Dataset Information

Reversal of profound vecuronium-induced neuromuscular block under sevoflurane anesthesia: sugammadex versus neostigmine.

ABSTRACT: Acetylcholinesterase inhibitors cannot rapidly reverse profound neuromuscular block. Sugammadex, a selective relaxant binding agent, reverses the effects of rocuronium and vecuronium by encapsulation. This study assessed the efficacy of sugammadex compared with neostigmine in reversal of profound vecuronium-induced neuromuscular block under sevoflurane anesthesia.Patients aged ?18 years, American Society of Anesthesiologists class 1-4, scheduled to undergo surgery under general anesthesia were enrolled in this phase III, multicenter, randomized, safety-assessor blinded study. Sevoflurane anesthetized patients received vecuronium 0.1 mg/kg for intubation, with maintenance doses of 0.015 mg/kg as required. Patients were randomized to receive sugammadex 4 mg/kg or neostigmine 70 ?g/kg with glycopyrrolate 14 ?g/kg at 1-2 post-tetanic counts. The primary efficacy variable was time from start of study drug administration to recovery of the train-of-four ratio to 0.9. Safety assessments included physical examination, laboratory data, vital signs, and adverse events.Eighty three patients were included in the intent-to-treat population (sugammadex, n = 47; neostigmine, n = 36). Geometric mean time to recovery of the train-of-four ratio to 0.9 was 15-fold faster with sugammadex (4.5 minutes) compared with neostigmine (66.2 minutes; p < 0.0001) (median, 3.3 minutes with sugammadex versus 49.9 minutes with neostigmine). No serious drug-related adverse events occurred in either group.Recovery from profound vecuronium-induced block is significantly faster with sugammadex, compared with neostigmine. Neostigmine did not rapidly reverse profound neuromuscular block (Trial registration number: NCT00473694).

SUBMITTER: Lemmens HJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2944304 | biostudies-literature | 2010 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Reversal of profound vecuronium-induced neuromuscular block under sevoflurane anesthesia: sugammadex versus neostigmine.

Lemmens Hendrikus Jm HJ El-Orbany Mohammad I MI Berry James J Morte Jovino Ben JB Martin Gavin G

BMC anesthesiology 20100901

<h4>Background</h4>Acetylcholinesterase inhibitors cannot rapidly reverse profound neuromuscular block. Sugammadex, a selective relaxant binding agent, reverses the effects of rocuronium and vecuronium by encapsulation. This study assessed the efficacy of sugammadex compared with neostigmine in reversal of profound vecuronium-induced neuromuscular block under sevoflurane anesthesia.<h4>Methods</h4>Patients aged ≥18 years, American Society of Anesthesiologists class 1-4, scheduled to undergo surg ...[more]

PMID: 20809967

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundFive percent of adult patients undergoing noncardiac inpatient surgery experience a major pulmonary complication. The authors hypothesized that the choice of neuromuscular blockade reversal (neostigmine vs. sugammadex) may be associated with a lower incidence of major pulmonary complications.MethodsTwelve U.S. Multicenter Perioperative Outcomes Group hospitals were included in a multicenter observational matched-cohort study of surgical cases between January 2014 and August 2018. Adult patients undergoing elective inpatient noncardiac surgical procedures with general anesthesia and endotracheal intubation receiving a nondepolarizing neuromuscular blockade agent and reversal were included. Exact matching criteria included institution, sex, age, comorbidities, obesity, surgical procedure type, and neuromuscular blockade agent (rocuronium vs. vecuronium). Other preoperative and intraoperative factors were compared and adjusted in the case of residual imbalance. The composite primary outcome was major postoperative pulmonary complications, defined as pneumonia, respiratory failure, or other pulmonary complications (including pneumonitis; pulmonary congestion; iatrogenic pulmonary embolism, infarction, or pneumothorax). Secondary outcomes focused on the components of pneumonia and respiratory failure.ResultsOf 30,026 patients receiving sugammadex, 22,856 were matched to 22,856 patients receiving neostigmine. Out of 45,712 patients studied, 1,892 (4.1%) were diagnosed with the composite primary outcome (3.5% sugammadex vs. 4.8% neostigmine). A total of 796 (1.7%) patients had pneumonia (1.3% vs. 2.2%), and 582 (1.3%) respiratory failure (0.8% vs. 1.7%). In multivariable analysis, sugammadex administration was associated with a 30% reduced risk of pulmonary complications (adjusted odds ratio, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.63 to 0.77), 47% reduced risk of pneumonia (adjusted odds ratio, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.62), and 55% reduced risk of respiratory failure (adjusted odds ratio, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.56), compared to neostigmine.ConclusionsAmong a generalizable cohort of adult patients undergoing inpatient surgery at U.S. hospitals, the use of sugammadex was associated with a clinically and statistically significant lower incidence of major pulmonary complications.

Project description:BackgroundReversing 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.MethodsThis 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.ResultsA 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).ConclusionsThis 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.

Project description:IntroductionDespite the use of quantitative neuromuscular monitoring together with the administration of reversal drugs (neostigmine or sugammadex), the incidence of residual neuromuscular blockade defined as a train-of-four ratio (TOFr) <0.9 remains high. Even TOFr >0.9 cannot ensure adequate recovery of neuromuscular function when T1 height is not recovered completely. Thus, a mathematical correction of TOFr needs to be applied because the return of a normal TOFr can precede the return of a normal T1 twitch height. On the other hand, different muscles have different sensitivities to neuromuscular blockade agents; thus, complete recovery of one specific muscle group does not represent complete recovery of all other muscles. Therefore, our study aims to assess the muscle strength recovery of respiratory-related muscle groups by ultrasound and evaluate global strength using handgrip dynamometry in the early postoperative period when TOFr=0.9 and corrected TOFr (cTOFr)=0.9 with comparison of neostigmine versus sugammadex as reversal drugs.Methods and analysisThis study will be a prospective, single-blinded, randomised controlled trial involving 60 patients with American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I-II and aged between 18 and 65 years, who will undergo microlaryngeal surgery. We will assess geniohyoid muscle, parasternal intercostal muscle, diaphragm, abdominal wall muscle and handgrip strength at four time points: before anaesthesia, TOFr=0.9, cTOFr=0.9 and 30 min after admission to the post anaesthesia care unit. Our primary objective will be to compare the effects of neostigmine and sugammadex on the recovery of muscle strength of different muscle groups in the early postoperative period when TOFr=0.9 and cTOFr=0.9. The secondary objective will be to observe the difference of muscle strength between the time points of TOFr=0.9 and cTOFr=0.9 to find out the clinical significance of cTOFr >0.9.Ethics and disseminationThe protocol was reviewed and approved by the Ethics Committee of The First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University. The findings will be disseminated to the public through peer-reviewed scientific journals.Trial registration numberChiCTR2000033832.

Project description: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].

Dataset Information

Reversal of profound vecuronium-induced neuromuscular block under sevoflurane anesthesia: sugammadex versus neostigmine.

Publications

Reversal of profound vecuronium-induced neuromuscular block under sevoflurane anesthesia: sugammadex versus neostigmine.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets