Literature DB >> 21842171

Intraoperative reversal of neuromuscular block with sugammadex or neostigmine during extreme lateral interbody fusion, a novel technique for spine surgery.

Milan Adamus1, Lumir Hrabalek, Tomas Wanek, Tomas Gabrhelik, Jana Zapletalova.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Extreme lateral interbody fusion (XLIF) is a method for stabilization of the lumbar spine. Intraoperatively, the surgeon identifies the lumbar nerve roots with a stimulator to prevent their injury. The objective of this study was to determine the extent to which shallow rocuronium-induced neuromuscular block must be intraoperatively reversed for reliable identification of nerve roots.
METHODS: General anesthesia (midazolam-propofol-sufentanil-oxygen/air/sevoflurane-rocuronium) was administered to all patients. Train-of-four (TOF) stimulation of the ulnar nerve at 15-s intervals and electromyographic response of the adductor pollicis muscle were used. During operation, the surgeon stimulated the lumbar nerve roots (5-10 mA) to identify their course. At the appearance of two twitches to the TOF stimuli, sugammadex (2 mg/kg) or neostigmine (0.04 mg/kg) was administered. When the response to nerve root stimulation appeared, the TOF ratio was recorded.
RESULTS: When the response to nerve root stimulation with 10 mA became detectable, the median (range) TOF ratios were 0.67 (0.50-0.81) and 0.65 (0.42-0.71) after sugammadex and neostigmine, respectively. Similarly, TOF ratios at the first detectable response to stimulation with 5 mA were 0.88 (0.67-0.93) and 0.83 (0.61-0.93). After sugammadex and neostigmine, the respective intervals until TOF ratio ≥0.90 were 2.0 (0.8-3.3) and 15.9 (7.3-28.8) min.
CONCLUSION: Intraoperative reversal of shallow rocuronium-induced block with either sugammadex or neostigmine is an efficient method. For reliable detection of lumbar nerve roots with a stimulating current of 10 mA, the block should be reversed to a TOF ratio of at least 0.70. For a current intensity of 5 mA, the TOF ratio should reach 0.90.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21842171     DOI: 10.1007/s00540-011-1209-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Anesth        ISSN: 0913-8668            Impact factor:   2.078


  13 in total

1.  Residual paralysis in the PACU after a single intubating dose of nondepolarizing muscle relaxant with an intermediate duration of action.

Authors:  Bertrand Debaene; Benoît Plaud; Marie-Pierre Dilly; François Donati
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 7.892

2.  The duration of residual neuromuscular block after administration of neostigmine or sugammadex at two visible twitches during train-of-four monitoring.

Authors:  Hanna L Illman; Päivi Laurila; Heikki Antila; Olli A Meretoja; Seppo Alahuhta; Klaus T Olkkola
Journal:  Anesth Analg       Date:  2010-10-26       Impact factor: 5.108

3.  Good clinical research practice in pharmacodynamic studies of neuromuscular blocking agents II: the Stockholm revision.

Authors:  T Fuchs-Buder; C Claudius; L T Skovgaard; L I Eriksson; R K Mirakhur; J Viby-Mogensen
Journal:  Acta Anaesthesiol Scand       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 2.105

4.  Can difficult intubation be easily and rapidly predicted?

Authors:  Sarka Fritscherova; Milan Adamus; Katerina Dostalova; Jirina Koutna; Lumir Hrabalek; Jana Zapletalova; Radovan Uvizl; Vladimir Janout
Journal:  Biomed Pap Med Fac Univ Palacky Olomouc Czech Repub       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 1.245

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

Authors:  Manfred Blobner; Lars I Eriksson; Jens Scholz; Johann Motsch; Giorgio Della Rocca; Martine E Prins
Journal:  Eur J Anaesthesiol       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 4.330

6.  Extreme Lateral Interbody Fusion (XLIF): a novel surgical technique for anterior lumbar interbody fusion.

Authors:  Burak M Ozgur; Henry E Aryan; Luiz Pimenta; William R Taylor
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2006 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 4.166

Review 7.  Sugammadex compared with neostigmine/glycopyrrolate for routine reversal of neuromuscular block: a systematic review and economic evaluation.

Authors:  F Paton; M Paulden; D Chambers; M Heirs; S Duffy; J M Hunter; M Sculpher; N Woolacott
Journal:  Br J Anaesth       Date:  2010-10-08       Impact factor: 9.166

8.  [XLIF--a new technique of the lumbar vertebra disc replacement: initial experience].

Authors:  L Hrabálek; T Wanek; M Adamus
Journal:  Rozhl Chir       Date:  2010-12

9.  Allergy to low dose sugammadex.

Authors:  L Menéndez-Ozcoidi; J R Ortiz-Gómez; J M Olaguibel-Ribero; M J Salvador-Bravo
Journal:  Anaesthesia       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 6.955

Review 10.  Clinical limitations of acetylcholinesterase antagonists.

Authors:  James E Caldwell
Journal:  J Crit Care       Date:  2009-01-17       Impact factor: 3.425

View more
  2 in total

Review 1.  Efficacy and safety of sugammadex versus neostigmine in reversing neuromuscular blockade in adults.

Authors:  Ana-Marija Hristovska; Patricia Duch; Mikkel Allingstrup; Arash Afshari
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2017-08-14

2.  Use of sugammadex in parotid surgery: a case report.

Authors:  Mustapha Bensghir; Abdelghafour Elkoundi; Redouane Ahtil; Mohammed Meziane; Charki Haimeur
Journal:  J Med Case Rep       Date:  2016-06-24
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.