The Effect of Deep Versus Moderate Neuromuscular Block on Surgical Conditions and Postoperative Respiratory Function in Bariatric Laparoscopic Surgery

Perioperative efficiency of sugammadex following minimally invasive gastric sleeve surgery: A superiority trial

BACKGROUND

Studies have proposed that the routine use of sugammadex could provide perioperative time savings and a reduction in the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting. The purpose of this study was to test the effectiveness of sugammadex on perioperative times and on the incidences of adverse events when compared with the active control, neostigmine, for minimally invasive gastric sleeve surgery.

METHODS

Following institutional review board approval, patient characteristics, type of primary neuromuscular blocking reversal agents, operating room discharge times, post-anaesthesia care unit recovery times, and incidences of and treatment for postoperative nausea and vomiting and orotracheal reintubation were the measures of interest. Superiority testing determined the between-group means differences of the reversal agents on the two perioperative time periods of interest.

RESULTS

Superiority testing demonstrated no improvement of the two perioperative times with sugammadex. There was no clinical difference in the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting or in the number of antiemetic doses received in the post-anaesthesia care unit between the two groups. Finally, the two orotracheal reintubations in the post-anaesthesia care unit were in the sugammadex administered group.

CONCLUSION

These results with sugammadex provide no perioperative time savings or reduce the incidence and treatment for postoperative nausea and vomiting in the post-anaesthesia care unit when compared with neostigmine.

Effect of deep neuromuscular block on the quality of early recovery after sleeve gastrectomy in obese patients: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Deep neuromuscular block (NMB) has been shown to improve surgical conditions and alleviate post-operative pain in bariatric surgery compared with moderate NMB. We hypothesized that deep NMB could also improve the quality of early recovery after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG).

METHODS

Eighty patients were randomized to receive either deep (post-tetanic count 1-3) or moderate (train-of-four count 1-3) NMB. The QoR-15 questionnaire was used to evaluate the quality of early recovery at 1 day before surgery (T0), 24 and 48 h after surgery (T2, T3). Additionally, we recorded diaphragm excursion (DE), postoperative pain, surgical condition, cumulative dose of analgesics, time of first flatus and ambulation, post-operative nausea and vomiting, time of tracheal tube removal and hospitalization time.

MAIN RESULTS

The quality of recovery was significantly better 24 h after surgery in patients who received a deep versus moderate block (114.4 ± 12.9 versus 102.1 ± 18.1). Diaphragm excursion was significantly greater in the deep NMB group when patients performed maximal inspiration at T2 and T3 (P < 0.05). Patients who underwent deep NMB reported lower visceral pain scores 40 min after surgery; additionally, these patients experienced lower pain during movement at T3 (P < 0.05). Optimal surgical conditions were rated in 87.5% and 64.6% of all measurements during deep and moderate NMB respectively (P < 0.001). The time to tracheal tube removal was significantly longer in the deep NMB group (P = 0.001). There were no differences in other outcomes.

CONCLUSION

In obese patients receiving deep NMB during LSG, we observed improved QoR-15 scores, greater diaphragmatic excursions, improved surgical conditions, and visceral pain scores were lower. More evidence is needed to determine the effects of deep NMB on these outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ChiCTR2200065919. Date of retrospectively registered: 18/11/2022.

Deep neuromuscular blockade in adults undergoing an abdominal laparoscopic procedure

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic surgery is the preferred option for many procedures. To properly perform laparoscopic surgery, it is essential that sudden movements and abdominal contractions in patients are prevented, as it limits the surgeon's view. There has been a growing interest in the potential beneficial effect of deep neuromuscular blockade (NMB) in laparoscopic surgery. Deep NMB improves the surgical field by preventing abdominal contractions, and it is thought to decrease postoperative pain. However, it is uncertain if deep NMB improves intraoperative safety and thereby improves clinical outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of deep neuromuscular blockade versus no, shallow, or moderate neuromuscular blockade during laparoscopic intra- or transperitoneal procedures in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was 31 July 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised clinical trials (irrespective of language, blinding, or publication status) in adults undergoing laparoscopic intra- or transperitoneal procedures comparing deep NMB to moderate, shallow, or no NMB. We excluded trials that did not report any of the primary or secondary outcomes of our review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were 1. all-cause mortality, 2. health-related quality of life, and 3. proportion of participants with serious adverse events. Our secondary outcomes were 4. proportion of participants with non-serious adverse events, 5. readmissions within three months, 6. short-term pain scores, 7. measurements of postoperative recovery, and 8. operating time. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 42 randomised clinical trials with 3898 participants. Most trials included participants undergoing intraperitoneal oncological resection surgery. We present the Peto fixed-effect model for most dichotomous outcomes as only sparse events were reported. Comparison 1: deep versus moderate NMB Thirty-eight trials compared deep versus moderate NMB. Deep NMB may have no effect on mortality, but the evidence is very uncertain (Peto odds ratio (OR) 7.22, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.45 to 115.43; 12 trials, 1390 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Deep NMB likely results in little to no difference in health-related quality of life up to four days postoperative (mean difference (MD) 4.53 favouring deep NMB on the Quality of Recovery-40 score, 95% CI 0.96 to 8.09; 5 trials, 440 participants; moderate-certainty evidence; mean difference lower than the mean clinically important difference of 10 points). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of deep NMB on intraoperatively serious adverse events (deep NMB 38/1150 versus moderate NMB 38/1076; Peto OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.52; 21 trials, 2231 participants; very low-certainty evidence), short-term serious adverse events (up to 60 days) (deep NMB 37/912 versus moderate NMB 42/852; Peto OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.42; 16 trials, 1764 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and short-term non-serious adverse events (Peto OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.35; 11 trials, 1232 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Deep NMB likely does not alter the duration of surgery (MD -0.51 minutes, 95% CI -3.35 to 2.32; 34 trials, 3143 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The evidence is uncertain if deep NMB alters the length of hospital stay (MD -0.22 days, 95% CI -0.49 to 0.06; 19 trials, 2084 participants; low-certainty evidence) or pain scores one hour after surgery (MD -0.31 points on the numeric rating scale, 95% CI -0.59 to -0.03; 22 trials, 1823 participants; very low-certainty evidence; mean clinically important difference 1 point) and 24 hours after surgery (MD -0.60 points on the numeric rating scale, 95% CI -1.05 to -0.15; 16 trials, 1404 participants; very low-certainty evidence; mean clinically important difference 1 point). Comparison 2: deep versus shallow NMB Three trials compared deep versus shallow NMB. The trials did not report on mortality and health-related quality of life. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of deep NMB compared to shallow NMB on the proportion of serious adverse events (RR 1.66, 95% CI 0.50 to 5.57; 2 trials, 158 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Comparison 3: deep versus no NMB One trial compared deep versus no NMB. There was no mortality in this trial, and health-related quality of life was not reported. The proportion of serious adverse events was 0/25 in the deep NMB group and 1/25 in the no NMB group.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There was insufficient evidence to draw conclusions about the effects of deep NMB compared to moderate NMB on all-cause mortality and serious adverse events. Deep NMB likely results in little to no difference in health-related quality of life and duration of surgery compared to moderate NMB, and it may have no effect on the length of hospital stay. Due to the very low-certainty evidence, we do not know what the effect is of deep NMB on non-serious adverse events, pain scores, or readmission rates. Randomised clinical trials with adequate reporting of all adverse events would reduce the current uncertainties. Due to the low number of identified trials and the very low certainty of evidence, we do not know what the effect of deep NMB on serious adverse events is compared to shallow NMB and no NMB. We found no trials evaluating mortality and health-related quality of life.

The impact of moderate versus deep neuromuscular blockade on the recovery characteristics following laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: A randomized double blind clinical trial

Background

Anesthesia with deep neuromuscular block for laparoscopic surgery may result in less postoperative pain with lower intra-abdominal pressure. However, the results in the existing literature are controversial. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of deep versus moderate neuromuscular block (NMB) on the postoperative recovery characteristics after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) for weight loss surgery.

Methods

This is parallel-group, randomized clinical trial. The study was conducted at a tertiary care center. Patients undergoing LSG were included. Patients were randomly assigned to either deep (post-tetanic count 1-2) or moderate (train-of-four 1-2) NMB group. The primary outcomes were numeric rating scale scores of the postoperative pain at rest and postoperative shoulder pain. The secondary outcomes were the length of hospital stay (LOS) and postoperative complications. The statistics were performed using StatsDirect statistical software (Version 2.7.9).

Results

Two groups were identified: Group D (deep NMB), 29 patients, and Group M (moderate NMB), 28 patients. The BMI mean values for groups D and M were 44 and 45 kg/m2 respectively (P > 0.05). The mean durations of surgery for were 46.7 min and 44.1 min for groups M and D, respectively (P > 0.05). The mean train-of-four (TOF) counts were 0.3 and 0 for groups M and D, respectively (P < 0.05). The mean times from giving reversal agent to tracheal extubation (minutes) were 6.5 and 6.58 min for groups M and D, respectively (P > 0.05). In the recovery room, the means of pain scores were 3 and 4 for groups M and D, respectively (P > 0.05). Upon admission to the surgical ward, the median values of the pain score were non-significant (P > 0.05) (95% CI: 0.4-0.7). The opioid consumption in the recovery room was non-significant between both groups (P > 0.05) (95% CI: 0.3-0.6). Postoperative shoulder pain was non-significant between both groups (P > 0.05) (95% CI: 0.4-0.7). The median values of surgeon opinion of both groups were non-significant (P > 0.05). Regarding the LOS, the mean values of groups D and M were 1.20 and 1.21 days, respectively (P > 0.05).

Conclusions

There was no significant difference between moderate and deep NMB techniques in terms of duration of the surgical procedure, postoperative pain, shoulder pain, and length of hospital stay. Further studies on a larger sample size are required to investigate the long-term recovery characteristics of patients with obesity undergoing LSG.

Postoperative Pulmonary Complications and Perioperative Strategies: A Systematic Review

The occurrence of postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) is frequently observed and has been linked to elevated levels of morbidity and mortality, which have adverse effects on both clinical and financial outcomes in healthcare settings. This systematic review aims to present the evidence that supports our comprehension of PPCs and emphasize the circumstances that necessitate the use of postoperative noninvasive ventilation (PNIV) or re-intubation with postoperative mechanical ventilation (POMV). A search was conducted on the National Library of Medicine's Pubmed database and Cochrane Library until November 29, 2020, to find published reports of randomized control trials (RCTs) that assessed postoperative pulmonary complications. Data related to the prevalence of PPCs and the use of PNIV, POMV, and length of hospital stay were extracted from all the studies. For the analysis, a total of 13 studies involving 6,609 patients were included, and out of these, four RCTs reported statistically significant results. The use of protective lung ventilation (PLV) with low tidal volume and positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) during intraoperative ventilation, along with pressure-controlled (PCV) ventilation, as well as the postoperative ventilation strategy of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) combined with standard oxygen therapy were the only techniques that demonstrated a clear reduction in the incidence of PPCs. Furthermore, the use of PLV with low tidal volume and PEEP and intraoperative mechanical ventilation with a vital capacity maneuver followed by 10 cm H2O of PEEP were found to decrease the requirement for postoperative noninvasive ventilation. CPAP with standard oxygen therapy was the only intervention that reduced the need for reintubation. Various ventilation strategies are available for both intraoperative and postoperative periods with the goal of decreasing the need for postoperative noninvasive ventilation (PNIV) or re-intubation with postoperative mechanical ventilation (POMV).

Peri-operative management of neuromuscular blockade: A guideline from the European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care

Recent data indicated a high incidence of inappropriate management of neuromuscular block, with a high rate of residual paralysis and relaxant-associated postoperative complications. These data are alarming in that the available neuromuscular monitoring, as well as myorelaxants and their antagonists basically allow well tolerated management of neuromuscular blockade. In this first European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care (ESAIC) guideline on peri-operative management of neuromuscular block, we aim to present aggregated and evidence-based recommendations to assist clinicians provide best medical care and ensure patient safety. We identified three main clinical questions: Are myorelaxants necessary to facilitate tracheal intubation in adults? Does the intensity of neuromuscular blockade influence a patient's outcome in abdominal surgery? What are the strategies for the diagnosis and treatment of residual paralysis? On the basis of this, PICO (patient, intervention, comparator, outcome) questions were derived that guided a structured literature search. A stepwise approach was used to reduce the number of trials of the initial research ( n  = 24 000) to the finally relevant clinical studies ( n  = 88). GRADE methodology (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) was used for formulating the recommendations based on the findings of the included studies in conjunction with their methodological quality. A two-step Delphi process was used to determine the agreement of the panel members with the recommendations: R1 We recommend using a muscle relaxant to facilitate tracheal intubation (1A). R2 We recommend the use of muscle relaxants to reduce pharyngeal and/or laryngeal injury following endotracheal intubation (1C). R3 We recommend the use of a fast-acting muscle relaxant for rapid sequence induction intubation (RSII) such as succinylcholine 1 mg kg -1 or rocuronium 0.9 to 1.2 mg kg -1 (1B). R4 We recommend deepening neuromuscular blockade if surgical conditions need to be improved (1B). R5 There is insufficient evidence to recommend deep neuromuscular blockade in general to reduce postoperative pain or decrease the incidence of peri-operative complications. (2C). R6 We recommend the use of ulnar nerve stimulation and quantitative neuromuscular monitoring at the adductor pollicis muscle to exclude residual paralysis (1B). R7 We recommend using sugammadex to antagonise deep, moderate and shallow neuromuscular blockade induced by aminosteroidal agents (rocuronium, vecuronium) (1A). R8 We recommend advanced spontaneous recovery (i.e. TOF ratio >0.2) before starting neostigmine-based reversal and to continue quantitative monitoring of neuromuscular blockade until a TOF ratio of more than 0.9 has been attained. (1C).

Does deep neuromuscular blockade provide improved perioperative outcomes in adult patients? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Deep neuromuscular blockade provides better surgical workspace conditions in laparoscopic surgery, but it is still not clear whether it improves perioperative outcomes, not to mention its role in other types of surgeries. We performed this systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to investigate whether deep neuromuscular blockade versus other more superficial levels of neuromuscular blockade provides improved perioperative outcomes in adult patients in all types of surgeries. Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar were searched from inception to June 25, 2022. Forty studies (3271 participants) were included. Deep neuromuscular blockade was associated with an increased rate of acceptable surgical condition (relative risk [RR]: 1.19, 95% confidence interval [CI]: [1.11, 1.27]), increased surgical condition score (MD: 0.52, 95% CI: [0.37, 0.67]), decreased rate of intraoperative movement (RR: 0.19, 95% CI: [0.10, 0.33]), fewer additional measures to improve the surgical condition (RR: 0.63, 95% CI: [0.43, 0.94]), and decreased pain score at 24 h (MD: -0.42, 95% CI: [-0.74, -0.10]). There was no significant difference in the intraoperative blood loss (MD: -22.80, 95% CI: [-48.83, 3.24]), duration of surgery (MD: -0.05, 95% CI: [-2.05, 1.95]), pain score at 48 h (MD: -0.49, 95% CI: [-1.03, 0.05]), or length of stay (MD: -0.05, 95% CI: [-0.19, 0.08]). These indicate that deep neuromuscular blockade improves surgical conditions and prevents intraoperative movement, and there is no sufficient evidence that deep neuromuscular blockade is associated with intraoperative blood loss, duration of surgery, complications, postoperative pain, and length of stay. More high-quality randomized controlled trials are needed, and more attention should be given to complications and the physiological mechanism behind deep neuromuscular blockade and postoperative outcomes.

Impact of the Deep Neuromuscular Block on Oncologic Quality of Laparoscopic Surgery in Obese Gastric Cancer Patients: A Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Obesity can hinder laparoscopic procedures and impede oncological safety during laparoscopic cancer surgery. Deep neuromuscular block (NMB) reportedly improves laparoscopic surgical conditions, but its oncological benefits are unclear. We aimed to evaluate whether deep NMB improves the oncologic quality of laparoscopic cancer surgery in obese patients.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a double-blinded, parallel-group, randomized, phase 3 trial at 9 institutions in Korea. Clinical stage I and II gastric cancer patients with a BMI at or above 25 kg m -2 were eligible and randomized 1:1 ratio to the deep or moderate NMB groups, with continuous infusion of rocuronium (0.5-1.0 and 0.1-0.5 mg kg -1 h -1, respectively). The primary endpoint was the number of retrieved lymph nodes (LNs). The secondary endpoints included the surgeon's surgical rating score (SRS) and interrupted events.

RESULTS

Between August 2017 and July 2020, 196 patients were enrolled. Fifteen patients were excluded, and 181 patients were finally included in the study. There was no significant difference in the number of retrieved LNs between the deep (N = 88) and moderate NMB groups (N = 93; 44.6 ± 17.5 vs 41.5 ± 16.9, p = 0.239). However, deep NMB enabled retrieving more LNs in patients with a BMI at or above 28 kg/m2 than moderate NMB (49.2 ± 18.6 vs 39.2 ± 13.3, p = 0.026). Interrupted events during surgery were lower in the deep NMB group than in the moderate NMB group (21.6% vs 36.6%; p = 0.034). The SRS was not influenced by NMB depth.

CONCLUSION

Deep NMB provides potential oncologic benefits by retrieving more LNs in patients with BMI at or above 28 kg/m2 during laparoscopic gastrectomy.

Deep Neuromuscular Blockade Combined with Low Pneumoperitoneum Pressure for Nociceptive Recovery After Major Laparoscopic Gastrointestinal Surgery: Study Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial

Purpose

Patients undergoing major laparoscopic surgery often experience significant pain and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). Deep neuromuscular block (NMB) improves surgical conditions and facilitates the application of low intra-abdominal pressure (IAP), which may be beneficial for these patients. This study is designed to determine the effects of deep NMB combined with low IAP, as compared to moderate NMB combined with standard IAP, on patients' nociceptive recovery after major laparoscopic gastrointestinal surgery.

Study Design and Methods

This single-center randomized controlled trial will include 220 patients scheduled for major laparoscopic gastrointestinal surgery (lasts for ≥ 90 minutes). Patients will be randomly assigned, with a 1:1 ratio, into a deep NMB + low IAP group (train of four = 0, post-tetanic count = 1-3, IAP = 8 mmHg) and a moderate NMB + standard IAP group (train of four = 1-3, IAP = 12 mmHg). If the surgical workspace is inadequate, the surgeons can request a step increase of 1 mmHg in IAP during 3-min intervals. The upper limit of IAP will be set at 15 mmHg. Postoperative recovery will be assessed using the postoperative quality recovery scale (PQRS). The primary outcome of this trial is the PQRS nociceptive recovery (including pain and PONV) at postoperative day (POD) 1. The secondary outcomes include recovery in other PQRS domains at POD 1, and recovery in all PQRS domains in a post-anesthesia care unit, at POD 3 in the surgical wards, at hospital discharge, and at postoperative 30 days. For the sample size estimation, 110 patients in each group (220 in total) would be needed to detect an absolute increase rate of 20% in the PQRS nociceptive domain in the deep NMB + low IAP group at POD 1.

Discussion

This study investigates the effects of deep NMB combined with low IAP on postoperative PQRS nociceptive recovery in patients undergoing major laparoscopic gastrointestinal surgery. We expect that this deep NMB + low IAP strategy would improve postoperative pain and PONV following major laparoscopic gastrointestinal surgery.

Effects of depth of neuromuscular blockade on the BIS-guided propofol requirement: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Deep neuromuscular blockade is considered beneficial for improving the surgical space condition during laparoscopic surgery. Adequacy of the surgical space condition may affect the anesthetists' decision regarding titration of depth of anesthesia. We investigated whether deep neuromuscular blockade reduces the propofol requirement under bispectral index monitoring compared to moderate neuromuscular blockade.

METHODS

Adult patients undergoing elective laparoscopic colorectal surgery were randomly allocated to a moderate or deep group. A train-of-four count of 1-2 in the moderate group, and a post-tetanic count of 1-2 in the deep group, were maintained by continuous infusion of rocuronium. The induction and maintenance of anesthesia were achieved by target-controlled infusion of propofol and remifentanil. The dose of propofol was adjusted to maintain the bispectral index in the range of 40-50. The remifentanil dose was titrated to maintain the systolic blood pressure to within 20% of the ward values.

RESULTS

A total of 82 patients were included in the analyses. The mean±SD dose of propofol was 7.54 ± 1.66 and 7.42 ± 1.01 mg·kg-1·h-1 in the moderate and deep groups, respectively (P = .104). The mean±SD dose of remifentanil was 4.84 ± 1.74 and 4.79 ± 1.77 μg kg-1 h-1 in the moderate and deep groups, respectively (P = .688). In comparison to the moderate group, the deep group showed significantly lower rates of intraoperative patient movement (42.9% vs 22.5%, respectively, P = .050) and additional neuromuscular blocking agent administration (76% vs 53%, respectively, P = .007). Postoperative complications, including pulmonary complications, wound problems and reoperation, were not different between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Deep neuromuscular blockade did not reduce the bispectral index-guided propofol requirement compared to moderate neuromuscular blockade during laparoscopic colon surgery, despite reducing movement of the patient and the requirement for a rescue neuromuscular blocking agent.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03890406).

Effect of Deep versus Moderate Neuromuscular Blockade on Quantitatively Assessed Postoperative Atelectasis Using Computed Tomography in Thoracic Surgery; a Randomized Double-Blind Controlled Trial

Background: postoperative atelectasis is a significant clinical problem during thoracic surgery with one-lung ventilation. Intraoperative deep neuromuscular blockade can improve surgical conditions, but an increased risk of residual paralysis may aggravate postoperative atelectasis. Every patient was verified to have full reversal before extubation. We compared the effect of deep versus moderate neuromuscular blockade on postoperative atelectasis quantitatively using chest computed tomography. Methods: patients undergoing thoracic surgery were randomly allocated to two groups: moderate neuromuscular blockade during surgery (group M) and deep neuromuscular blockade during surgery (group D). The primary outcome was the proportion and the volume of postoperative atelectasis measured by chest computed tomography on postoperative day 2. The mean values of the repeatedly measured intraoperative dynamic lung compliance during surgery were also compared. Result: the proportion of postoperative atelectasis did not differ between the groups (1.32 [0.47–3.20]% in group M and 1.41 [0.24–3.07]% in group D, p = 0.690). The actual atelectasis volume was 38.2 (12.8–61.4) mL in group M and 31.9 (7.84–75.0) mL in group D (p = 0.954). Some factors described in the lung protective ventilation were not taken into account and might explain the atelectasis in both groups. The mean lung compliance during one-lung ventilation was higher in group D (26.6% in group D vs. 24.1% in group M, p = 0.026). Conclusions: intraoperative deep neuromuscular blockade did not affect postoperative atelectasis when compared with moderate neuromuscular blockade if full reversal was verified.

Intraoperative Monitoring of the Obese Patient Undergoing Surgery: A Narrative Review

With the increasing prevalence of obesity in the population, anaesthetists must confidently manage both the pathophysiological and technical challenges presented in bariatric and non-bariatric surgery. The intraoperative period represents an important opportunity to optimise and mitigate risk. However, there is little formal guidance on what intraoperative monitoring techniques should be used in this population. This narrative review collates the existing evidence for intraoperative monitoring devices in the obese patients. Although a number of non-invasive blood pressure monitors have been tested, an invasive arterial line remains the most reliable monitor if accurate, continuous monitoring is required. Goal-directed fluid therapy is recommended by clinical practice guidelines, but the methods tested to assess this had guarded applicability to the obese population. Transcutaneous carbon dioxide (CO₂) monitoring may offer additional benefit to standard capnography in this population. Individually titrated positive end expiratory pressure (PEEP) and recruitment manoeuvres improved intraoperative mechanics but yielded no benefit in the immediate postoperative period. Depth of anaesthesia monitoring appears to be beneficial in the perioperative period regarding recovery times and complications. Objective confirmation of reversal of neuromuscular blockade continues to be a central tenet of anaesthesia practice, particularly relevant to this group who have been characterised as an "at risk" extubation group. Where deep neuromuscular blockade is used, continuous neuromuscular blockade is suggested. Both obesity and the intraoperative context represent somewhat unstable search terms, as the clinical implications of the obesity phenotype are not uniform, and the type and urgency of surgery have significant impact on the intraoperative setting. This renders the generation of summary conclusions around what intraoperative monitoring techniques are suitable in this population highly challenging.

A narrative review on the potential benefits and limitations of deep neuromuscular blockade

BACKGROUND

Neuromuscular blockade was shown to improve surgical conditions. However, the risk of residual neuromuscular blockade upon extubation prevents anaesthesiologists from maintaining complete paralysis. For this reason, deep NMB is still underused in anaesthesia. This review focused on answering six questions revolving around the use of deep NMB versus moderate NMB.

METHODS

This was a non-exhaustive narrative review based on 6 selected relevant questions: does deep NMB 1) improve surgical conditions? 2) reduce surgical complications? 3) facilitate a reduction in intraoperative pneumoperitoneum pressure (PnP)? 4) does a reduction in intraoperative PnP impact clinical outcomes? 5) does the combination of deep NMB and lower PnP improve respiratory parameters? 6) improve OR efficiency or readmission rates?

RESULTS

This review highlights some of the key studies that have demonstrated potential benefits of deep NMB, but it also included reports showing no benefit, highlighting that the evidence is not unequivocal. Deep NMB does in fact improve surgical conditions, but whether this improvement translates into improved clinical outcomes is far from concluded. Indeed, there is an increased risk or residual curarisation, especially if patients are not monitored and reversed appropriately. The most important benefit of deep NMB may be the prevention of unacceptable surgical working conditions. The other potential major benefits are the reduction in PnP and reduction in pain. Deep NMB must be used with appropriate monitoring.

CONCLUSION

Deep NMB was associated with an improvement in surgical conditions, reduction in PnP, pain, and complications; but further research is needed to definitively prove this relationship.

Comparisons of surgical conditions of deep and moderate neuromuscular blockade through multiple assessments and the quality of postoperative recovery in upper abdominal laparoscopic surgery

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To determine the effect of deep neuromuscular blockade (NMB) on surgical field conditions through multiple assessments during pneumoperitoneum and evaluate the effect of the depth of intraoperative NMB on the quality of postoperative recovery over multiple time periods.

DESIGN

Prospective randomized study.

SETTING

Operating room of a university hospital.

PATIENTS

Eighty non-morbidly obese patients (ASA physical status 1-2) who were scheduled to undergo laparoscopic gastrectomy in the reverse Trendelenburg position.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were allocated to either the deep or moderate NMB group. The depth of NMB was maintained at a post-tetanic count of 1 for deep NMB with a continuous infusion of rocuronium and at a train-of-four count of 1 for moderate NMB with a small intermittent bolus of cisatracurium.

MEASUREMENTS

Single-blinded scoring of the quality of the surgical field condition was performed by a surgeon using a five-point scale in a 15-min interval during pneumoperitoneum. The quality of postoperative recovery was assessed using the Postoperative Quality of Recovery Scale (PostopQRS) on the day before surgery (baseline) and 1 h, 1 day, and 6 days after surgery.

MAIN RESULTS

Optimal surgical field condition was rated in 87.0% (449/516) and 72.3% (370/512) of all measurements during deep and moderate NMB, respectively (P < 0.001). The percentage of patients maintaining a good-to-optimal condition throughout pneumoperitoneum was higher in the deep NMB group than in the moderate NMB group. There were no significant differences in the percentage of recovered patients between the two groups for all domains and all timepoints.

CONCLUSIONS

Multiple assessments of the surgical field condition demonstrated that deep NMB provided a more satisfactory surgical field condition than moderate NMB during laparoscopic gastrectomy. However, the quality of postoperative recovery, assessed using the PostopQRS, was not different between the two groups according to the depth of NMB.

Actual versus ideal body weight dosing of sugammadex in morbidly obese patients offers faster reversal of rocuronium- or vecuronium-induced deep or moderate neuromuscular block: a randomized clinical trial

Background

This randomized, double-blind trial evaluated sugammadex-mediated recovery time from rocuronium- or vecuronium-induced moderate (M-) or deep (D-) neuromuscular block in morbidly obese adults dosed by actual (ABW) or ideal body weight (IBW).

Methods

Adults with BMI ≥40 kg/m² were randomized to 1 of 5 groups: M-neuromuscular block, sugammadex 2 mg/kg ABW; M-neuromuscular block, sugammadex 2 mg/kg IBW; M-neuromuscular block, neostigmine 5 mg, and glycopyrrolate 1 mg; D-neuromuscular block, sugammadex 4 mg/kg ABW; or D-neuromuscular block, sugammadex 4 mg/kg IBW. Supramaximal train of four (TOF) stimulation of the ulnar nerve (TOF-watch SX®) monitored recovery. Primary endpoint was time to TOF ratio ≥ 0.9 for ABW and IBW groups pooled across neuromuscular blocking agent (NMBA)/blocking depth, analyzed by log-rank test stratified for agent and depth. Prespecified safety outcomes included treatment-emergent bradycardia, tachycardia, and other arrhythmias, and adjudicated hypersensitivity and anaphylaxis.

Results

Of 207 patients randomized, 188 received treatment (28% male, BMI 47 ± 5.1 kg/m², age 48 ± 13 years). Recovery was 1.5 min faster with ABW vs IBW dosing. The sugammadex 2 mg/kg groups recovered 9-fold faster [time 0.11-fold, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.14] than the neostigmine group. ABW (5.3%) and IBW (2.7%) groups had similar incidences of recovery time > 10 min (95% CI of difference: − 4.8 to 11.0%); 84% for neostigmine group. Re-curarization occurred in one patient each in the 2 mg/kg IBW and neostigmine groups. Prespecified safety outcomes occurred with similar incidences.

Conclusions

ABW-based sugammadex dosing yields faster reversal without re-curarization, supporting ABW-based sugammadex dosing in the morbidly obese, irrespective of the depth of neuromuscular block or NMBA used.

Trial registration

Registered on November 17, 2017, at ClinicalTrials.gov under number NCT03346070.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12871-021-01278-w.

Deep neuromuscular block does not improve surgical conditions in patients receiving sevoflurane anaesthesia for laparoscopic renal surgery

Background

Deep neuromuscular block is associated with improved working conditions during laparoscopic surgery when propofol is used as a general anaesthetic. However, whether deep neuromuscular block yields similar beneficial effects when anaesthesia is maintained using volatile inhalation anaesthesia has not been systematically investigated. Volatile anaesthetics, as opposed to intravenous agents, potentiate muscle relaxation, which potentially reduces the need for deep neuromuscular block to obtain optimal surgical conditions. We examined whether deep neuromuscular block improves surgical conditions over moderate neuromuscular block during sevoflurane anaesthesia.

Methods

In this single-centre, prospective, randomised, double-blind study, 98 patients scheduled for elective renal surgery were randomised to receive deep (post-tetanic count 1–2 twitches) or a moderate neuromuscular block (train-of-four 1–2 twitches). Anaesthesia was maintained with sevoflurane and titrated to bispectral index values between 40 and 50. Pneumoperitoneum pressure was maintained at 12 mm Hg. The primary outcome was the difference in surgical conditions, scored at 15 min intervals by one of eight blinded surgeons using a 5-point Leiden-Surgical Rating Scale (L-SRS) that scores the quality of the surgical field from extremely poor¹ to optimal⁵.

Results

Deep neuromuscular block did not improve surgical conditions compared with moderate neuromuscular block: mean (standard deviation) L-SRS 4.8 (0.3) vs 4.8 (0.4), respectively (P=0.94). Secondary outcomes, including unplanned postoperative readmissions and prolonged hospital admission, were not significantly different.

Conclusions

During sevoflurane anaesthesia, deep neuromuscular block did not improve surgical conditions over moderate neuromuscular block in normal-pressure laparoscopic renal surgery.

Clinical trial registration

NL7844 (www.trialregister.nl).

Comparison of the effects of deep and moderate neuromuscular block on respiratory system compliance and surgical space conditions during robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a randomized clinical study

OBJECTIVE

Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) requires pneumoperitoneum (Pnp) and a steep head-down position that may disturb respiratory system compliance (C_rs) during surgery. Our aim was to compare the effects of different degrees of neuromuscular block (NMB) on C_rs with the same Pnp pressure during RARP.

METHODS

One hundred patients who underwent RARP were enrolled and randomly allocated to a deep or moderate NMB group with 50 patients in each group. Rocuronium was administered to both groups: in the moderate NMB group to maintain 1-2 responses to train-of-four (TOF) stimulation; and in the deep NMB group to maintain no response to TOF stimulation and 1-2 responses in the post-tetanic count. Pnp pressure in both groups was 10 mmHg (1 mmHg=133.3 Pa). Peak inspiratory pressure (P_peak), mean pressure (P_mean), C_rs, and airway resistance (R_aw) were recorded after anesthesia induction and at 0, 30, 60, and 90 min of Pnp and post-Pnp. Surgical space conditions were evaluated after the procedure on a 4-point scale.

RESULTS

Immediately after the Pnp, P_peak, P_mean, and R_aw significantly increased, while C_rs decreased and persisted during Pnp in both groups. The results did not significantly differ between the two groups at any of the time points. There was no difference in surgical space conditions between groups. Body movements occurred in 14 cases in the moderate NMB group and in one case in the deep NMB group, and all occurred during obturator lymphadenectomy. A significant difference between the two groups was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Under the same Pnp pressure in RARP, deep and moderate NMBs resulted in similar changes in C_rs, and in other respiratory mechanics and surgical space conditions. However, deep NMB significantly reduced body movements during surgery.

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.

Low-pressure pneumoperitoneum with deep neuromuscular blockade in metabolic surgery to reduce postoperative pain: a randomized pilot trial

BACKGROUND

For metabolic laparoscopic surgery, higher pressures up to 20 mmHg are often used to create a surgical field of sufficient quality. This randomized pilot study aimed to determine the feasibility, safety and tolerability of low intraabdominal pressure (IAP) and deep neuromuscular blockade (NMB) to reduce postoperative pain.

METHODS

In a teaching hospital in the Netherlands, 62 patients eligible for a laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) were randomized into one of four groups in a 2 × 2 factorial design: deep/moderate NMB and standard (20 mmHg)/low IAP (12 mmHg). Patient and surgical team were blinded. Primary outcome measure was the surgical field quality, scored on the Leiden-Surgical Rating Scale (L-SRS). Secondary outcome measures were (serious) adverse events, duration of surgery and postoperative pain.

RESULTS

62 patients were included. L-SRS was good or perfect in all patients that were operated under standard IAP with deep or moderate NMB. In 40% of patients with low IAP and deep NMB, an increase in IAP was needed to improve surgical overview. In patients with low IAP and moderate NMB, IAP was increased to improve surgical overview in 40%, and in 75% of these cases a deep NMB was requested to further improve the surgical overview. Median duration of surgery was 38 min (IQR34-40 min) in the group with standard IAP and moderate NMB and 52 min (IQR46-55 min) in the group with low IAP and deep NMB.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of moderate NMB and low IAP can create insufficient surgical overview. Larger trials are needed to corroborate the findings of this study.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Dutch Trial Register: Trial NL7050, registered 28 May 2018. https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/7050 .

Does deep neuromuscular blockade during laparoscopy procedures change patient, surgical, and healthcare resource outcomes? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

Deep neuromuscular blockade may facilitate the use of reduced insufflation pressure without compromising the surgical field of vision. The current evidence, which suggests improved surgical conditions compared with other levels of block during laparoscopic surgery, features significant heterogeneity. We examined surgical patient- and healthcare resource use-related outcomes of deep neuromuscular blockade compared with moderate neuromuscular blockade in adults undergoing laparoscopic surgery.

Methods

We conducted a systematic literature review according to the quality standards recommended by the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews. Randomized controlled trials comparing outcomes of deep neuromuscular blockade and moderate neuromuscular blockade among adults undergoing laparoscopic surgeries were included. A random-effects model was used to conduct pair-wise meta-analyses.

Results

The systematic literature review included 15 studies—only 13 were analyzable in the meta-analysis and none were judged to be at high risk of bias. Compared with moderate neuromuscular blockade, deep neuromuscular blockade was associated with improved surgical field of vision and higher vision quality scores. Also, deep neuromuscular blockade was associated with a reduction in the post-operative pain scores in the post-anesthesia care unit compared with moderate neuromuscular blockade, and there was no need for an increase in intra-abdominal pressure during the surgical procedures. There were minor savings on resource utilization, but no differences were seen in recovery in the post-anesthesia care unit or overall length of hospital stay with deep neuromuscular blockade.

Conclusions

Deep neuromuscular blockade may aid the patient and physician surgical experience by improving certain patient outcomes, such as post-operative pain and improved surgical ratings, compared with moderate neuromuscular blockade. Heterogeneity in the pooled estimates suggests the need for better designed randomized controlled trials.

Depth of Neuromuscular Block Is Not Associated with Abdominal Wall Distention or Surgical Conditions during Gynecologic Laparoscopic Operations. A Prospective Trial

The influence of the degree of a neuromuscular block (NMB) on surgical operating conditions during laparoscopic surgery is debated controversially. The extent of abdominal distension during the time course of the NMB was assessed as a new measurement tool. In 60 patients scheduled for gynecologic laparoscopic surgery, the increase of the abdominal wall length induced by the capnoperitoneum was measured at 5 degrees of the NMB: intense NMB—post-tetanic count (PTC) = 0; deep NMB—train-of-four count (TOF) = 0 and PTC = 1–5; medium NMB—PTC > 5 and TOF = 0–1; shallow NMB—TOF > 1; full recovery—train-of-four ratio TOFR > 90%. Simultaneously, the quality of operating conditions was assessed with a standardized rating scale (SRS) reaching from 1 (extremely poor conditions) to 5 (excellent conditions). Fifty patients could be included in the analysis. The abdominal wall length increased by 10–13 mm induced by the capnoperitoneum. SRS was higher during intense NMB (4.7 ± 0.5) vs. full recovery (4.5 ± 0.5) (mean ± SD; p = 0.025). Generally, an intense NMB did not increase abdominal wall length induced by capnoperitoneum. Additionally, its influence on the quality of surgical operating conditions seems to be of minor clinical relevance.

Neuromuscular monitoring during modified rapid sequence induction: A comparison of TOF-Cuff® and TOF-Scan®

BACKGROUND

Acceleromyometry is the clinical standard for quantitative neuromuscular monitoring, mostly using the stimulation pattern train-of-four (TOF). TOF-Cuff®, a recently introduced neuromuscular monitor with stimulating electrodes integrated within a blood pressure cuff, assesses the muscular response in the upper arm.

METHODS

The time from administration of a neuromuscular blocking agent to TOF-ratio 0% during modified rapid sequence induction was compared between TOF-Cuff® and acceleromyometry (TOF-Scan®). Included were 26 adults with body mass index <35 kg/m². TOF-Scan® and TOF-Cuff® were simultaneously fitted on patients' opposite arms. The mean difference to TOF-ratio 0% was compared using the one sample t-test (p < 0.05) and Bland-Altman plots.

RESULTS

After anesthesia induction, atracurium 0.9 mg/kg (±0.08) i.v. was administered. The mean time to TOF ratio 0% for TOF-Scan® was 140.4 s (±34.3), and 132.7 s (±32.5) for TOF-Cuff®, with a mean difference of 5.4 (95% CI: -9.9 to 20.7, p = 0.472). The maximum difference between the two modalities was 135 s when the TOF-Cuff® was faster and 60 s when the TOF-Scan® was faster.

CONCLUSIONS

No statistically significant systematic difference was found between TOF-Scan® and TOF-Cuff®. However, there was high variability and wide limits of agreement. The two devices cannot be used interchangeably.

Perioperative care of the obese patient

Background

Obesity has become an increasing problem worldwide during the past few decades. Hence, surgeons and anaesthetists will care for an increasing number of obese patients in the foreseeable future, and should be prepared to provide optimal management for these individuals. This review provides an update of recent evidence regarding perioperative strategies for obese patients.

Methods

A search for papers on the perioperative care of obese patients (English language only) was performed in July 2019 using the PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and Cochrane Library electronic databases. The review focused on the results of RCTs, although observational studies, meta-analyses, reviews, guidelines and other reports discussing the perioperative care of obese patients were also considered. When data from obese patients were not available, relevant data from non-obese populations were used.

Results and conclusion

Obese patients require comprehensive preoperative evaluation. Experienced medical teams, appropriate equipment and monitoring, careful anaesthetic management, and an adequate perioperative ventilation strategy may improve postoperative outcomes. Additional perioperative precautions are necessary in patients with severe morbid obesity, metabolic syndrome, untreated or severe obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome, or obesity hypoventilation syndrome; patients receiving home ventilatory support or postoperative opioid therapy; and obese patients undergoing open operations, long procedures or revisional surgery.

How to optimize neuromuscular blockade in ambulatory setting?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review is to discuss the optimal use of neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBA) during ambulatory surgery, and to provide an update on the routine use of neuromuscular monitoring and the prevention of residual paralysis.

RECENT FINDINGS

The number of major surgical procedures performed in ambulatory patients is likely to increase in the coming years, following the development of laparoscopic and thoracoscopic procedures. To successfully complete these procedures, the proper use of NMBA is mandatory. The use of NMBA not only improves intubating conditions but also ventilation. Recent studies demonstrate that NMBA are much more the solution rather than the cause of airway problems. There is growing evidence that the paralysis of the diaphragm and the abdominal wall muscles, which are resistant to NMBA is of importance during laparoscopic surgery. Further studies are still required to determine when deep neuromuscular block [posttetanic count (PTC) < 5] is required perioperatively. There is now a consensus to use perioperatively neuromuscular monitoring and particularly objective neuromuscular monitoring in combination with reversal agents to avoid residual paralysis and its related morbidity (e.g. respiratory complications in the PACU).

SUMMARY

Recent data suggest that it is now possible to obtain a tight control of neuromuscular block to maintain optimal relaxation tailored to the surgical requirements and to obtain a rapid and reliable recovery at the end of the procedure.

Effects of deep vs moderate neuromuscular block on the quality of recovery after robotic gastrectomy

BACKGROUND

It remains unclear whether deep neuromuscular blockade results in better postoperative recovery than does moderate neuromuscular blockade. Therefore, in this study, we aimed to compare the effects of deep neuromuscular blockade and moderate neuromuscular blockade on the quality of postoperative recovery in patients undergoing robotic gastrectomy.

METHODS

In this prospective, double-blind, single-center randomized controlled superiority trial with two parallel groups, 56 adult patients (19-80 years) scheduled for elective robotic gastrectomy were randomly assigned to a moderate neuromuscular blockade group or a deep neuromuscular blockade group in a 1:1 ratio. In the deep and moderate neuromuscular blockade groups, the infusion rate for rocuronium was adjusted to maintain a post-tetanic count of 1-2 or a train-of-four count of 1-2, respectively. The primary outcome was the Quality of Recovery-40 (QoR-40) score on postoperative day 1. Secondary outcomes included the QoR-40 score on postoperative day 2, intraoperative hemodynamic data, intraoperative respiratory data, visual analog scale score for pain, postoperative incidences of nausea and vomiting, postoperative rescue analgesic use, and postoperative rescue antiemetic use.

RESULTS

The postoperative QoR-40 score was similar between the two groups on postoperative days 1 and 2. Moreover, the two groups showed no differences in intraoperative hemodynamic and respiratory data or postoperative pain, nausea and vomiting, and rescue medication use.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that the quality of recovery after robotic gastrectomy is similar for deep and moderate neuromuscular blockade. Therefore, deep neuromuscular blockade during robotic gastrectomy may be unnecessary, at least in patients with normal body mass index.

Reversal of residual neuromuscular block: complications associated with perioperative management of muscle relaxation

The use of anticholinesterases to reverse residual neuromuscular block at the end of surgery became routine practice in the 1950s. These drugs could only be used when recovery from block was established [two twitches of the train-of-four (TOF) count detectable] and concern was expressed about their cholinergic side-effects. By the 1990s, it was recognized that failure to reverse residual block adequately to a TOF ratio (TOFR) >0.7 was associated with increased risk of postoperative pulmonary complications (POPCs) following the long-acting non-depolarizing neuromuscular blocking drug (NDNMBD) pancuronium. By 2003, and the introduction of acceleromyography, a TOFR ≥0.9 was considered necessary to protect the airway from aspiration before tracheal extubation. It was also considered that four, not two, twitches of the TOF should be detectable before neostigmine was given. Use of any NDNMBD was subsequently shown to be associated with increased risk of POPCs, but it was thought that neostigmine reduced that risk. Recently, there has been conflicting evidence that use of neostigmine might increase the incidence of POPCs. Although sugammadex has been shown to rapidly reverse profound neuromuscular block from aminosteroidal agents, there is currently no evidence that sugammadex is superior to neostigmine in its effect on POPCs. Other new antagonists, including cysteine to degrade CW002 and calabadion 1 and 2 to antagonize aminosteroidal and benzylisoquinolium NDNMBDs, are being studied in preclinical and clinical trials. Quantitative neuromuscular monitoring is essential whenever a NDNMBD is used to ensure full recovery from neuromuscular block.

The use of surgical rating scales for the evaluation of surgical working conditions during laparoscopic surgery: a scoping review

INTRODUCTION

Surgical rating scales (SRSs) enable the surgeon to uniformly quantify surgical working conditions. They are increasingly used as a primary outcome in studies evaluating the effect of anaesthesia or surgery-related interventions on the quality of the surgical work field. SRSs are especially used in laparoscopic surgery due to a renewed interest in deep neuromuscular block. There are however no guidelines regarding the uniform use of SRS and the uniform reporting of results.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in the databases of PubMed, Web of Science and Embase for studies that reported the use of an SRS to evaluate surgical conditions in laparoscopic surgery. Only original human research in English language with full text availability through the Leiden university library was considered for this review. The full texts of eligible abstracts were independently reviewed by the first and second author. The quality of SRSs and methodology of rating were systematically reviewed.

RESULTS

The search yielded 2830 reports, of which 17 were identified using a surgical rating scale (SRS) in laparoscopic surgery. Ten of these reports used a unique SRS, these were systematically appraised for their quality. The overall quality of the SRSs was low: the majority of the scales were poorly described and lacked assessment of inter- and intra-rater reliability. In addition, considerable differences exist in the methodology of rating and the reporting of results.

CONCLUSION

There is substantial inconsistency in SRS quality, methodology, and results reporting. The uniform use of high-quality surgical rating scales is needed to improve the quality and reproducibility of future research.

Comparison of rocuronium requirement in children with continuous infusion versus intermittent bolus: A randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Minimising rocuronium administration during paediatric surgery helps to reduce the incidence of residual muscular blockade.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether intermittent bolus injection (Bolus group) or continuous infusion (group) requires the lesser amount of rocuronium.

DESIGN

A randomised, single-blind controlled trial.

SETTING

A single university hospital from March to June 2017.

PATIENTS

Sixty-six children undergoing general anaesthesia.

INTERVENTIONS

Dose of rocuronium for maintenance of muscle relaxation in either Bolus or continuous infusion group. Train-of-four (TOF) count of two was maintained during surgery. When TOF count reached three, 0.1 mg kg of rocuronium was administered in Bolus group or infused at an increased rate of 0.1 mg kg h in continuous infusion group.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcome was the dose of rocuronium given (μg kg min). The recovery time from the TOF count four to TOF 0.7 (RT0.7), and 0.9 (RT0.9) were recorded. All adverse events were recorded up to 30 min after extubation.

RESULTS

Mean (SD) rocuronium dose in the Bolus group was 6.1 (0.9), [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 5.7 to 6.4] μg kg min and 4.9 (1.0), (95% CI 4.6 to 5.3) μg kg min in the continuous infusion group (P = 0.001). RT0.7 was 24.0 (13.7), 95% CI 19.3 to 28.7) min in the Bolus group, and 25.7 (16.0), (95% CI 20.2 to 31.2) min in the continuous infusion group (P = 0.73). RT0.9 was 30.7 (17.1), (95% CI 24.9 to 36.5) min in the Bolus group, and 30.0 (17.6), (95% CI 24.0 to 36.0) min in the continuous infusion group (P = 0.91). The incidence of adverse events was not significantly different between two groups.

CONCLUSION

In children undergoing general anaesthesia, the dose of rocuronium given by continuous administration was less than that with intermittent bolus.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier: NCT03060707).

Sugammadex: Appropriate Use in the Context of Budgetary Constraints

Purpose of Review

The purpose of this review is to assess how sugammadex impacts postoperative residual curarization using appropriate doses based on neuromuscular transmission monitoring and whether the advantages of sugammadex versus neostigmine outweigh its higher cost.

Recent Findings

An accurate assessment of neuromuscular blockade with monitoring is necessary before selecting neostigmine versus sugammadex for reversal at the end of surgery to overcome incomplete neuromuscular recovery. The main advantages of sugammadex over neostigmine are its predictability and its ability to extend the range of blockade reversal. The cost of sugammadex is greater when higher doses of sugammadex are required for antagonism of deep block. Sugammadex probably has the potential to be cost-effective compared with neostigmine if its time savings are put to productive use in clinical practice. However, to date, the economic benefits of the drug are unknown.

Summary

With sugammadex, almost any degree of neuromuscular block can be antagonized within 2–3 min; neostigmine is the only reversal agent effective against benzylisoquinolines and can ideally be used for reversal of lower levels of residual paralysis. The performance of the more expensive sugammadex on improving patient outcomes may depend on several elements of clinical strategy.

Recent advances in neuromuscular block during anesthesia

Muscle relaxation is a routine part of anesthesia and has important advantages. However, the lingering effects of muscle relaxants in the postoperative period have historically been associated with postoperative adverse events. Neuromuscular reversal, together with neuromuscular monitoring, is a recognized strategy to reduce the rate of postoperative residual relaxation but has only marginally improved outcome in the past few decades.

Sugammadex, a novel reversal agent with unique encapsulating properties, has changed the landscape of neuromuscular reversal and opened up new opportunities to improve patient care. By quickly and completely reversing any depth of neuromuscular block, it may reduce the rate of residual relaxation and improve respiratory recovery. In addition, sugammadex has made the use of deep neuromuscular block possible during surgery. Deep neuromuscular block may improve surgical working conditions and allow for a reduction in insufflation pressures during selected laparoscopic procedures. However, whether and how this may impact outcomes is not well established.