Efficacy and safety of sugammadex versus neostigmine in reversing neuromuscular blockade in adults.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Hristovska AM
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6483345 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundRapid and complete reversal of neuromuscular blockade (NMB) is desirable at the end of surgery. Sugammadex reverses rocuronium-induced NMB by encapsulation. It is well tolerated in Caucasian patients, providing rapid reversal of moderate (reappearance of T2) rocuronium-induced NMB. We investigated the efficacy and safety of sugammadex versus neostigmine in Korean patients.MethodsThis randomized, safety assessor-blinded trial (NCT01050543) included Korean patients undergoing general anesthesia. Rocuronium 0.6 mg/kg was given prior to intubation with maintenance doses of 0.1-0.2 mg/kg as required. Patients received sugammadex 2.0 mg/kg or neostigmine 50 µg/kg with glycopyrrolate 10 µg/kg to reverse the NMB at the reappearance of T2, after the last rocuronium dose. The primary efficacy endpoint was the time from sugammadex or neostigmine administration to recovery of the train-of-four (TOF) ratio to 0.9. The safety of these medications was also assessed.ResultsOf 128 randomized patients, 118 had evaluable data (n = 59 in each group). The geometric mean (95% confidence interval) time to recovery of the TOF ratio to 0.9 was 1.8 (1.6, 2.0) minutes in the sugammadex group and 14.8 (12.4, 17.6) minutes in the neostigmine group (P < 0.0001). Sugammadex was generally well tolerated, with no evidence of residual or recurrence of NMB; four patients in the neostigmine group reported adverse events possibly indicative of inadequate NMB reversal.ConclusionsSugammadex was well tolerated and provided rapid reversal of moderate rocuronium-induced NMB in Korean patients, with a recovery time 8.1 times faster than neostigmine. These results are consistent with those reported for Caucasian patients.
| S-EPMC3888842 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of sugammadex for reversing neuromuscular blockade in pediatric patients. MEDLINE and other three Databases were searched. Randomized clinical trials were included if they compared sugammadex with neostigmine or placebo in pediatric patients undergoing surgery involving the use of rocuronium or vecuronium. The primary outcome was the time interval from administration of reversal agents to train-of-four ratio (TOFr, T4/T1) > 0.9. Incidences of any drug-related adverse events were secondary outcomes. Trial inclusion, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment were performed independently. Mean difference and relative risk were used as summary statistics with random effects models. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed by the I2 statistic. Funnel plot was used to detect publication bias. Ten studies with 580 participants were included. Although considerable heterogeneity (I2 = 98.5%) was detected in primary outcome, the results suggested that, compared with placebo or neostigmine, sugammadex can reverse rocuronium-induced neuromuscular blockade more rapidly with lower incidence of bradycardia. No significant differences were found in the incidences of other adverse events. Compared with neostigmine or placebo, sugammadex may reverse rocuronium-induced neuromuscular blockade in pediatric patients rapidly and safely.
| S-EPMC5515941 | biostudies-literature
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.
| S-EPMC7864000 | biostudies-literature
Project description: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).
| S-EPMC2944304 | biostudies-literature
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].
| S-EPMC9772266 | biostudies-literature
Project description: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.
| S-EPMC9859243 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Sugammadex is known to reverse neuromuscular blockade induced by non-depolarizing agents. In children, the recommended dose for reversal of moderate neuromuscular blockade is 2 mg/kg. We investigated the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of sugammadex in Korean children. Methods: Children (2-17 years of age) undergoing brain or spine surgery were enrolled and randomly assigned to control (neostigmine) and 2, 4, or 8 mg/kg sugammadex groups. Following induction of anesthesia and monitoring of the response to train-of-four stimulation, 1 mg/kg rocuronium was intravenously administered. Upon reappearance of the second twitch to train-of-four stimulation, the study drug was administered according to group allocation. The plasma concentrations of rocuronium and sugammadex were serially measured at nine predefined time points following study drug administration. To determine efficacy, we measured the time elapsed from drug administration to recovery of T4/T1 ≥ 0.9. For pharmacokinetics, non-compartmental analysis was performed and we monitored adverse event occurrence from the time of study drug administration until 24 h post-surgery. Results: Among the 29 enrolled participants, the sugammadex (2 mg/kg) and control groups showed recovery times [median (interquartile range)] of 1.3 (1.0-1.9) and 7.7 (5.3-21.0) min, respectively (p = 0.002). There were no significant differences in recovery time among the participants in sugammadex groups. The pharmacokinetics of sugammadex were comparable to those of literature findings. Although two hypotensive events related to sugammadex were observed, no intervention was necessary. Conclusion: The findings of this pharmacokinetic analysis and efficacy study of sugammadex in Korean children indicated that sugammadex (2 mg/kg) may be safely administered for reversing moderate neuromuscular blockade. Some differences in pharmacokinetics of sugammadex were observed according to age. Clinical Trial Registration: http://clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04347486).
| S-EPMC10133539 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:The use of neostigmine after neuromuscular blockade (NMB) has been associated with postoperative respiratory complications. In previous studies, we found lower diaphragmatic activity after neostigmine reversal of NMB, compared to sugammadex. It is still unclear whether the adequate use of neostigmine guarantees normal respiratory muscle function after NMB. In this study, we wanted to assess the effect of commonly used degrees of NMB and their possible reversal strategies on respiratory muscle activity after the return of normal neuromuscular transmission. METHODS:This is a randomized, controlled, parallel-group, single-centre, double-blind study in patients scheduled for intracranial surgery at a tertiary academic hospital in Belgium. All participants received target controlled propofol/remifentanil anesthesia and were randomized into one of five groups, receiving either a shallow NMB with no reversal (shallow/saline), a shallow NMB with sugammadex reversal (shallow/sugammadex), a moderate NMB with neostigmine reversal (moderate/neostigmine), a moderate NMB with sugammadex reversal (moderate/sugammadex), or a deep NMB with sugammadex reversal (deep/sugammadex). Primary and secondary outcome parameters were diaphragm and intercostal electromyographic (EMG) activity at the moment of resumed spontaneous breathing activity, defined as a maximal interval of 10 min after the first spontaneous breath. RESULTS:For the five groups, a total of 55 patients could be included in the final analysis. Median time of spontaneous breathing analyzed was 5 min (IQR 3-9.5 min). Both the moderate/sugammadex and the moderate/neostigmine groups had lower levels of diaphragm EMG compared to the shallow/sugammadex group. The moderate/neostigmine group had lower levels of intercostal EMG activity compared to the shallow/saline group. CONCLUSIONS:In this study, the depth of neuromuscular blockade and type of reversal strategy impacts respiratory muscle activity at the moment of resumed spontaneous breathing and recovery of neuromuscular blockade. Both groups that received moderate NMB had lower levels of diaphragm EMG, compared to the shallow NMB group with sugammadex reversal. Compared to the shallow NMB group with no reversal, the moderate NMB with neostigmine reversal group had lower intercostal EMG activity. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01962298 on October 9, 2013 and EudraCT 2013-001926-25 on October 10, 2013.
| S-EPMC6800991 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSince the antagonistic effect of neostigmine on muscle relaxation is still controversial, this study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of neostigmine for the reversal of neuromuscular blockade in patients recovering from general anesthesia.MethodsMultiple databases, including PubMed, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), were electronically searched up to August 2021. Relevant studies on the use of neostigmine for neuromuscular blockade reversal in patients under general anesthesia were retrieved. Two reviewers independently screened and extracted data from the retrieved studies, and assessed their risk of bias. Review Manager 5.2 was used to evaluate the efficacy and safety of neostigmine based on the included articles. Heterogeneity and related subgroup, sensitivity, and bias analyses were carried out.ResultsThe analysis included 14 studies involving 2,109 patients, including 1,209 in the neostigmine group and 990 in the control group. Results from the random-effects model showed that neostigmine reduced the length of stay in the post-anesthesia care unit [mean difference (MD) =-17.73; 95% confidential interval (CI): -22.06 to -13.41; P<0.0001], the time to recovery of train-of-four ratio ≥0.9 (MD =-16.60; 95% CI: -23.67 to -9.52; P<0.0001), and the extubation time (MD =-16.69; 95% CI: -28.22 to -5.17; P=0.005). However, no difference was observed in adverse events between the neostigmine and control groups [odds ratio (OR) =0.97; 95% CI: 0.84-1.12; P=0.71]. Subgroup analyses adjusted for the dosage of neostigmine had no effect on the above results.ConclusionsNeostigmine can effectively and safely enhance neuromuscular recovery from non-depolarizing muscle relaxants in patients under general anesthesia.
| S-EPMC8667102 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThis study compared efficacy and safety of the selective relaxant binding agent sugammadex (2 mg/kg) with neostigmine (50 μg/kg) for neuromuscular blockade (NMB) reversal in Chinese and Caucasian subjects.MethodsThis was a randomized, active-controlled, multicenter, safety-assessor-blinded study (NCT00825812) in American Society of Anesthesiologists Class 1-3 subjects undergoing surgery with propofol anesthesia. Rocuronium 0.6 mg/kg was administered for endotracheal intubation, with 0.1-0.2 mg/kg maintenance doses given as required. NMB was monitored using TOF-Watch(®) SX. At second twitch reappearance, after last rocuronium dose, subjects received sugammadex 2 mg/kg or neostigmine 50 μg/kg plus atropine 10-20 μg/kg, according to randomization. Primary efficacy variable was time from sugammadex/neostigmine to recovery of the train-of-four (TOF) ratio to 0.9.ResultsOverall, 230 Chinese subjects (sugammadex, n = 119, neostigmine, n = 111); and 59 Caucasian subjects (sugammadex, n = 29, neostigmine, n = 30) had evaluable data. Geometric mean (95% CI) time to recovery to TOF ratio 0.9 was 1.6 (1.5-1.7) min with sugammadex vs 9.1 (8.0-10.3) min with neostigmine in Chinese subjects. Corresponding times for Caucasian subjects were 1.4 (1.3-1.5) min and 6.7 (5.5-8.0) min, respectively. Sugammadex 2 mg/kg was generally well tolerated, with no serious adverse events reported. There was no residual NMB or recurrence of NMB.ConclusionBoth Chinese and Caucasian subjects recovered from NMB significantly faster after sugammadex 2 mg/kg vs neostigmine 50 μg/kg, with a ~5.7 times (p < 0.0001) faster recovery with sugammadex vs neostigmine in Chinese subjects. Sugammadex was generally well tolerated.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00825812.
| S-EPMC4153006 | biostudies-literature