Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Impact of sugammadex and neostigmine on outcome after major orthopaedic surgery: A population-based analysis.
Cozowicz, Crispiana; Zhong, Haoyan; Poeran, Jashvant; Illescas, Alex; Liu, Jiabin; Poultsides, Lazaros A; Athanassoglou, Vassilis; Memtsoudis, Stavros G.
Afiliação
  • Cozowicz C; From the Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative Medicine and Intensive Care Medicine, Paracelsus Medical University, Salzburg, Austria (CC, SGM), Hospital for Special Surgery, Department of Anesthesiology, Critical Care & Pain Management, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, USA (HZ, AI, JL, SGM), Department of Orthopaedic Surgery/Institute for Healthcare Delivery Science, Department of Population Health Science and Policy, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, 1 Gustave L. Levy
Eur J Anaesthesiol ; 41(5): 374-380, 2024 May 01.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38497249
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Residual neuromuscular blockade after surgery remains a major concern given its association with pulmonary complications. However, current clinical practices with and the comparative impact on perioperative risk of various reversal agents remain understudied.

OBJECTIVE:

We investigated the use of sugammadex and neostigmine in the USA, and their impact on postoperative complications by examining national data.

DESIGN:

This population-based retrospective study used national Premier Healthcare claims data. SETTING AND

PARTICIPANTS:

Patients undergoing total hip/knee arthroplasty (THA, TKA), or lumbar spine fusion surgery between 2016 and 2019 in the United States who received neuromuscular blocking agents. INTERVENTION The effects of sugammadex and neostigmine for pharmacologically enhanced reversal were compared with each other and with controls who received no reversal agent. MAIN

OUTCOMES:

included pulmonary complications, cardiac complications, and a need for postoperative ventilation. Mixed-effects regression models compared the outcomes between neostigmine, sugammadex, and controls. We report odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Bonferroni-adjusted P values of 0.008 were used to indicate significance.

RESULTS:

Among 361 553 patients, 74.5% received either sugammadex (20.7%) or neostigmine (53.8%). Sugammadex use increased from 4.4% in 2016 to 35.4% in 2019, whereas neostigmine use decreased from 64.5% in 2016 to 43.4% in 2019. Sugammadex versus neostigmine or controls was associated with significantly reduced odds for cardiac complications (OR 0.86, 95% CI, 0.80 to 0.92 and OR 0.83, 95% CI, 0.78 to 0.89, respectively). Both sugammadex and neostigmine versus controls were associated with reduced odds for pulmonary complications (OR 0.85, 95% CI, 0.77 to 0.94 and OR 0.91, CI 0.85 to 0.98, respectively). A similar pattern of sugammadex and neostigmine was observed for a reduction in severe pulmonary complications, including the requirement of invasive ventilation (OR 0.54, 95% CI, 0.45 to 0.64 and OR 0.53, 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.6, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS:

Population-based data indicate that sugammadex and neostigmine both appear highly effective in reducing the odds of severe life-threatening pulmonary complications. Sugammadex, especially, was associated with reduced odds of cardiac complications.
Assuntos

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Bloqueio Neuromuscular / Procedimentos Ortopédicos Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Eur J Anaesthesiol Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Bloqueio Neuromuscular / Procedimentos Ortopédicos Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Eur J Anaesthesiol Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article