6
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      The comparative efficacy and safety of sugammadex and neostigmine in reversing neuromuscular blockade in adults. A Cochrane systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

      1 , 2 , 1 , 1

      Anaesthesia

      Wiley

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 55

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          A survey of current management of neuromuscular block in the United States and Europe.

          Postoperative residual neuromuscular block is a frequent occurrence. Recent surveys of clinical practice in Europe suggest that neuromuscular blocking drugs are often administered without appropriate monitoring. No comparable survey has been undertaken in the United States (US). From this survey, we compared current clinical neuromuscular practice and attitudes between anesthesia practitioners in the US and Europe. We conducted an Internet-based survey among anesthesia practitioners in the US and Europe. The Anesthesia Patient Safety Foundation and the European Society of Anaesthesiology e-mailed all of their active members, inviting them to anonymously answer a series of questions on a dedicated Internet Protocol address-sensitive website. The survey was available online for 60 days. The chi(2) test and Fisher's exact test were used to compare clinical survey items between the 2 cohorts. A total of 2636 completed surveys were received. Most respondents from the US (64.1%) and Europe (52.2%) estimated the incidence of clinically significant postoperative residual neuromuscular weakness to be <1% (P < 0.0001). Routine pharmacologic reversal was less common in Europe than in the US (18% vs 34.2%, respectively; P < 0.0001), and quantitative monitors were available to fewer clinicians in the US (22.7%) than in Europe (70.2%) (P < 0.0001). However, 19.3% of Europeans and 9.4% of Americans never use neuromuscular monitors. Most respondents reported that neither conventional nerve stimulators nor quantitative train-of-four monitors should be part of minimum monitoring standards. Our results suggest a lack of agreement among anesthesia providers about the best way to monitor neuromuscular function. Efforts to improve awareness by developing formal training programs and/or publishing official guidelines on best practices to reduce the incidence of postoperative neuromuscular weakness and patient morbidity are warranted.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Effects of sugammadex on incidence of postoperative residual neuromuscular blockade: a randomized, controlled study.

            This study aimed to investigate whether reversal of rocuronium-induced neuromuscular blockade with sugammadex reduced the incidence of residual blockade and facilitated operating room discharge readiness.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Reversal of rocuronium-induced neuromuscular blockade with sugammadex compared with neostigmine during sevoflurane anaesthesia: results of a randomised, controlled trial.

              Sugammadex, a modified gamma-cyclodextrin, is a selective relaxant-binding agent designed to reverse the effects of the steroidal neuromuscular blocking agents rocuronium or vecuronium. This study compared the efficacy of sugammadex and neostigmine for reversal of neuromuscular blockade induced by rocuronium for facilitating elective surgery. This randomised, multicentre, parallel-group trial included 98 adult patients. Patients received intravenous propofol for induction followed by sevoflurane maintenance anaesthesia. Neuromuscular blockade was monitored using acceleromyography and a train-of-four (TOF) mode of stimulation. Patients were randomly allocated to receive sugammadex 2.0 mg kg(-1) or neostigmine 50 microg kg (-1) (with glycopyrrolate 10 microg kg(-1)) at reappearance of the second response of the TOF (mean 16% twitch height of first response) after the last dose of rocuronium. Safety was evaluated by assessing adverse events, laboratory variables and vital signs. Time to recovery of the TOF ratio of 0.9 after sugammadex compared with neostigmine was significantly shorter (P < 0.0001), being 1.5 versus 18.6 min (geometric means). Predictability of response was greater with sugammadex than neostigmine: with 98% of sugammadex patients versus 11% of neostigmine patients recovering to a TOF ratio of 0.9 within 5 min. There were no clinical events related to residual neuromuscular blockade or reoccurrence of blockade. Serious adverse events were observed in two sugammadex-treated patients and in three neostigmine-treated patients, respectively, but none were considered related to study drugs. Sugammadex achieved significantly faster recovery of neuromuscular function after rocuronium to a TOF ratio of 0.9 compared with neostigmine (Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT00451217).
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Anaesthesia
                Anaesthesia
                Wiley
                00032409
                May 2018
                May 2018
                December 27 2017
                : 73
                : 5
                : 631-641
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Pediatric and Obstetric Anaesthesia; Juliane Marie Centre; Copenhagen University Hospital; Copenhagen Denmark
                [2 ]Department of Neuroanaesthesia; Juliane Marie Centre; Copenhagen University Hospital; Copenhagen Denmark
                Article
                10.1111/anae.14160
                © 2017

                Comments

                Comment on this article