healthcare cost in an academic center

Introduction

Neuromuscular blockade is an essential component of the general anesthesia as it allows for a better airway management and optimal surgical conditions. Despite significant reductions in extubation and OR readiness-for-discharge times have been associated with the use of sugammadex, the cost-effectiveness of this drug remains controversial. We aimed to compare the time to reach a train-of-four (TOF) response of ≥0.9 and operating room readiness for discharge in patients who received sugammadex for moderate neuromuscular blockade reversal when compared to neostigmine during outpatient surgeries under general anesthesia. Potential reduction in time for OR discharge readiness as a result of sugammadex use may compensate for the existing cost-gap between sugammadex and neostigmine.

Methods

We conducted a single-center, randomized, double arm, open-label, prospective clinical trial involving adult patients undergoing outpatient surgeries under general anesthesia. Eligible subjects were randomized (1:1 ratio) into two groups to receive either sugammadex (Groups S), or neostigmine/glycopyrrolate (Group N) at the time of neuromuscular blockade reversal. The primary outcome was the time to reverse moderate rocuronium-induced neuromuscular blockade (TOF ratio ≥0.9) in both groups. In addition, post-anesthesia care unit (PACU)/hospital length of stay (LOS) and perioperative costs were compared among groups as secondary outcomes.

Results

Thirty-seven subjects were included in our statistical analysis (Group S= 18 subjects and Group N= 19 subjects). The median time to reach a TOF ratio ≥0.9 was significantly reduced in Group S when compared to Group N (180 versus 540 seconds; p = 0.0052). PACU and hospital LOS were comparable among groups. Postoperative nausea and vomiting was the main adverse effect reported in Group S (22.2% versus 5.3% in Group N; p = 0.18), while urinary retention (10.5%) and shortness of breath (5.3%) were only experienced by some patients in Group N. Moreover, no statistical differences were found between groups regarding OR/anesthesia, PACU, and total admission costs.

Discussion

Sugammadex use was associated with a significantly faster moderate neuromuscular blockade reversal. We found no evidence of increased perioperative costs associated with the use of sugammadex in patients undergoing outpatient surgeries in our academic institution.

Clinical trial registration

[https://clinicaltrials.gov/] identifier number [NCT03579589].

Utility of neuromuscular blockade reversal in the evaluation of acute neurosurgical patients: A retrospective case-series

OBJECTIVE

Sugammadex reversal of neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBAs) is usually performed postoperatively. A scarcity of literature exists exploring sugammadex use for timely neurological examination of neurosurgical patients. NMBAs, like rocuronium, are used in the Emergency Department during intubation and their unpredictable duration of action often impedes timely and accurate assessment of patient neurological status. We aim to explore the role of sugammadex in evaluating patients in need of acute neurosurgical care.

METHODS

Retrospective assessment of patients presenting with traumatic brain injury or intracranial hemorrhage was conducted at our level 1 trauma center. Patients of interest were those for whom sugammadex reversal of rocuronium neuromuscular blockade, from intubating doses, was pursued to ensure timely neurologic assessment. Nine patients were identified for whom GCS pre-/post-sugammadex, rocuronium dosing, elapsed time between rocuronium administration and reversal, and clinical course data were retrieved.

RESULTS

Arrival GCS was 5.2 ± 3.2, with intubation accomplished within 10 ± 2.5 min of presentation. Rocuronium dosing was consistent between patients, average single dose of 1.2 ± 0.3 mg/kg. Lingering neuromuscular blockade ranged from 28 to 132 min (87.3 ± 34.3 min). All patients exhibited a GCS of 3 T upon initial neurosurgical evaluation, prior to reversal. Post-reversal GCS rose to 6.0 T ± 2.2. Sugammadex facilitated more accurate clinical decision making in 8 of 9 patients, including prevention of unnecessary invasive procedures. Two of 9 patients were eventually discharged home or to a rehabilitation facility.

CONCLUSIONS

Rocuronium neuromuscular blockade can linger beyond pharmacokinetic predictions, thus delaying timely and precise neurologic assessment. Our data suggests sugammadex may be a useful addition to the clinician's armamentarium for acute neurologic assessment in the neurosurgical population. Sugammadex may impact clinical decision-making in certain patients and allow for more informed decision-making by families and physicians alike. Prospective studies are needed to definitively assess the impact of sugammadex on outcomes in acute neurosurgical settings.

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.

Sugammadex, the Guardian of Deep Muscle Relaxation During Conventional and Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Surgery: A Narrative Review

High intra-abdominal pressure induced by artificial pneumoperitoneum can obviously impair respiratory and circulatory functions and has a negative effect on the prognosis of patients undergoing conventional and robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery. The application of deep neuromuscular blockade during the operation is reported to lower the intra-abdominal pressure and improve patients’ outcome. However, concern lies in the risks of postoperative residual muscular paralysis with the use of deep neuromuscular blockade. Sugammadex, a specific antagonist for aminosteroids muscle relaxants, can effectively and rapidly reverse rocuronium and vecuronium induced neuromuscular blockade of different depths. Thus, sugammadex allows the ability to safeguard the application of deep neuromuscular blockade in laparoscopic operations and helps to alleviate the adverse complications associated with pneumoperitoneum. Here, we review the application of deep neuromuscular blockade in different laparoscopic surgeries and discuss the benefits and possible risks of sugammadex administration in the reversal of deep neuromuscular blockade in these operations.

ROUTINE USE OF SUGAMMADEX DOES NOT SHORTEN PACU LENGTH OF STAY: A PROSPECTIVE DOUBLE-BLINDED RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL

Background

The reversal agent sugammadex has been shown to be more efficacious at reversal from neuromuscular blockade (NMB) induced by the aminosteroid class of non-depolarizing muscle relaxants than the traditionally used medication neostigmine. However, whether these differences lead to significantly faster PACU discharge readiness remains unknown. Given the increased acquisition cost of sugammadex as compared to neostigmine we compared these two reversal agents in our surgical population to determine if its pharmacokinetic superiority warranted a change in current practice.

Methods

We conducted a single-center randomized patient and assessor blinded clinical trial. A total of 201 patients presenting for surgery requiring NMB with an estimated duration of ≤ 6 hours were included in the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis. The primary outcome was time from reversal agent administration to PACU discharge readiness, measured by either the institutional discharge scoring tool or bedside clinical assessment by a PACU physician or advanced practice provider. Secondary outcomes included subjective assessment of recovery by the patient (pain, visual changes, speaking difficulty, swallowing difficulty, PONV, anxiety) and a simple strength assessment.

Results

Median time from reversal administration to PACU discharge readiness was 3.59 hours (IQR 2.49-5.09) in the neostigmine group and 3.62 hours (IQR 2.70-5.87) in the sugammadex group. Patients who received sugammadex had 8% longer reversal to PACU discharge times (exp(estimate) 1.08, 95% CI [0.87-1.34], p=0.499). Patients age 70 or older had 28% longer reversal to PACU discharge times (exp(estimate) of 1.28, 95% CI [0.91-1.80], P=0.158). In the a modified ITT analysis, sugammadex patients were estimated to be in PACU 13% longer than neostigmine arm patients (exp(estimate) 1.13, 95% CI [0.91-1.40], p=0.265) and patients older than or equal to 70 years 31% longer than patients less than 70 years old (exp(estimate) 1.31, 95% CI [0.93-1.84], p=0.121). Treatment arm was not associated with any of the secondary outcomes.

Conclusion

There was no significant difference in time to readiness to discharge from PACU, and there were no subjective or objective clinically relevant differences in recovery from neuromuscular blockade between the groups. Findings of this study support continued use of either agent at the anesthesiologist's discretion.

Hereditary pseudocholinesterase deficiency discovery after electroconvulsive therapy

Inherited pseudocholinesterase deficiency refers to an uncommon defect in the butyrylcholinesterase enzyme which can result in prolonged muscle paralysis due to delayed breakdown of choline ester paralytic anaesthetic agents. We describe a 25-year-old woman receiving electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) for treatment of depression in whom motor function did not recover adequately after administration of succinylcholine. Investigated post-ECT, she was found to have severe pseudocholinesterase deficiency. Implications of pseudocholinesterase deficiency for ECT treatment and anaesthetic strategies are discussed.

Recovery profile of sugammadex versus neostigmine in pediatric patients undergoing cardiac catheterization: A randomized double-blind study

Background:

Sugammadex is a selective reversal agent which has the ability to reverse deep neuromuscular blockade. However, there are still controversial results as regard sugammadex effects on the quality of recovery. We hypothesized that Sugammadex may have better recovery profile compared to neostigmine in pediatric patients with congenital heart diseases undergoing cardiac catheterization.

Patients and Methods:

This prospective randomized double-blind study included 50 pediatric patients aged <2 years who were divided into two groups according to the reversal agent used; Group S (Sugammadex) and Group N (Neostigmine). Both groups received the same anesthetic technique during cardiac catheterization, and basic hemodynamic monitoring was ensured in both groups. After the procedure, reversal was done using 4 mg.kg^‒1 sugammadex or 0.04 mg. kg^‒1 neostigmine plus 0.02 mg. kg^‒1 atropine according to the group allocation. Recovery time and side effects were recorded.

Results:

The two groups showed comparable findings regarding demographics. Nonetheless, the total time of anesthesia had mean values of 91.06 and 101.25 min in the two groups, respectively (P = 0.003), while recovery time had mean values of 1.61 and 9.23 min in the same groups, respectively (P < 0.001). Hemodynamic profile (heart rate and mean arterial pressure) was better after reversal with sugammadex. Blood sugar levels and side effects showed no significant difference between both groups.

Conclusion:

Sugammadex can be a more rapid and effective alternative to neostigmine for reversal of rocuronium-induced neuromuscular blockade in pediatric patients undergoing cardiac catheterization.