Neuromuscular blockade management in patients with COVID-19

Neuromuscular blockade and oxygenation changes during prone positioning in COVID-19

PURPOSE

Neuromuscular blockers (NMBs) are often used during prone positioning to facilitate mechanical ventilation in COVID-19 related ARDS. However, their impact on oxygenation is uncertain.

METHODS

Multi-centre observational study of invasively ventilated COVID-19 ARDS adults treated with prone positioning. We collected data on baseline characteristics, prone positioning, NMB use and patient outcome. We assessed arterial blood gas data during supine and prone positioning and after return to the supine position.

RESULTS

We studied 548 prone episodes in 220 patients (mean age 54 years, 61% male) of whom 164 (75%) received NMBs. Mean PaO2:FiO2 (P/F ratio) during the first prone episode with NMBs reached 208 ± 63 mmHg compared with 161 ± 66 mmHg without NMBs (Δmean = 47 ± 5 mmHg) for an absolute increase from baseline of 76 ± 56 mmHg versus 55 ± 56 mmHg (padj < 0.001). The mean P/F ratio on return to the supine position was 190 ± 63 mmHg in the NMB group versus 141 ± 64 mmHg in the non-NMB group for an absolute increase from baseline of 59 ± 58 mmHg versus 34 ± 56 mmHg (padj < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

During prone positioning, NMB is associated with increased oxygenation compared to non-NMB therapy, with a sustained effect on return to the supine position. These findings may help guide the use of NMB during prone positioning in COVID-19 ARDS.

Comparison of onset of neuromuscular blockade with electromyographic and acceleromyographic monitoring: a prospective clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Reliable devices that quantitatively monitor the level of neuromuscular blockade after neuromuscular blocking agents' administration are crucial. Electromyography and acceleromyography are two monitoring modalities commonly used in clinical practice. The primary outcome of this study is to compare the onset of neuromuscular blockade, defined as a Train-Of-Four Count (TOFC) equal to 0, as measured by an electromyography-based device (TetraGraph) and an acceleromyography-based device (TOFscan). The secondary outcome was to compare intubating conditions when one of these two devices reached a TOFC equal to 0.

METHODS

One hundred adult patients scheduled for elective surgery requiring neuromuscular blockade were enrolled. Prior to induction of anesthesia, TetraGraph electrodes were placed over the forearm of patients' dominant/non-dominant hand based on randomization and TOFscan electrodes placed on the contralateral forearm. Intraoperative neuromuscular blocking agent dose was standardized to 0.5 mg.kg-1 of rocuronium. After baseline values were obtained, objective measurements were recorded every 20 seconds and intubation was performed using video laryngoscopy once either device displayed a TOFC = 0. The anesthesia provider was then surveyed about intubating conditions.

RESULTS

Baseline TetraGraph train-of-four ratios were higher than those obtained with TOFscan (Median: 1.02 [0.88, 1.20] vs. 1.00 [0.64, 1.01], respectively, p < 0.001). The time to reach a TOFC = 0 was significantly longer when measured with TetraGraph compared to TOFscan (Median: 160 [40, 900] vs. 120 [60, 300] seconds, respectively, p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in intubating conditions when either device was used to determine the timing of endotracheal intubation.

CONCLUSIONS

The onset of neuromuscular blockade was longer when measured with TetraGraph than TOFscan, and a train-of-four count of zero in either device was a useful indicator for adequate intubating conditions.

CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER AND REGISTRY

URL NCT05120999, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05120999.

Sugammadex in Emergency Situations

Sugammadex may be required or used in multiple emergency situations. Moderate and high doses of this compound can be used inside and outside the operating room setting. In this communication, recent developments in the use of sugammadex for the immediate reversal of rocuronium-induced neuromuscular blockade were assessed. In emergency surgery and other clinical situations necessitating rapid sequence intubation, the tendency to use rocuronium followed by sugammadex instead of succinylcholine has been increasing. In other emergency situations such as anaphylactic shock caused by rocuronium or if intubation or ventilation is not possible, priority should be given to resuming ventilation maintaining hemodynamic stability, in accordance with the traditional guidelines. If necessary for the purpose of resuming ventilation, reversal of neuromuscular blockade should be done in a timely fashion.

Molecular mechanisms of muscular and non-muscular actions of neuromuscular blocking agents in critical illness: a narrative review

Despite frequent use of neuromuscular blocking agents in critical illness, changes in neuromuscular transmission with critical illness are not well appreciated. Recent studies have provided greater insights into the molecular mechanisms for beneficial muscular effects and non-muscular anti-inflammatory properties of neuromuscular blocking agents. This narrative review summarises the normal structure and function of the neuromuscular junction and its transformation to a 'denervation-like' state in critical illness, the underlying cause of aberrant neuromuscular blocking agent pharmacology. We also address the important favourable and adverse consequences and molecular bases for these consequences during neuromuscular blocking agent use in critical illness. This review, therefore, provides an enhanced understanding of clinical therapeutic effects and novel pathways for the salutary and aberrant effects of neuromuscular blocking agents when used during acquired pathologic states of critical illness.

Neuromuscular blocking agents in the intensive care unit

Neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBA) are a controversial therapeutic option in the approach to the critically ill patient. They are not innocuous, and the available evidence does not support their routine use in the intensive care unit. If necessary, monitoring protocols should be established to avoid residual relaxation, adverse effects, and associated complications. This narrative review discusses the current indications for the use of NMBA and the different tools for monitoring blockade in the intensive care unit. However, expanding the use of NMBA in critical settings merits the development of prospective studies.

Advances in the Regulation of Macrophage Polarization by Mesenchymal Stem Cells and Implications for ALI/ARDS Treatment

Acute lung injury/acute respiratory distress syndrome (ALI/ARDS) is a common condition with high mortality. ALI/ARDS is caused by multiple etiologies, and the main clinical manifestations are progressive dyspnea and intractable hypoxemia. Currently, supportive therapy is the main ALI/ARDS treatment, and there remains a lack of targeted and effective therapeutic strategies. Macrophages are important components of innate immunity. M1 macrophages are pro-inflammatory, while M2 macrophages are anti-inflammatory and promote tissue repair. Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) are stem cells with broad application prospects in tissue regeneration due to their multi-directional differentiation potential along with their anti-inflammatory and paracrine properties. MSCs can regulate the balance of M1/M2 macrophage polarization to improve the prognosis of ALI/ARDS. In this paper, we review the mechanisms by which MSCs regulate macrophage polarization and the signaling pathways associated with polarization. This review is expected to provide new targets for the treatment of ALI/ARDS.

Characteristics of postintubation dysphagia in ICU patients in the context of the COVID-19 outbreak: A report of 920 cases from a Brazilian reference center

The purpose of this research was to identify risk factors that were independently related to the maintenance of a swallowing dysfunction in patients affected by critical COVID-19. We conducted a prospective observational cohort study of critical patients with COVID-19, who were admitted to a COVID-19 dedicated intensive care unit (ICU) and required prolonged orotracheal intubation (≥48 hours). Demographic and clinical data were collected at ICU admission and/or at hospital discharge or in-hospital death. Swallowing data was based on The Functional Oral Intake Scale (FOIS) and was collected at two distinct moments: initial swallowing assessment and at patient outcome. Patients were divided into two groups according to their FOIS level assigned on the last swallowing assessment: in-hospital resolved dysphagia–patients with FOIS levels 6 and 7; non-resolved dysphagia at hospital outcome–patients with FOIS levels 1 to 5. Nine hundred and twenty patients were included in our study. Results of the multivariate logistic regression model for the prediction of non-resolved dysphagia at hospital outcome in critical COVID-19 patients. indicated that increasing age (p = 0.002), severity at admission (p = 0.015), body mass index (p = 0.008), use of neuromuscular blockers (p = 0.028), presence of neurologic diseases (p = 0.038), presence of Diabetes Mellitus (p = 0.043) and lower FOIS levels on the initial swallowing assessment (p<0.001) were associated with higher chances of presenting dysphagia at hospital outcome. Critical patients with COVID-19 may experience post-acute COVID-19 dysphagia, indicating the need to prepare for the care/rehabilitation of these patients.

Opioids in COVID-19: Two Sides of a Coin

Introduction: The treatment of most severe COVID-19 patients included the large-scale use of sedatives and analgesics-possibly in higher doses than usual-which was reported in the literature. The use of drugs that decrease mortality is necessary and opioids are important agents in procedures such as orotracheal intubation. However, these drugs seem to have been overestimated in the COVID-19 pandemic. We performed a review of the PubMed-Medline database to evaluate the use of opioids during this period. The following descriptors were used to enhance the search for papers: "Opioids", "COVID-19," "COVID-19 pandemic," "SARS-CoV-2," "Opioid use disorder," "Opioid dependence" and the names of the drugs used. We also evaluated the distribution of COVID-19 patients in Brazil and the applicability of opioids in our country during the COVID-19 pandemic. Results: Several positive points were found in the use of opioids in the COVID-19 pandemic, for instance, they can be used for analgesia in orotracheal intubation, for chronic pain management, and as coadjutant in the management of acute intensification of pain. However, high doses of opioids might exacerbate the respiratory depression found in COVID-19 patients, their chronic use can trigger opioid tolerance and the higher doses used during the pandemic might result in greater adverse effects. Unfortunately, the pandemic also affected individuals with opioid use disorder, not only those individuals are at higher risk of mortality, hospitalization and need for ventilatory support, but measures taken to decrease the SARS-CoV-2 spread such as social isolation, might negatively affect the treatment for opioid use disorder. In Brazil, only morphine, remifentanil and fentanyl are available in the basic health care system for the treatment of COVID-19 patients. Out of the 5,273,598 opioid units used in this period all over the country, morphine, fentanyl, and remifentanil, accounted for, respectively, 559,270 (10.6%), 4,624,328 (87.6%), and 90,000 (1.8%) units. Many Brazilian regions with high number of confirmed cases of COVID-19 had few units of opioids available, as the Southeast region, with a 0.23 units of opioids per confirmed COVID-19 case, and the South region, with 0.05 units. In the COVID-19 pandemic scenario, positive points related to opioids were mainly the occurrence of analgesia, to facilitate intubation and their use as coadjutants in the management of acute intensification of pain, whereas the negative points were indiscriminate use, the presence of human immunosuppressor response and increased adverse effects due to higher doses of the drug. Conclusion: The importance of rational and individualized use of analgesic hypnotics and sedative anesthetics should be considered at all times, especially in situations of high demand such as the COVID-19 pandemic.