Dose-reversal effect relationship of three different doses of neostigmine in obese patients: A randomised clinical trial

Emergency use of sugammadex after failure of standard reversal drugs and postoperative pulmonary complications: A retrospective cohort study

Background and Aims

The use of sugammadex instead of neostigmine for the reversal of neuromuscular blockade may decrease postoperative pulmonary complications. It is unclear if this finding is applicable to situations where sugammadex is administered after the administration of neostigmine. The objective of this study was to compare the incidence of a composite outcome measure of major postoperative pulmonary complications in patients who received sugammadex as a rescue agent after neostigmine versus those who received sugammadex alone for reversal of neuromuscular blockade.

Material and Methods

This retrospective cohort study analyzed the medical records of adult patients who underwent elective inpatient noncardiac surgery under general anesthesia and received sugammadex for reversal of neuromuscular blockade, at a tertiary care academic hospital between August 2016 and November 2018.

Results

A total of 1,672 patients were included, of whom 1,452 underwent reversal with sugammadex alone and 220 received sugammadex following reversal with neostigmine/glycopyrrolate. The composite primary outcome was diagnosed in 60 (3.6%) patients. Comparing these two groups, and after adjusting for confounding factors, patients who received sugammadex after reversal with neostigmine had more postoperative pulmonary complications than those reversed with sugammadex alone (6.8% vs. 3.1%, odds ratio, 2.29; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.25 to 4.18; P = 0.006).

Conclusion

The use of sugammadex following reversal with neostigmine was associated with a higher incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications as compared to the use of sugammadex alone. The implications of using sugammadex after the failure of standard reversal drugs should be investigated in prospective studies.

Reversal agents: do we need to administer with neuromuscular monitoring - an observational study

Background and Aims

In clinical practice, in the majority of patients, recovery from the effect of muscle relaxants is assessed using subjective methods such as head lift, eye-opening, or by sustained hand grip after giving anticholinesterases (neostigmine) at the end of surgery. We planned a prospective observational cohort study to test the hypothesis that objective neuromuscular monitoring can help us in avoiding the use of anticholinesterases for reversal.

Methods

The patients posted for surgery of <2 h duration were included in the study. The cohort of patients was formed on the basis of those who were exposed to objective neuromuscular monitoring of recovery (train-of-four [TOF] ratio of 0.9 or more; exposed group) and the patients who were not exposed to objective neuromuscular monitoring (non-exposed group) acting as a control. Using objective neuromuscular monitoring, the time required for recovery from muscle relaxation when neostigmine was not given for reversal was noted and it was then compared with that of the control group.

Results

A total of 190 patients were enrolled over a period of 3 years. With the use of TOF ratio of 0.9 for extubation, patients safely recovered from neuromuscular blockade, without using neostigmine, with no difference in the mean recovery time (14.48 ± 1.138 min) as compared to the control group (12.14 ± 1.067 min, P = 0.139). There was no incidence of reintubation in post-operative period.

Conclusion

With objective neuromuscular monitoring, we can ensure complete recovery from the neuromuscular blockade while avoiding the use of anticholinesterases.