Literature DB >> 20523215

A randomized simultaneous comparison of acceleromyography with a peripheral nerve stimulator for assessing reversal of rocuronium-induced neuromuscular blockade with sugammadex.

Leon Drobnik1, Harald J Sparr, Sven-Egron Thörn, Karin S Khuenl-Brady, Henk Rietbergen, Martine E Prins, Johan Ullman.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND
OBJECTIVE: We investigated the relationship between acceleromyography and a peripheral nerve stimulator for measuring reversal in patients administered sugammadex following rocuronium.
METHODS: In this randomized, active and within-participant controlled study, patients received rocuronium 0.6 mg kg for intubation with 0.15 mg kg maintenance doses as required. Single-dose sugammadex 4.0 or 1.0 mg kg was given 15 min after the last rocuronium dose. Neuromuscular monitoring was performed simultaneously: acceleromyography on one forearm and a peripheral nerve stimulator on the other. The peripheral nerve stimulator assessor was blinded to acceleromyography results. The primary efficacy end point was the difference between time from start of sugammadex 4.0 mg kg administration to recovery of the train-of-four ratio to 0.9 (acceleromyography) and time to reappearance of the fourth twitch (T4) (peripheral nerve stimulator).
RESULTS: Sixty-one patients received sugammadex 4.0 mg kg. With acceleromyography, mean (SD) recovery time to a train-of-four ratio of at least 0.9 was 1.5 (0.7) min. With both the peripheral nerve stimulator and acceleromyography, mean (SD) time to T4 reappearance was 0.8 (0.3) min. Mean (95% confidence interval) difference between time to T4 reappearance (peripheral nerve stimulator) and recovery to a train-of-four ratio of at least 0.9 (acceleromyography) was 0.8 (0.6-0.9) min.
CONCLUSION: T4 is detected at similar times when measured by a peripheral nerve stimulator or acceleromyography following sugammadex 4.0 mg kg administration 15 min after rocuronium. The mean interval between T4 reappearance (peripheral nerve stimulator) and recovery to a train-of-four ratio of at least 0.9 (acceleromyography) was 0.8 min. These findings provide guidance for evaluating the reversal effect of sugammadex in clinical situations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20523215     DOI: 10.1097/EJA.0b013e32833b1b85

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Anaesthesiol        ISSN: 0265-0215            Impact factor:   4.330


  4 in total

1.  Fading Sugammadex, or Just Cautiously (re) Considered?!

Authors:  Sanda-Maria Copotoiu
Journal:  J Crit Care Med (Targu Mures)       Date:  2015-06-05

2.  Flucloxacillin and diclofenac do not cause recurrence of neuromuscular blockade after reversal with sugammadex.

Authors:  Pieter-Jan de Kam; Michiel W van den Heuvel; Peter Grobara; Alex Zwiers; Jean-Luc Jadoul; Erik de Clerck; Steven Ramael; Pierre A M Peeters
Journal:  Clin Drug Investig       Date:  2012-03-01       Impact factor: 2.859

Review 3.  Is lower-dose sugammadex a cost-saving strategy for reversal of deep neuromuscular block? Facts and fiction.

Authors:  Hans D de Boer; Ricardo V Carlos; Sorin J Brull
Journal:  BMC Anesthesiol       Date:  2018-11-06       Impact factor: 2.217

4.  Sugammadex and ideal body weight in bariatric surgery.

Authors:  Maria Sanfilippo; Francesco Alessandri; Ahmed Abdelgawwad Wefki Abdelgawwad Shousha; Antonio Sabba; Alessandra Cutolo
Journal:  Anesthesiol Res Pract       Date:  2013-06-06
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.