Assuntos
Anafilaxia , Sugammadex , gama-Ciclodextrinas , Humanos , Sugammadex/efeitos adversos , Anafilaxia/induzido quimicamente , Anafilaxia/diagnóstico , gama-Ciclodextrinas/efeitos adversos , Fármacos Neuromusculares não Despolarizantes/efeitos adversos , Feminino , Rocurônio/efeitos adversos , Rocurônio/administração & dosagem , Masculino , Hipersensibilidade a Drogas/diagnóstico , Hipersensibilidade a Drogas/etiologia , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Androstanóis/efeitos adversosRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Sugammadex, a novel selective antagonist of non-depolarizing neuromuscular blocking agents, has been shown to rapidly and effectively reverse moderate and deep paralysis in adults and pediatric patients over age 2, improving patient recovery and reducing the risk of postoperative complications. AREAS COVERED: Since the use of sugammadex in patients under age 2 is not widely studied, we aim to provide an overview on the drug's application and potential use in infants and neonates. There is a limited but growing body of evidence for the safe, efficacious use of sugammadex in children under age 2. Relevant studies were identified from the most updated data including case reports, clinical trials, systematic reviews, and meta analyses. EXPERT OPINION: The results suggest that at a dose of 2 to 4 mg/kg of sugammadex can be safely used to rapidly and effectively reverse neuromuscular blockade in neonates and infants; it is non-inferior based on incidence of adverse events compared to neostigmine. Additionally, sugammadex doses between 8 and 16 mg/kg may be used as a rescue agent for infants during 'can't intubate, can't ventilate' crisis. Overall, sugammadex offers new value in the perioperative care of patients under age 2, with further studies warranted to better understand its application and full effect in the pediatric population.
Assuntos
Relação Dose-Resposta a Droga , Bloqueio Neuromuscular , Fármacos Neuromusculares não Despolarizantes , Sugammadex , Humanos , Sugammadex/administração & dosagem , Sugammadex/efeitos adversos , Sugammadex/farmacologia , Lactente , Bloqueio Neuromuscular/métodos , Bloqueio Neuromuscular/efeitos adversos , Recém-Nascido , Fatores Etários , Fármacos Neuromusculares não Despolarizantes/administração & dosagem , Fármacos Neuromusculares não Despolarizantes/efeitos adversos , Fármacos Neuromusculares não Despolarizantes/antagonistas & inibidores , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/prevenção & controle , Neostigmina/administração & dosagem , Neostigmina/efeitos adversos , Assistência Perioperatória/métodosRESUMO
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review article explores the evidence regarding sugammadex (MSD Australia) and its potential interaction with hormonal contraceptives. The impact of recent clinical trials and review articles is examined. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent clinical data suggest that the interaction between sugammadex and estrogen and progesterone concentrations may not be clinically significant and may confer some protection against ovulation. There are no clinical trials reporting interactions between sugammadex and the exogenous hormonal compounds found in oral contraceptive pills. The method of contraception is an important consideration, as sugammadex theoretically affects oral and nonoral, and combined versus single agent methods differently. Two large retrospective database studies have reported two cases of pregnancy postoperatively in patients on hormonal contraceptives whose anesthetic included sugammadex. SUMMARY: Strong clinical evidence to support or refute claims of a significant impact of sugammadex on contraceptive efficacy in women on contraception is lacking. The existing evidence does not suggest a basis for concern regarding the impact of sugammadex on contraception in the perioperative setting.
Assuntos
Interações Medicamentosas , Sugammadex , gama-Ciclodextrinas , Humanos , Sugammadex/efeitos adversos , Sugammadex/administração & dosagem , Feminino , gama-Ciclodextrinas/efeitos adversos , gama-Ciclodextrinas/administração & dosagem , Anticoncepcionais Orais/efeitos adversos , GravidezRESUMO
AIMS: Residual neuromuscular blockade has been linked to pulmonary complications in the postoperative period. This study aimed to determine whether sugammadex was associated with a lower risk of postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) compared with neostigmine. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study was conducted in a tertiary academic medical center. Patients ≥18 year of age undergoing noncardiac surgical procedures with general anesthesia and mechanical ventilation were enrolled between January 2019 and September 2021. We identified all patients receiving rocuronium and reversal with neostigmine or sugammadex via electronic medical record review. The primary endpoint was a composite of PPCs (including pneumonia, atelectasis, respiratory failure, pulmonary embolism, pleural effusion, or pneumothorax). The incidence of PPCs was compared using propensity score analysis. RESULTS: A total of 1786 patients were included in this study. Among these patients, 976 (54.6%) received neostigmine, and 810 (45.4%) received sugammadex. In the whole sample, PPCs occurred in 81 (4.54%) subjects (7.04% sugammadex vs. 2.46% neostigmine). Baseline covariates were well balanced between groups after overlap weighting. Patients in the sugammadex group had similar risk (overlap weighting OR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.40 to 1.41) compared to neostigmine. The sensitivity analysis showed consistent results. In subgroup analysis, the interaction P-value for the reversal agents stratified by surgery duration was 0.011. CONCLUSION: There was no significant difference in the rate of PPCs when the neuromuscular blockade was reversed with sugammadex compared to neostigmine. Patients undergoing prolonged surgery may benefit from sugammadex, which needs to be further investigated.
Assuntos
Pneumopatias , Neostigmina , Bloqueio Neuromuscular , Fármacos Neuromusculares não Despolarizantes , Complicações Pós-Operatórias , Rocurônio , Sugammadex , Humanos , Neostigmina/efeitos adversos , Neostigmina/administração & dosagem , Sugammadex/efeitos adversos , Sugammadex/administração & dosagem , Estudos Retrospectivos , Masculino , Feminino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Bloqueio Neuromuscular/efeitos adversos , Bloqueio Neuromuscular/métodos , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/prevenção & controle , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/epidemiologia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/etiologia , Idoso , Rocurônio/administração & dosagem , Rocurônio/efeitos adversos , Fármacos Neuromusculares não Despolarizantes/efeitos adversos , Fármacos Neuromusculares não Despolarizantes/administração & dosagem , Pneumopatias/prevenção & controle , Adulto , Respiração Artificial/efeitos adversos , Anestesia Geral/efeitos adversosAssuntos
Anafilaxia , Sugammadex , Humanos , Sugammadex/efeitos adversos , Anafilaxia/induzido quimicamente , Anafilaxia/diagnóstico , Anafilaxia/terapia , Anafilaxia/tratamento farmacológico , Fármacos Neuromusculares não Despolarizantes/efeitos adversos , Hipersensibilidade a Drogas/diagnóstico , Hipersensibilidade a Drogas/terapia , Hipersensibilidade a Drogas/etiologia , Bloqueio Neuromuscular/efeitos adversos , Fatores de RiscoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: We assessed the association between education-based interventions, the frequency of train-of-four (TOF) monitoring, and postoperative outcomes. METHODS: We studied adults undergoing noncardiac surgery from February 1, 2020 through October 31, 2021. Our education-based interventions consisted of 3 phases. An interrupted time-series analysis, adjusting for patient- and procedure-related characteristics and secular trends over time, was used to assess the associations between education-based interventions and the frequency of TOF monitoring, postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs), 90-day mortality, and sugammadex dosage. For each outcome and intervention phase, we tested whether the intervention at that phase was associated with an immediate change in the outcome or its trend (weekly rate of change) over time. In a sensitivity analysis, the association between education-based interventions and postoperative outcomes was adjusted for TOF monitoring. RESULTS: Of 19,422 cases, 11,636 (59.9%) had documented TOF monitoring. Monitoring frequency increased from 44.2% in the first week of preintervention stage to 83.4% in the final week of the postintervention phase. During the preintervention phase, the odds of TOF monitoring trended upward by 0.5% per week (odds ratio [OR], 1.005; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.002-1.007). Phase 1 saw an immediate 54% increase (OR, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.33-1.79) in the odds, and the trend OR increased by 3% (OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01-1.05) to 1.035, or 3.5% per week (joint Wald test, P < .001). Phase 2 was associated with a further immediate 29% increase (OR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.02-1.64) but no significant association with trend (OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.93-1.01) of TOF monitoring (joint test, P = .04). Phase 3 and postintervention phase were not significantly associated with the frequency of TOF monitoring (joint test, P = .16 and P = .61). The study phases were not significantly associated with PPCs or sugammadex administration. The trend OR for 90-day mortality was larger by 24% (OR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.06-1.45; joint test, P = .03) in phase 2 versus phase 1, from a weekly decrease of 8% to a weekly increase of 14%. However, this trend reversed again at the transition from phase 3 to the postintervention phase (OR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.68-0.99; joint test, P = .05), from a 14% weekly increase to a 6.2% weekly decrease in the odds of 90-day mortality. In sensitivity analyses, adjusting for TOF monitoring, we found similar associations between study initiatives and postoperative outcomes. TOF monitoring was associated with lower odds of PPCs (OR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.55-0.86) and 90-day mortality (OR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.63-0.98), but not sugammadex dosing (mean difference, -0.02; 95% CI, -0.04 to 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Our education-based interventions were associated with both TOF utilization and 90-day mortality but were not associated with either the odds of PPCs or sugammadex dosing. TOF monitoring was associated with reduced odds of PPCs and 90-day mortality.
Assuntos
Bloqueio Neuromuscular , Adulto , Humanos , Sugammadex/efeitos adversos , Bloqueio Neuromuscular/efeitos adversos , Monitoração Neuromuscular , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/diagnóstico , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/etiologia , Estudos RetrospectivosRESUMO
Sugammadex is now in widespread use to reverse the neuromuscular blocking effects of rocuronium. Adverse effects from sugammadex are rare, but anaphylactic and cardiovascular reactions to the drug have been reported. In an attempt to reduce such side-effects, a modified gamma-cyclodextrin, adamgammadex, has been developed. Phase 3 clinical trials suggest that it is slightly less potent than sugammadex and has a non-inferior speed of onset. In a multicentre trial of 310 patients, there was a suggestion of a lower incidence of allergic responses and recurarisation after adamgammadex compared with sugammadex. The clinical implications of this study are discussed in this editorial.
Assuntos
Bloqueio Neuromuscular , Fármacos Neuromusculares não Despolarizantes , Humanos , Fármacos Neuromusculares não Despolarizantes/efeitos adversos , Rocurônio , Sugammadex/efeitos adversos , Estudos Multicêntricos como Assunto , Ensaios Clínicos Fase III como AssuntoRESUMO
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.
Assuntos
Bloqueio Neuromuscular , Humanos , Bloqueio Neuromuscular/efeitos adversos , Rocurônio/efeitos adversos , Sugammadex/efeitos adversos , Tolerância a Medicamentos , Tolerância ImunológicaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Preliminary clinical trials of adamgammadex, a new cyclodextrin-based selective reversal agent, have demonstrated its efficacy in reversing neuromuscular block by rocuronium. METHODS: This multicentre, randomised, double-blind, positive-controlled, non-inferiority phase III clinical trial compared the efficacy and safety of adamgammadex and sugammadex. We randomised 310 subjects to receive adamgammadex (4 mg kg-1) or sugammadex (2 mg kg-1) at reappearance of the second twitch of the train-of-four (TOF), and standard safety data were collected. RESULTS: For the primary outcome, the proportion of patients with TOF ratio ≥0.9 within 5 min was 98.7% in the adamgammadex group vs 100% in the sugammadex group, with a point estimate and 95% confidence interval (CI) of 1.3% (-4.6%, +1.3%); the lower limit was greater than the non-inferiority margin of -10%. For the key secondary outcome, the median (inter quartile range) time from the start of administration of adamgammadex or sugammadex to recovery of TOF ratio to 0.9 was 2.25 (1.75, 2.75) min and 1.75 (1.50, 2.00) min, respectively. The difference was 0.50 (95% CI: 0.25, 0.50); the upper limit was lower than the non-inferiority margin of 5 min. In addition, there were no inferior results observed in secondary outcomes. Adamgammadex had a lower incidence of adverse drug reactions compared with sugammadex (anaphylactic reaction, recurarisation, decreased heart rate, and laryngospasm; P=0.047). CONCLUSIONS: Adamgammadex was non-inferior to sugammadex with a possible lower incidence of adverse drug reactions compared with sugammadex. Adamgammadex may have a potential advantage in terms of its overall risk-benefit profile. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR2000039525. Registered October 30, 2020. https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=56825.
Assuntos
Efeitos Colaterais e Reações Adversas Relacionados a Medicamentos , Bloqueio Neuromuscular , Fármacos Neuromusculares não Despolarizantes , gama-Ciclodextrinas , Humanos , Sugammadex/efeitos adversos , Rocurônio , Bloqueio Neuromuscular/métodos , gama-Ciclodextrinas/efeitos adversos , Fármacos Neuromusculares não Despolarizantes/efeitos adversos , Androstanóis/efeitos adversos , Efeitos Colaterais e Reações Adversas Relacionados a Medicamentos/etiologiaRESUMO
STUDY OBJECTIVE: Perioperative neuromuscular blocking agents are pharmacologically reversed to minimize complications associated with residual neuromuscular block. Neuromuscular block reversal with anticholinesterases (e.g., neostigmine) require coadministration of an anticholinergic agent (e.g., glycopyrrolate) to mitigate muscarinic activity; however, sugammadex, devoid of cholinergic activity, does not require anticholinergic coadministration. Single-institution studies have found decreased incidence of post-operative urinary retention associated with sugammadex reversal. This study used a multicenter database to better understand the association between neuromuscular block reversal technique and post-operative urinary retention. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study utilizing large healthcare database. SETTING: Non-profit, non-governmental and community and teaching hospitals and health systems from rural and urban areas. PATIENTS: 61,898 matched adult inpatients and 95,500 matched adult outpatients. INTERVENTIONS: Neuromuscular block reversal with sugammadex or neostigmine plus glycopyrrolate. MEASUREMENTS: Incidence of post-operative urinary retention by neuromuscular block reversal agent and the independent association of neuromuscular block reversal technique and risk of post-operative urinary retention. MAIN RESULTS: The incidence of post-operative urinary retention was 2-fold greater among neostigmine with glycopyrrolate compared to sugammadex patients (5.0% vs 2.4% inpatients; 0.9% vs 0.4% outpatients; both p < 0.0001). Multivariable logistic regression identified reversal with neostigmine to be independently associated with greater risk of post-operative urinary retention (inpatients: odds ratio, 2.20; 95% confidence interval, 2.00 to 2.41; p < 0.001; outpatients: odds ratio, 2.57; 95% confidence interval, 2.13 to 3.10; p < 0.001). Post-operative urinary retention-related visits within 2 days following discharge were five-fold higher among those reversed with neostigmine than sugammadex among inpatients (0.05% vs. 0.01%, respectively; p = 0.018) and outpatients (0.5% vs. 0.1%; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Though this study suggests that neuromuscular block reversal with neostigmine can increase post-operative urinary retention risk, additional studies are needed to fully understand the association.
Assuntos
Bloqueio Neuromuscular , Fármacos Neuromusculares não Despolarizantes , Retenção Urinária , Adulto , Humanos , Neostigmina/efeitos adversos , Sugammadex/efeitos adversos , Bloqueio Neuromuscular/efeitos adversos , Bloqueio Neuromuscular/métodos , Retenção Urinária/induzido quimicamente , Retenção Urinária/epidemiologia , Glicopirrolato , Estudos Retrospectivos , Inibidores da Colinesterase/efeitos adversos , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/epidemiologia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/etiologia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/prevenção & controle , HospitaisRESUMO
Anaphylaxis is a life-threatening, systemic, hypersensitivity reaction, manifested by urticaria, hypotension, and respiratory symptoms. Antigens that are cleared renally may have protracted exposure in patients with impaired renal function, resulting in prolonged and refractory anaphylactic shock. After administration of sugammadex, a 47-year-old man developed prolonged, refractory anaphylactic shock, with anuria due to acute kidney injury. The patient was treated with continuous, short-term, veno-venous hemodiafiltration. Initiating this therapy in patients with refractory anaphylactic shock and anuria due to an antigen that is excreted renally can expedite recovery.
Assuntos
Anafilaxia , Anuria , Terapia de Substituição Renal Contínua , Hipotensão , Masculino , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Sugammadex/efeitos adversos , Anafilaxia/induzido quimicamente , Anafilaxia/terapia , Anuria/induzido quimicamente , Hipotensão/induzido quimicamenteRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Sugammadex is a modified gamma-cyclodextrin that has been developed with the goal of reversing the steroidal neuromuscular blocking agents. The aim of the present study is to investigate the effects of different sugammadex doses on embryologic and neural tube development in an early-stage chick embryo model. METHODS: A total of 100 specific pathogen-free, fertilized domestic chicken eggs were randomly divided into five groups (n = 20, each), and placed in an automatic cycle incubator. The eggs in the "control (C)" group were incubated without administration of any drug till the end of the experiment. Sub-blastodermic administration of 0.9% NaCl as vehicle control (VC) and different doses of sugammadex solutions prepared with the latter [2 mg/mL (LD), 4 mg/mL (MD), 16 mg/mL (HD)] were performed at 30 hr of incubation. All embryos were removed from the eggs at 72 hr when they were expected to reach Hamburger-Hamilton (HH) stages 19-20, then they were fixed, and evaluated histo-morphologically. RESULTS: Embryonic development was not observed in 11 eggs (1 in C, 1 in VC; 3 in LD, 3 in MD, and 3 in HD). All the developed embryos were compatible with the HH stages 19-20. A neural tube closure defect was detected in one embryo in the HD group. No statistically significant difference was found between the groups in terms of embryonic and neural tube developments. CONCLUSIONS: No significant association was found between the drug and adverse outcomes; however, a trend with dosing was seen. Further studies are required before conclude on safety and extrapolate these results to human beings.
Assuntos
Defeitos do Tubo Neural , Tubo Neural , Sugammadex , Animais , Embrião de Galinha , Galinhas , Desenvolvimento Embrionário/efeitos dos fármacos , Tubo Neural/crescimento & desenvolvimento , Defeitos do Tubo Neural/induzido quimicamente , Sugammadex/efeitos adversosRESUMO
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review describes recent prospective and retrospective work exploring the incidence and clinical consequence of sugammadex-induced bradycardia and an update of recent evidence and adverse event reports to the United States Food and Drug Administration regarding the incidence of sugammadex induced bradycardia. RECENT FINDINGS: This work suggests that the incidence of sugammadex-induced bradycardia can range from 1 to 7% depending on the definition to reverse moderate to deep neuromuscular blockade. For most instances, the bradycardia is inconsequential. For those instances that have hemodynamic instability, the adverse physiology is easily treated with appropriate vasoactive agents. One study demonstrated that the incidence of bradycardia from sugammadex is less than with neostigmine. There are several case reports that describe marked bradycardia with cardiac arrest from reversal with sugammadex. The incidence of this type of reaction to sugammadex appears to be very rare. Data from the United States Food and Drug Administration's Adverse Event Reporting System public dashboard corroborates this presence of this rare finding. SUMMARY: Sugammadex-induced bradycardia is common and, in most instances, of minimal clinical consequence. Nevertheless, anesthesia providers should maintain proper monitoring and vigilance to treat hemodynamical instability with each administration of sugammadex.
Assuntos
Bradicardia , Bloqueio Neuromuscular , Humanos , Sugammadex/efeitos adversos , Bradicardia/induzido quimicamente , Bradicardia/epidemiologia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Neostigmina/efeitos adversos , Bloqueio Neuromuscular/efeitos adversosRESUMO
STUDY OBJECTIVE: Residual neuromuscular block may lead to postoperative muscle weakness, inadequate oxygenation, and other pulmonary complications. Sugammadex may provide more rapid and effective restoration of neuromuscular function than neostigmine. We therefore tested the primary hypothesis that noncardiac surgical patients given sugammadex oxygenate better during initial recovery than those given neostigmine. Secondarily, we tested the hypothesis that patients given sugammadex have fewer pulmonary complications during hospitalization. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort analysis. SETTING: Postoperative recovery area of a tertiary care hospital. PATIENTS: Adults who had non-cardiothoracic surgery and were given either neostigmine or sugammadex. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was the lowest SpO2/FiO2 ratio in the post-anesthesia care unit. The secondary outcome was a composite of pulmonary complications. MAIN RESULTS: Among 71,457 cases, 10,708 (15%) were given sugammadex and 60,749 (85%) received neostigmine. After propensity weighting, the mean minimum SpO2/FiO2 ratio was 301 ± 77 (SD) in patients given sugammadex and 303 ± 71 in those given neostigmine, yielding an estimated difference in means of -3.5 (95% confidence interval: -5.3, -1.7; P = 0.0002). 4.4% of patients given sugammadex and 3.6% of patients given neostigmine had postoperative pulmonary complications (P = 0.0005, number-needed-to-be-exposed =136; 95% CI: 83, 330), with the main contributing components being new bronchospasm or exacerbation of obstructive pulmonary disease. CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative minimum SpO2/FiO2 ratio during PACU admission was similar after reversal of neuromuscular block by sugammadex and neostigmine. Reversal with sugammadex was associated with more pulmonary complications, but most were minor and of little consequence.
Assuntos
Bloqueio Neuromuscular , Fármacos Neuromusculares não Despolarizantes , Adulto , Humanos , Neostigmina/efeitos adversos , Sugammadex/efeitos adversos , Bloqueio Neuromuscular/efeitos adversos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fármacos Neuromusculares não Despolarizantes/efeitos adversos , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/epidemiologia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/etiologia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/prevenção & controle , Estudos de Coortes , Inibidores da Colinesterase/efeitos adversosAssuntos
Fármacos Neuromusculares não Despolarizantes , Sugammadex , Feminino , Humanos , Bloqueio Neuromuscular/efeitos adversos , Bloqueio Neuromuscular/métodos , Fármacos Neuromusculares não Despolarizantes/administração & dosagem , Fármacos Neuromusculares não Despolarizantes/efeitos adversos , Sugammadex/administração & dosagem , Sugammadex/efeitos adversosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Sugammadex and neostigmine are routinely used to reverse residual neuromuscular blocks at the end of surgery. Sugammadex has been linked with prolongation of laboratory coagulation markers, but clinical relevance on postoperative blood loss and transfusions remains unclear. METHODS: In this retrospective, single-center, cohort study, we analyzed medical records of adult patients having noncardiac surgery who were given sugammadex or neostigmine from May 2016 to December 2020. Our primary outcome was the incidence of any postoperative transfusion of red blood cells, and/or fresh-frozen plasma, and/or platelets. Secondary outcomes were duration of hospitalization, need for resurgery, and postoperative intensive care unit (ICU) admission. After propensity score weighting, the odds ratio (OR) for postoperative transfusion was assessed in both groups (sugammadex versus neostigmine) using a generalized estimation equation to count within-subject correlation weighted by the inverse propensity score. RESULTS: Out of 39,325 eligible surgeries, 33,903 surgeries in 29,062 patients were included in the analysis; with 4581 patients receiving sugammadex and 29,322 patients receiving neostigmine. The raw incidence of postoperative transfusion was 7.40% in sugammadex and 7.45% in the neostigmine group. After weighting by propensity score, the incidence of postoperative transfusion was 8.01% in the sugammadex and 7.38% in the neostigmine group (OR, 1.11 [95% confidence interval [CI], 0.97-1.26; P = .118]). There was no difference in duration of hospitalization and need for resurgery, but odds of postoperative ICU admission were significantly higher for patients receiving sugammadex than those receiving neostigmine (OR, 1.33 [98.33% CI, 1.17-1.52; P < .0001]). Our a priori planned analysis of coagulation laboratory parameters could not be completed because of a high amount of missing laboratory data. CONCLUSIONS: There is no statistically significant nor clinically important difference in the risk of postoperative transfusion in patients receiving sugammadex or neostigmine.
Assuntos
Recuperação Demorada da Anestesia , Bloqueio Neuromuscular , Adulto , Humanos , Neostigmina/efeitos adversos , Sugammadex/efeitos adversos , Recuperação Demorada da Anestesia/induzido quimicamente , Estudos Retrospectivos , Estudos de Coortes , Bloqueio Neuromuscular/efeitos adversos , Inibidores da Colinesterase/efeitos adversosRESUMO
Abstract Sugammadex is a distinctive neuromuscular reversal drug that acts by encapsulating the neuromuscular relaxant molecule and dislodging it from its site of action. Sugammadex has been approved for pediatric patients over 2 years of age. Although arrhythmias have been reported, there is no report of adverse effects in healthy children, such as severe bradycardia requiring intervention. We report two cases of severe bradycardia immediately after the administration of sugammadex in healthy children. Our aim is to alert to the occurrence of one of the most severe adverse effects of sugammadex, in the healthy pediatric population as well.
Assuntos
Humanos , Criança , Fármacos Neuromusculares não Despolarizantes , Bloqueio Neuromuscular , Bradicardia/induzido quimicamente , Sugammadex/efeitos adversosRESUMO
Reversing neuromuscular blockade with sugammadex can eliminate residual paralysis, which has been associated with postoperative respiratory complications. There are equivocal data on whether sugammadex reduces these when compared with neostigmine. We investigated the association of the choice of reversal drug with postoperative respiratory complications and advanced healthcare utilisation. We included adult patients who underwent surgery and received general anaesthesia with sugammadex or neostigmine reversal at two academic healthcare networks between January 2016 and June 2021. The primary outcome was postoperative respiratory complications, defined as post-extubation oxygen saturation < 90%, respiratory failure requiring non-invasive ventilation, or tracheal re-intubation within 7 days. Our main secondary outcome was advanced healthcare utilisation, a composite outcome including: 7-day unplanned intensive care unit admission; 30-day hospital readmission; or non-home discharge. In total, 5746 (6.9%) of 83,250 included patients experienced postoperative respiratory complications. This was not associated with the reversal drug (adjusted OR (95%CI) 1.01 (0.94-1.08); p = 0.76). After excluding patients admitted from skilled nursing facilities, 8372 (10.5%) patients required advanced healthcare utilisation, which was not associated with the choice of reversal (adjusted OR (95%CI) 0.95 (0.89-1.01); p = 0.11). Equivalence testing supported an equivalent effect size of sugammadex and neostigmine on both outcomes, and neostigmine was non-inferior to sugammadex with regard to postoperative respiratory complications or advanced healthcare utilisation. Finally, there was no association between the reversal drug and major adverse cardiovascular events (adjusted OR 1.07 (0.94-1.21); p = 0.32). Compared with neostigmine, reversal of neuromuscular blockade with sugammadex was not associated with a reduction in postoperative respiratory complications or post-procedural advanced healthcare utilisation.
Assuntos
Bloqueio Neuromuscular , Transtornos Respiratórios , Adulto , Humanos , Neostigmina/efeitos adversos , Sugammadex/efeitos adversos , Inibidores da Colinesterase/efeitos adversos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/epidemiologia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/prevenção & controle , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/induzido quimicamente , Transtornos Respiratórios/induzido quimicamente , Bloqueio Neuromuscular/efeitos adversos , Aceitação pelo Paciente de Cuidados de SaúdeRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Sugammadex reversal of neuromuscular block facilitates recovery of neuromuscular function after surgery, but the drug is expensive. We evaluated the effects of sugammadex on hospital costs of care. METHODS: We analysed 79 474 adult surgical patients who received neuromuscular blocking agents and reversal from two academic healthcare networks between 2016 and 2021 to calculate differences in direct costs. We matched our data with data from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project-National Inpatient Sample (HCUP-NIS) to calculate differences in total costs in US dollars. Perioperative risk profiles were defined based on ASA physical status and admission status (ambulatory surgery vs hospitalisation). RESULTS: Based on our registry data analysis, administration of sugammadex vs neostigmine was associated with lower direct costs (-1.3% lower costs; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.5 to -2.2%; P=0.002). In the HCUP-NIS matched cohort, sugammadex use was associated with US$232 lower total costs (95% CI, -US$376 to -US$88; P=0.002). Subgroup analysis revealed that sugammadex was associated with US$1042 lower total costs (95% CI, -US$1198 to -US$884; P<0.001) in patients with lower risk. In contrast, sugammadex was associated with US$620 higher total costs (95% CI, US$377 to US$865; P<0.001) in patients with a higher risk (American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status ≥3 and preoperative hospitalisation). CONCLUSIONS: The effects of using sugammadex on costs of care depend on patient risk, defined based on comorbidities and admission status. We observed lower costs of care in patients with lower risk and higher costs of care in hospitalised surgical patients with severe comorbidities.