Residual Neuromuscular Blockade in the Critical Care Setting

Deep Neuromuscular Block for Endolaryngeal Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVES

To determine the safety and efficacy of deep neuromuscular block (NMB) for endolaryngeal surgery.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Ovid Medline, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang, VIP databases, and trial registry database.

METHODS

Inclusion criteria followed the PICOS principles: Participants, adults undergoing endolaryngeal surgery; Intervention, deep NMB performed during the surgery; Control, no-deep NMB performed; Outcomes, primary outcome: the incidence of clinically acceptable surgical conditions.

SECONDARY OUTCOME

the incidence of intraoperative complications (including vocal fold movement and coughing) and total incidence of postoperative complications [including postoperative residual curarization (PORC), postoperative sore throat (POST), and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV)]. Study design, randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Duplicate publications, editorials, letters, abstracts, and reviews were excluded.

RESULTS

Four articles with 242 patients were identified for analysis. The results indicated that compared with no-deep NMB, deep NMB provides a higher incidence of clinically acceptable surgical conditions (98.36% vs. 76.67%; relative ratio [RR] = 1.29, 95% CI: 1.07-1.56), a lower incidence of intraoperative complications (10.83% versus 37.16%; RR = 0.32; 95% CI: 0.21-0.49) (lower incidence of vocal fold movement [1.85% vs. 34%; RR = 0.08, 95% CI: 0.02-0.41] and coughing [15.53% vs. 38.78%; RR = 0.42, 95% CI: 0.27-0.66]). There were no differences in the overall incidence of postoperative complications (RR = 2.10, 95% CI: 0.12-36.40).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on current published evidence, deep NMB provides better surgical conditions with a higher incidence of clinically acceptable surgical conditions and a lower incidence of intraoperative complications (lower incidence of vocal fold movement and coughing) without increasing the overall incidence of postoperative complications.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

1 Laryngoscope, 133:2055-2065, 2023.

Deep neuromuscular block for minimally invasive lung surgery: a protocol for a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

INTRODUCTION

Minimally invasive lung surgery (MILS) gradually became the primary surgical therapy for lung cancer, which remains the leading cause of cancer death. Adequate muscle relaxation by deep neuromuscular block (NMB) is particularly necessary for MILS to provide a satisfactory surgical field. However, deep NMB for MILS remains controversial, as one-lung ventilation may provide an acceptable surgical field. Then, we will perform a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify the efficacy of deep NMB for MILS.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will search the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Ovid Medline, Web of Science, Chinese BioMedical Literature, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, VIP and Wanfang databases from inception to March 2022 to identify randomised controlled trials of adult participants undergoing MILS with deep NMB. Studies published in English or Chinese will be considered. The primary outcome will be the surgical conditions according to the surgeon's perspective. Secondary outcomes will be the incidence of perioperative events and perioperative mortality. Heterogeneity will be assessed by the χ² test and I² statistic. Data will be synthesised by both a fixed-effect and a random-effects meta-analysis, with an intention to present the random-effects result if there is no indication of funnel plot asymmetry. Otherwise, metaregression will be used. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool, trial sequential analysis and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation will be used to assess the evidence quality and control the risks of random errors. Funnel plots and Egger's regression test will be used to assess publication bias.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval was not required for this systematic review protocol. The results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42021254016.

Influence of sugammadex versus neostigmine for neuromuscular block reversal on the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

The influence of sugammadex for reversal of neuromuscular block (NMB) on postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs), compared with neostigmine, remains to be determined. We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare the incidence of PPCs between patients who received sugammadex versus neostigmine.

METHODS

Relevant studies were obtained by searching the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases. A random effects model incorporating the potential heterogeneity was used to pool the results.

RESULTS

Fourteen RCTs including 1478 adult patients who underwent surgeries with general anesthesia were included, and of these, 753 received sugammadex and 725 received neostigmine for reversal of NMB. The pooled results showed that sugammadex was associated with a lower risk of overall PPCs compared to neostigmine (odds ratio [OR]: 0.62, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.43-0.89, p = 0.01; I² = 0%). This finding remained consistent after exclusion of two studies with potential overlapping events (OR: 0.58, 95% CI: 0.36-0.96, p = 0.03; I²=9%). Stratified analyses according to the categories of PPCs showed that sugammadex was associated with a significantly lower risk of postoperative respiratory failure (OR: 0.60, 95% CI: 0.38-0.97, p = 0.04; I² = 0%) but not of postoperative pulmonary infection (OR: 0.79, p = 0.71), atelectasis (OR: 0.78, p = 0.33), or pneumothorax (OR: 0.87, p = 0.79).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with neostigmine, the use of sugammadex for reversal of NMB was associated with a lower risk of PPCs, mainly due to a lower incidence of postoperative respiratory failure with the use of sugammadex.