Drug-specific cyclodextrins with emphasis on sugammadex, the neuromuscular blocker rocuronium and perioperative anaphylaxis: implications for drug allergy

Efficacy and safety of adamgammadex for reversing rocuronium-induced deep neuromuscular blockade: A multicenter, randomized, phase IIb study

The rapid reversal of deep neuromuscular blockade (NMB) is important but remains challenging. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of adamgammadex versus sugammadex in reversing deep rocuronium-induced NMB. This multicenter, randomized, phase IIb study included 80 patients aged 18-64 years, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade 1-2, undergoing elective surgery under general anesthesia with rocuronium. Patients were randomized to the adamgammadex 7, 8, and 9 mg/kg group or the sugammadex 4 mg/kg group. The primary efficacy variable was the time to recovery of train-of-four ratio (TOFr) to 0.9. The secondary efficacy variables were the time to recovery of TOFr to 0.7, antagonistic success rate of the recovery of TOFr to 0.9 within 5 min, and incidence rate of recurarization within 30 min after drug administration. The explorative efficacy variable was the time to recovery of the corrected TOFr to 0.9 (actual/baseline TOF ratio). Adamgammadex 7, 8, and 9 mg/kg and sugammadex 4 mg/kg groups did not significantly differ in all efficacy variables. Importantly, adamgammadex 9 mg/kg permitted reversal within a geometric mean of 2.9 min. According to the safety profile, adamgammadex achieved good tolerance and low incidence of drug-related adverse events compared with the 4 mg/kg sugammadex. Adamgammadex 7, 8, and 9 mg/kg facilitated rapid reversal of deep rocuronium-induced NMB and had good tolerance and low incidence of drug-related adverse events. Therefore, adamgammadex is a potential and promising alternative to sugammadex.

The Nonirritating Concentrations of Neuromuscular Blocking Agents and Related Compounds

BACKGROUND

Skin testing (ST) concentrations of neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBAs), NMBA-reversal agents, and the sugammadex-rocuronium inclusion complex (S-R-Cx) vary widely among reports.

OBJECTIVE

To determine maximal ST nonirritant concentrations (NICs) of NMBAs (cisatracurium, rocuronium, succinylcholine, and vecuronium), NMBA-reversal agents (neostigmine and sugammadex), and S-R-Cx in NMBA-tolerant and NMBA-naïve participants.

METHODS

A single-center, prospective study between October 2019 and November 2021 of adult participants with or without a planned surgical procedure. The reference standard was tolerance of medication tested during a procedure (NMBA-tolerant group) before ST. Participants received skin prick testing (SPT) and intradermal test (IDT) injections at 5-7 increasing concentrations of 1 or more medications. All medications were reconstituted according to package insert instructions and diluted with 0.9% saline. A concentration was considered irritant when more than 5% of participants had a positive test per ST positivity criteria (wheal ≥3 mm than initial wheal and associated erythema of the same size or greater than wheal). We also compared our results with current guidelines.

RESULTS

A total of 187 participants (78% NMBA-tolerant) underwent 7812 skin tests. All undiluted SPT concentrations were nonirritant. We found the following maximal IDT NICs (mg/mL): cisatracurium (0.02), rocuronium (0.05), succinylcholine (0.8), vecuronium (0.01), neostigmine (0.2), sugammadex (50), and S-R-Cx (sugammadex 7.14 + rocuronium 2).

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that SPT may be performed with undiluted stock concentrations. We confirm maximal IDT NICs for cisatracurium and rocuronium. We also propose that currently recommended maximal IDT NICs of succinylcholine, neostigmine, sugammadex, and S-R-Cx could be increased, whereas the maximal IDT NIC of vecuronium could be decreased compared with current guidelines and prior reports.

Allergic and other adverse reactions to drugs used in anesthesia and surgery

The list of drugs patients may be exposed to during the perioperative and postoperative periods is potentially extensive. It includes induction agents, neuromuscular blocking drugs (NMBDs), opioids, antibiotics, sugammadex, colloids, local anesthetics, polypeptides, antifibrinolytic agents, heparin and related anticoagulants, blue dyes, chlorhexidine, and a range of other agents depending on several factors related to individual patients’ clinical condition and progress in the postoperative recovery period. To avoid poor or ultrarapid metabolizers to a particular drug (for example tramadol and codeine) or possible adverse drug reactions (ADRs), some drugs may need to be avoided during or after surgery. This will be the case for patients with a history of anaphylaxis or other adverse events/intolerances to a known drug. Other drugs may be ceased for a period before surgery, e.g., anticoagulants that increase the chance of bleeding; diuretics for patients with acute renal failure; antihypertensives relative to kidney injury after major vascular surgery; and serotonergic drugs that together with some opioids may rarely induce serotonin toxicity. Studies of germline variations shown by genotyping and phenotyping to identify a predisposition of genetic factors to ADRs offer an increasingly important approach to individualize drug therapy. Studies of associations of human leukocyte antigen (HLA) genes with some serious delayed immune-mediated reactions are ongoing and variations of drug-metabolizing cytochrome CYP450 enzymes, P-glycoprotein, and catechol-O -methyltransferase show promise for the assessment of ADRs and non-responses to drugs, particularly opioids and other analgesics. Surveys of ADRs from an increasing number of institutions often cover small numbers of patients, are retrospective in nature, fail to clearly identify culprit drugs, and do not adequately distinguish immune-mediated from non-immune-mediated anaphylactoid reactions. From the many surveys undertaken, the large list of agents identified during and after anesthesia and surgery are examined for their ADR involvement. Drugs are classified into those most often involved, (NMBD and antibiotics); drugs that are becoming more frequently implicated, namely antibiotics (particularly teicoplanin), and blue dyes; those becoming less frequently involved; and drugs more rarely involved in perioperative, and postoperative adverse reactions but still important and necessary to keep in mind for the occasional potential sensitive patient. Clinicians should be aware of the similarities between drug-induced true allergic type I IgE/FcεRI- and pseudoallergic MRGPRX2-mediated ADRs, the clinical features of each, and their distinguishing characteristics. Procedures for identifying MRGPRX2 agonists and diagnosing and distinguishing pseudoallergic from allergic reaction mechanisms are discussed.

Successful management of rocuronium-induced anaphylaxis with sugammadex: A case report

Although anaphylaxis during anaesthesia is a rare event, neuromuscular blocking drugs are responsible for 62% of anaesthesia-related anaphylaxis. However, sugammadex, a modified gamma-cyclodextrin, can encapsulate rocuronium molecules and cause the rapid reversal of the neuromuscular blockade. A 68-year-old man who presented for a radical prostatectomy was induced with IV fentanyl/propofol/rocuronium. He had not received rocuronium previously but had received cisatracurium. Shortly after anaesthesia, the patient’s heart rate abruptly increased, and systolic blood pressure (SBP) dropped to 40 mm Hg. Despite cardiopulmonary resuscitation and intensive management, his haemodynamic stability did not improve until he received IV sugammadex, 200 mg. Intradermal skin tests showed he was positive for cisatracurium, rocuronium and succinylcholine. The patient was suspected to have cross-reactivity of rocuronium with cisatracurium. This case highlights the potential benefit of sugammadex as an adjunct to conventional measures during rocuronium-induced anaphylaxis.

Advantages and pitfalls of clinical application of sugammadex

Sugammadex, a modified γ-cyclodextrin, is one of the drugs focused on in the anesthetic field because it provides rapid and complete reversal from neuromuscular blockade (NMB) by encapsulating rocuronium. Its introduction has revolutionized anesthesia practice because it is a safe, predictable, and reliable neuromuscular antagonist. Hence, its use has increased worldwide. Further, it has been in the spotlight for recovering from deep NMB in laparoscopic surgery and improving the surgical condition. Recently, studies have been conducted on the postoperative outcome after deep NMB and use of sugammadex in various clinical conditions. However, with increase in sugammadex use, reports regarding its complications are increasing. Appropriate dosing of sugammadex with quantitative neuromuscular monitoring is emphasized because under-dosing or over-dosing of sugammadex might be associated with unexperienced complications. Sugammadex is now leaping into an ideal reversal agent, changing the anesthesia practice.

Anaphylactic shock after sugammadex administration, induced by formation of a sugammadex-rocuronium complex -a case report

Background

Sugammadex is a reversal agent for non-depolarizing neuromuscular blockers and widely used worldwide on account of its rapid and effective reversal from neuromuscular blockade, despite its advantages, multiple cases of sugammadex-induced anaphylactic shock have been reported.

Case

A 42-year-old man developed anaphylactic shock in the postanesthesia care unit. Initially, sugammadex was suspected as the causative agent, but an intradermal skin test revealed negative results. A further skin test was performed with sugammadex-rocuronium complex that yielded positive results.

Conclusions

Anesthesiologists and healthcare providers should be aware of the possibility of anaphylaxis from the sugammadex-rocuronium complex, as well as from sugammadex or rocuronium alone.

Association between sugammadex and anaphylaxis in pediatric patients: A nested case-control study using a national inpatient database

BACKGROUND

Sugammadex is used as a reversal drug during anesthesia. Although several case reports have described anaphylaxis following sugammadex infusion, little is known about the relationship between sugammadex and anaphylaxis, particularly in pediatric patients.

AIMS

The aim of this retrospective study was to investigate the association between sugammadex and in-hospital anaphylaxis in pediatric patients who underwent general anesthesia.

METHODS

We identified patients who underwent general anesthesia in a Japanese national inpatient database between July 2010 and March 2016. We conducted 1-4 case-control matching between patients with and without perioperative anaphylaxis. We calculated the adjusted odds ratio for sugammadex use and occurrence of anaphylaxis, using a conditional logistic regression analysis with adjustment for duration of anesthesia, antibiotics, and blood transfusions.

RESULTS

Among 835 405 patients who underwent general anesthesia, we identified 149 (0.018%) patients with anaphylactic shock and 472 (0.056%) with a combination of anaphylaxis associated signs/symptoms and skin lesions. Sugammadex use was not significantly associated with anaphylactic shock (odds ratio, 0.80; 95% confidence interval, 0.53-1.21; P = .29) or the combination of anaphylaxis associated signs/symptoms and skin lesions (odds ratio, 1.25; 95% confidence interval, 0.97-1.60; P = .08).

CONCLUSION

The present study showed no significant association between sugammadex and perioperative anaphylaxis in pediatric patients who underwent general anesthesia.

A suspected case of rocuronium-sugammadex complex-induced anaphylactic shock after cesarean section

An anaphylactic reaction during a cesarean section occurs rarely, and rocuronium is thought to be one of the common agents causing perioperative anaphylaxis. Here we report an anaphylactic shock after cesarean section that is suggested to be induced by the rocuronium-sugammadex complex. A 36-year-old primigravida underwent an elective cesarean section under general anesthesia due to placenta previa. While the operation was completed uneventfully, she developed anaphylactic shock following sugammadex administration. She was successfully managed with rapid treatments. Serum tryptase level was significantly elevated. Although sugammadex was first suspected to be the causative agent, the result of intradermal skin tests with sugammadex were negative. Surprisingly, a subsequent intradermal test with undiluted rocuronium caused the patient to fall into a state of shock. Furthermore, a later skin-prick test with pre-mixed rocuronium-sugammadex complex also revealed a strong positive reaction, and a test with only rocuronium showed negative. We finally concluded that the rocuronium-sugammadex complex is the causative agent in this case. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report suggesting anaphylaxis caused by the rocuronium-sugammadex complex. This case highlights the importance of appropriate examinations to determinate the pathogenesis of anaphylaxis in order to establish risk reduction strategies.

Non-IgE-Dependent Hypersensitivity to Rocuronium Reversed by Sugammadex: Report of Three Cases and Hypothesis on the Underlying Mechanism

We present 3 cases of pseudoallergic (anaphylactoid) reactions to perioperatively administered rocuronium, which rapidly resolved after sugammadex injection. Allergological workup showed no evidence for immediate-type hypersensitivity to the drugs used for anesthesia, including rocuronium. However, rocuronium induced an irritative reaction in skin tests in all 3 patients and in 3 healthy individuals. This reaction was specifically suppressed by adding sugammadex at a 1:1 molecular proportion to rocuronium before the skin tests. This observation suggests that the patients suffered from a pseudoallergic reaction, and indicates that sugammadex might act via the inhibition of non-IgE mediated MRGPRX2 (Mas-related G-protein-coupled receptor member X2)-triggered mast cell degranulation induced by rocuronium.

A case of anaphylaxis apparently induced by sugammadex and rocuronium in successive surgeries

Rocuronium is the agent most frequently involved in perioperative anaphylaxis, and sugammadex has also been known to induce anaphylactic reactions. We describe a case of successive anaphylactic episodes that seemed to be induced by clinical doses of rocuronium and sugammadex. The patient was a 19-year-old woman who had a medical history of asthma, but no history of surgery. She had been injured in a fall, and several surgeries were scheduled for multiple bone fractures. At the first surgery under general anesthesia, she developed anaphylaxis 5 min after sugammadex administration. A second general anesthesia for treatment of calcaneal fracture was induced uneventfully without neuromuscular blockade after 10 days. A third general anesthesia was scheduled to reinforce the spinal column 12 days after the first surgery. She developed anaphylaxis 8 min after rocuronium administration. The level of plasma histamine was elevated, but serum tryptase level remained normal. This surgery was canceled and rescheduled without use of a neuromuscular blockade. Skin tests were performed in a later investigation. The patient showed positive results on intradermal tests for sugammadex and rocuronium, supporting a diagnosis of allergic reactions to both drugs. Clinicians must be aware that anaphylactic reactions can be induced by both sugammadex and rocuronium.

Sugammadex and rocuronium-induced anaphylaxis

Perioperative anaphylaxis is a life-threatening clinical condition that is typically the result of drugs or substances used for anesthesia or surgery. The most common cause of anaphylaxis during anesthesia is reportedly neuromuscular blocking agents. Of the many muscle relaxants that are clinically available, rocuronium is becoming popular in many countries. Recent studies have demonstrated that succinylcholine (but also rocuronium use) is associated with a relatively high rate of IgE-mediated anaphylaxis compared with other muscle relaxant agents. Sugammadex is widely used for reversal of the effects of steroidal neuromuscular blocking agents, such as rocuronium and vecuronium. Confirmed cases of allergic reactions to clinical doses of sugammadex have also been recently reported. Given these circumstances, the number of cases of hypersensitivity to either sugammadex or rocuronium is likely to increase. Thus, anesthesiologists should be familiar with the epidemiology, mechanisms, and clinical presentations of anaphylaxis induced by these drugs. In this review, we focus on the diagnosis and treatment of anaphylaxis to sugammadex and neuromuscular blocking agents. Moreover, we discuss recent studies in this field, including the diagnostic utility of flow cytometry and improvement of rocuronium-induced anaphylaxis with the use of sugammadex.

Unusual Cyclodextrin Derivatives as a New Avenue to Modulate Self- and Metal-Induced Aβ Aggregation

Mounting evidence suggests an important role of cyclodextrins in providing protection in neurodegenerative disorders. Metal dyshomeostasis is reported to be a pathogenic factor in neurodegeneration because it could be responsible for damage involving oxidative stress and protein aggregation. As such, metal ions represent an effective target. To improve the metal-binding ability of cyclodextrin, we synthesized three new 8-hydroxyquinoline-cyclodextrin conjugates with difunctionalized cyclodextrins. In particular, the 3-difunctionalized regioisomer represents the first example of cyclodextrin with two pendants at the secondary rim, resulting in a promising compound. The derivatives have significant antioxidant capacity and the powerful activity in inhibiting self-induced amyloid-β aggregation seems to be led by synergistic effects of both cyclodextrin and hydroxyquinoline. Moreover, the derivatives are also able to complex metal ions and to inhibit metal-induced protein aggregation. Therefore, these compounds could have potential as therapeutic agents in diseases related to protein aggregation and metal dyshomeostasis.

Cucurbit[7]uril host-guest complexes and [2]pseudorotaxanes with N-methylpiperidinium, N-methylpyrrolidinium, and N-methylmorpholinium cations in aqueous solution

The formations of host-guest complexes between cucurbit[7]uril and a series of N-substituted N-methylpiperidinium, N-methylpyrrolidinium, and N-methylmorpholinium cations in aqueous solution have been investigated using (1)H NMR spectroscopy and electrospray ionization mass spectrometry. Dications comprising the N-methylheterocyclic head groups, bridged by a decamethylene chain, form sequential 1 : 1 ([2]pseudorotaxanes) and 2 : 1 host-guest complexes with cucurbit[7]uril. The cucurbituril initially resides over the decamethylene chain, however with further additions of the host molecule a translocation of the hosts to the cationic N-heterocyclic head groups occurs. The order of the magnitude of the cucurbituril host-guest stability constants, determined by competitive (1)H NMR binding experiments, follows the trend in the hydrophobicity of the quaternary ammonium cations.

Sugammadex as a reversal agent for neuromuscular block: an evidence-based review

Sugammadex is the first clinical representative of a new class of drugs called selective relaxant binding agents. It has revolutionized the way anesthesiologists think about drug reversal. Sugammadex selectively binds rocuronium or vecuronium, thereby reversing their neuromuscular blocking action. Due to its 1:1 binding of rocuronium or vecuronium, it is able to reverse any depth of neuromuscular block. So far, it has been approved for use in adult patients and for pediatric patients over 2 years. Since its approval in Europe, Japan, and Australia, further insight on its use in special patient populations and specific diseases have become available. Due to its pharmacodynamic profile, sugammadex, in combination with rocuronium, may have the potential to displace succinylcholine as the "gold standard" muscle relaxant for rapid sequence induction. The use of rocuronium or vecuronium, with the potential of reverse of their action with sugammadex, seems to be safe in patients with impaired neuromuscular transmission, ie, neuromuscular diseases, including myasthenia gravis. Data from long-term use of sugammadex is not yet available. Evidence suggesting an economic advantage of using sugammadex and justifying its relatively high cost for an anesthesia-related drug, is missing.

Developments in the field of allergy in 2011 through the eyes of Clinical and Experimental Allergy

As in previous years, we felt it would be of value to our readership to summarize the new information provided by the authors who have published in Clinical and Experimental Allergy in 2011 and set this in the context of recent advances in our understanding of the pathogenesis and management of allergic disease in all its many manifestations. In 2011, about 210 articles were published in Clinical and Experimental Allergy including editorials, reviews, opinion articles, guidelines, letters, book reviews and of course at the heart of the journal, papers containing original data. As before, this review is divided into sections based on the way the journal is structured, although this year we have grouped together all the papers dealing with mechanisms of allergic disease, whether they involve patients (clinical mechanisms), pure in vitro studies (basic mechanisms) or animal models (experimental models), as we felt this was a more coherent way to deal with the subject. In the field of asthma and rhinitis, the relationship between airway inflammation and airway dysfunction was of perennial interest to investigators, as were phenotypes and biomarkers. Aspirin hypersensitivity appeared in studies in several papers and there was new interest in asthma in the elderly. The mechanisms involved in allergic disease describe advances in our understanding of T cell responses, the relationship between inflammation and disease, mast cell and basophil activation, steroid resistance and novel therapies. In the section dealing with epidemiology, studies seeking to identify risk factors for allergic disease including vitamin D are prominent, as once again are studies investigating gene-environment interactions. The clinical allergy section focuses on drug allergy, food allergy and immunotherapy. The area of oral immunotherapy for food allergy is well covered and we were grateful to Stephen Durham for guest editing an outstanding special issue on immunotherapy in the centenary year of Leonard Noon's pioneering work. Lastly, in the field of allergens, the interest in component-resolved diagnosis continues to grow and there are also articles describing important novel cultivars and the effect of food processing on the allergenic properties of foods. Another terrific year, full of important and high-quality work,which the journal has been proud to bring to the allergy community.