Prolonged Opioid Use and Pain Outcome and Associated Factors after Surgery under General Anesthesia: A Prospective Cohort Association Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND: There is insufficient prospective evidence regarding the relationship between surgical experience and prolonged opioid use and pain. The authors investigated the association of patient characteristics, surgical procedure, and perioperative anesthetic course with postoperative opioid consumption and pain 3 months postsurgery. The authors hypothesized that patient characteristics and intraoperative factors predict opioid consumption and pain 3 months postsurgery. METHODS: Eleven U.S. and one European institution enrolled patients scheduled for spine, open thoracic, knee, hip, or abdominal surgery, or mastectomy, in this multicenter, prospective observational study. Preoperative and postoperative data were collected using patient surveys and electronic medical records. Intraoperative data were collected from the Multicenter Perioperative Outcomes Group database. The association between postoperative opioid consumption and surgical site pain at 3 months, elicited from a telephone survey conducted at 3 months postoperatively, and demographics, psychosocial scores, pain scores, pain management, and case characteristics, was analyzed. RESULTS: Between September and October 2017, 3,505 surgical procedures met inclusion criteria. A total of 1,093 cases were included; 413 patients were lost to follow-up, leaving 680 (64%) for outcome analysis. Preoperatively, 135 (20%) patients were taking opioids. Three months postsurgery, 96 (14%) patients were taking opioids, including 23 patients (4%) who had not taken opioids preoperatively. A total of 177 patients (27%) reported surgical site pain, including 45 (13%) patients who had not reported pain preoperatively. The adjusted odds ratio for 3-month opioid use was 18.6 (credible interval, 10.3 to 34.5) for patients who had taken opioids preoperatively. The adjusted odds ratio for 3-month surgical site pain was 2.58 (1.45 to 4.4), 4.1 (1.73 to 8.9), and 2.75 (1.39 to 5.0) for patients who had site pain preoperatively, knee replacement, or spine surgery, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative opioid use was the strongest predictor of opioid use 3 months postsurgery. None of the other variables showed clinically significant association with opioid use at 3 months after surgery.

Clarifying the grey space of sugammadex induced bradycardia.

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.

Pro-Con Debate: Do We Need Quantitative Neuromuscular Monitoring in the Era of Sugammadex?

In this Pro-Con article, we debate the merits of using quantitative neuromuscular blockade monitoring. Consensus guidelines recommend their use to guide the administration of nondepolarizing neuromuscular blockade and reversal agents. A major impediment to this guideline is that until recently, reliable quantitative neuromuscular blockade monitors have not been widely available. Without them, anesthesia providers have been trained with and are adept at using a variety of qualitative neuromuscular blockade monitors otherwise known as peripheral nerve stimulators. Although perhaps less accurate, anesthesia providers find them reliable and easy to use. They have a long track record of using them with the perception that their use leads to effective neuromuscular blockade reversal and minimizes clinically significant adverse events from residual neuromuscular blockade. In the recent past, 2 disruptive developments have called upon anesthesia care providers to reconsider their practice in neuromuscular blockade administration, reversal, and monitoring. These include: (1) commercialization of more reliable quantitative neuromuscular monitors and (2) widespread use of sugammadex, a versatile reversal agent of neuromuscular blockade. Sugammadex appears to be so effective at rapidly and effectively reversing even the deepest of neuromuscular blockades, and it has left anesthesia providers wondering whether quantitative monitoring is indeed necessary or whether conventional, familiar, and less expensive qualitative monitoring will suffice? This Pro-Con debate will contrast anesthesia provider perceptions with evidence surrounding the use of quantitative neuromuscular blockade monitors to explore whether quantitative neuromuscular monitoring (NMM) is just another technology solution looking for a problem or a significant advance in NMM that will improve patient safety and outcomes.

Observation of Complement Protein Gene Expression Before and After Surgery in Opioid-Consuming and Opioid-Naive Patients.

Opioids may influence inflammation. We compared genes associated with pain and inflammation in patients who consumed opioids (3-120 mg of oral morphine equivalents per day) with those who did not for differential expression. White blood cells were assayed in 20 patients presenting for total lower extremity joint replacement. We focused on messenger ribonucleic acid expression of complement proteins. We report that the expression of a complement inhibitor, complement 4 binding protein A, was reduced, and the expression of a complement activator, complement factor D, was increased in opioid-consuming patients. We conclude that opioid consumption may influence expression of complement activators and inhibitors.

A pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic real-time display may change anesthesiologists' behavior.

We have developed a real-time graphical display that presents anesthetic pharmacology data (drug effect site concentrations (Ce) and probability of anesthetic effects including hypnosis, loss of response to tracheal intubation), improving a previous prototype. We hypothesized that the use of the display alters (1) clinical behavior of anesthesiologists (i.e., Ce of isoflurane and fentanyl at the end of anesthesia), (2) fentanyl dose during the first 30 min of recovery in the post anesthesia care unit (PACU), and that the response of clinicians to the display in terms of workload and utility is favorable. The display was evaluated in a two-group, non-randomized prospective observational study of 30 patients undergoing general anesthesia using isoflurane and fentanyl. The isoflurane-predicted Ce was lower in the display group (without-display: 0.64% ± 0.06%; with-display: 0.42 ± 0.04%; t23.9 = 3.17, P = 0.004 < adjusted alpha 0.05/2). The difference in fentanyl-predicted Ce did not achieve statistical significance (without-display: 1.5 ± 0.1 ng/ml; with-display: 2.0 ± 0.2 ng/ml; t25.5 = 2.26, P = 0.03 > adjusted alpha 0.05/2) (means ± standard error). A joint test of isoflurane and fentanyl Ce with respect to the display condition rejected the null hypothesis of no differences (Hotelling T2, P = 0.01), supporting our primary hypothesis. The total fentanyl per patient during the first 30 min in the PACU with the display was 75.0 ± 62.7 µg and that without the display was 83.0 ± 74.7 µg. There was no significant difference between the groups (means ± standard deviation, P = 0.75). There were no differences in perceived workload. Use of the display does not appear to be cognitively burdensome and may change the anesthesiologist's dosing regimen.

The effect of audiovisual distraction on patient-controlled sedation under spinal anesthesia: a prospective, randomized trial.

Audiovisual distraction (AVD) has been used to augment or replace procedural sedation. We investigated whether AVD in patients having total hip (THA) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA) under spinal anesthesia would reduce self-administered propofol consumption during surgery. 50 participants were randomized equally into a patient-controlled sedation (PCS) group or AVD group. All participants were given a spinal block and a propofol PCS device prior to surgery. In addition, Group AVD participants selected and watched a movie or documentary film on a tablet device with noise-cancelling headphones during surgery. The primary outcome of this study was total propofol consumption standardized as mcg/kg/min. Secondary outcomes evaluated increased supplemental oxygen use, rescue airway interventions, hypotension, disruptive movement events during surgery, sedation, and satisfaction with anesthesia scores. Historical clinician-controlled propofol usage at our institution over the previous 2 years were recorded. There was no significant difference in median propofol consumption between Groups PCS and AVD, 8.4 mcg/kg/min (1.6-18.9) vs 4 mcg/kg/min (0-9) (P = 0.29), respectively. Historical clinician-controlled usage of propofol demonstrated a median of 39.3 mcg/kg/min (29.2-51.2). There were few differences in the secondary outcome measures. The use of AVD did not reduce patient-controlled propofol consumption in patients having a THA or TKA surgery under spinal anesthesia.

The Influence of Hemorrhagic Shock on the Disposition and Effects of Intravenous Anesthetics: A Narrative Review.

The need to reduce the dose of intravenous anesthetic in the setting of hemorrhagic shock is a well-established clinical dogma. Considered collectively,; the body of information concerning the behavior of intravenous anesthetics during hemorrhagic shock, drawn from animal and human data, confirms that clinical dogma and informs the rational selection and administration of intravenous anesthetics in the setting of hemorrhagic shock. The physiologic changes during hemorrhagic shock can alter pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of intravenous anesthetics. Decreased size of the central compartment and central clearance caused by shock physiology lead to an altered dose-concentration relationship. For most agents and adjuncts, shock leads to substantially higher concentrations and increased effect. The notable exception is etomidate, which has relatively unchanged pharmacokinetics during shock. Increased concentrations lead to increased primary effect as well as increased side effects, notably cardiovascular effects. Pharmacokinetic changes are essentially reversed for all agents by fluid resuscitation. Propofol is unique among agents in that, in addition to the pharmacokinetic changes, it exhibits increased potency during shock. The pharmacodynamic changes of propofol persist despite fluid resuscitation. The persistence of these pharmacodynamic changes during shock is unlikely to be due to increased endogenous opiates, but is most likely due to increased fraction of unbound propofol. The stage of shock also appears to influence the pharmacologic changes. The changes are more rapid and pronounced as shock physiology progresses to the uncompensated stage. Although scant, human data corroborate the findings of animal studies. Both the animal and human data inform the rational selection and administration of intravenous anesthetics in the setting of hemorrhagic shock. The well-entrenched clinical dogma that etomidate is a preferred induction agent in patients experiencing hemorrhagic shock is firmly supported by the evidence. Propofol is a poor choice for induction or maintenance of anesthesia in severely bleeding patients, even with resuscitation; this can include emergent trauma cases or scheduled cases that routinely have mild or moderate blood loss.

Gene Variants in Hepatic Metabolism, Gamma-Aminobutyric Acid-ergic Reward, and Prostaglandin Pathways in Opioid-Consuming and Opioid-Naïve Patients Presenting for Lower Extremity Total Joint Replacement.

Gene variants may contribute to individual differences in the experience of pain and the efficacy and reward of treatments. We explored gene variation in opioid-naïve and opioid-consuming patients undergoing elective lower extremity total joint replacement. We focused on 3 gene pathways including prostaglandin, gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA)-ergic reward, and hepatic metabolism pathways. We report that for genes with possible or probable deleterious impact in these 3 pathways, opioid consumers had more gene variants than opioid-naïve patients (median 3 vs 1, P = .0092). We conclude that chronic opiate users may have genetic susceptibility to altered responses in reward/dependency and pain/inflammation pathways.

An Automated Algorithm Incorporating Poincaré Analysis Can Quantify the Severity of Opioid-Induced Ataxic Breathing.

BACKGROUND: Opioid-induced respiratory depression (OIRD) is traditionally recognized by assessment of respiratory rate, arterial oxygen saturation, end-tidal CO2, and mental status. Although an irregular or ataxic breathing pattern is widely recognized as a manifestation of opioid effects, there is no standardized method for assessing ataxic breathing severity. The purpose of this study was to explore using a machine-learning algorithm for quantifying the severity of opioid-induced ataxic breathing. We hypothesized that domain experts would have high interrater agreement with each other and that a machine-learning algorithm would have high interrater agreement with the domain experts for ataxic breathing severity assessment. METHODS: We administered target-controlled infusions of propofol and remifentanil to 26 healthy volunteers to simulate light sleep and OIRD. Respiration data were collected from respiratory inductance plethysmography (RIP) bands and an intranasal pressure transducer. Three domain experts quantified the severity of ataxic breathing in accordance with a visual scoring template. The Krippendorff alpha, which reports the extent of interrater agreement among N raters, was used to assess agreement among the 3 domain experts. A multiclass support vector machine (SVM) was trained on a subset of the domain expert-labeled data and then used to quantify ataxic breathing severity on the remaining data. The Vanbelle kappa was used to assess the interrater agreement of the machine-learning algorithm with the grouped domain experts. The Vanbelle kappa expands on the Krippendorff alpha by isolating a single rater-in this case, the machine-learning algorithm-and comparing it to a group of raters. Acceptance criteria for both statistical measures were set at >0.8. The SVM was trained and tested using 2 sensor inputs for the breath marks: RIP and intranasal pressure. RESULTS: Krippendorff alpha was 0.93 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.91-0.95) for the 3 domain experts. Vanbelle kappa was 0.98 (95% CI, 0.96-0.99) for the RIP SVM and 0.96 (0.92-0.98) for the intranasal pressure SVM compared to the domain experts. CONCLUSIONS: We concluded it may be feasible for a machine-learning algorithm to quantify ataxic breathing severity in a manner consistent with a panel of domain experts. This methodology may be helpful in conjunction with traditional measures to identify patients experiencing OIRD.

A comparison of ventilation with a non-invasive ventilator versus standard O2 with a nasal cannula for colonoscopy with moderate sedation using propofol.

The aim of this study was to test the effects of CPAP on moderately sedated patients undergoing colonoscopy. Our hypothesis was that CPAP can reduce the incidence and duration of obstructive apnea and hemoglobin oxygen desaturation in patients undergoing procedural sedation for colonoscopy. Two groups of consenting adult patients scheduled to undergo routine colonoscopy procedures and sedated with propofol and fentanyl were monitored in this study: control and intervention. Patients in the intervention group were connected via a facemask to a ventilator that delivered supplemental oxygen (100%) through a standard air-cushion mask. The mask had a built-in leak to facilitate CO2 clearance during CPAP. Patients in the control group received 2-10 L/min of oxygen via nasal cannula or non-rebreather mask. Subjects in the control group were collected in a prior study and used as historical controls. The primary outcome measures were the number of apneic events and the cumulative duration of apneic events. An apneic event was defined as a period longer than 10 s without respiration. The secondary outcome was the area under the curve (AUC) for the arterial oxygen saturation less than 90% versus time during sedative and analgesic administration (time (s) below threshold multiplied by percent below threshold). A desaturation event was defined as a period of time during which arterial oxygen saturation was less than 90%. 29 patients were enrolled in the intervention group and 156 patients were previously enrolled in the control group as part of an earlier study. The median number of apneic events in the control group was 7 compared to 0 in the intervention group. The intervention group experienced apnea less than 1% of the total procedure time compared to 17% in the control group (p < 0.001). There were no desaturation events observed in the 29 patients in the intervention group. In contrast, 27 out of 156 patients in the control group experienced a desaturation event. Average AUC of patients in the control group was 70%-s (time (s) * oxygen saturation below < 90%) (95% CI 32.34-108.60%) whereas the average AUC in intervention group patients was 0%-s (% time (s) * oxygen saturation < 90%) (95% CI 0-0%), p = 0.01. This preliminary study found that CPAP via a tight-fitting mask may be an effective tool to reduce the incidence and duration of obstructive apneic events as well as hemoglobin oxygen desaturation during lower endoscopy procedures that use propofol and fentanyl for sedation.Clinical Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02623270. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02623270 .

Comparison of 7 Different Sensors for Detecting Low Respiratory Rates Using a Single Breath Detection Algorithm in Nonintubated, Sedated Volunteers.

BACKGROUND: Numerous technologies are used to monitor respiratory rates in nonintubated patients. No technology has emerged as the standard. The primary aim of this study was to assess the limits of agreement between a reference sensor signal (respiratory inductance plethysmography bands) and 7 alternative sensor signals (nasal capnometer, nasal pressure transducer, oronasal thermistor, abdominal accelerometer, transpulmonary electrical impedance, peritracheal microphone, and photoplethysmography) for measuring low respiratory rates in sedated, nonintubated, supine volunteers. A unified approach based on a single breath detection algorithm was applied to each sensor to facilitate comparison. We hypothesized that all of the sensor signals would allow detection of low (<10 breaths per minute) respiratory rates to within ±2 breaths per minute of the reference sensor signal. METHODS: Volunteers received remifentanil and propofol infusions at selected target concentration pairs to induce depression of ventilation. Signals from each sensor were analyzed by an identical threshold-based detection algorithm to compute the breathing rate. Bland-Altman limits of agreement and error rate analyses were used to characterize the performance of each sensor compared to the reference sensor. RESULTS: The analysis of the accelerometer and capnometer signals, using Bland-Altman and error rate analyses, showed the highest breath rate agreement (1.96 × standard deviation) of the 7 sensors with -2.1 to 2.2 and -2.5 to 2.7 breaths per minute, respectively. All other signals exhibited wider limits of agreement, with impedance being the widest at -7.8 to 7.4 breaths per minute. For the abdomen accelerometer, 95% of Bland-Altman data points were within ±2 breaths per minute. For the capnometer, 96% of data points were within ±2 breaths per minute. Nasal pressure, thermistor, and microphone all had >80% of data points within ±2 breaths per minute. Impedance and photoplethysmograph signals had 58% and 64%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: A unified approach can be applied to a variety of sensor signals to estimate respiratory rates in spontaneously breathing, nonintubated, sedated volunteers. However, detecting clinically relevant low respiratory rates (<6 breaths per minute) is a technical challenge. By our analysis, no single sensor was able to detect slow respiratory rates with adequate precision (<±2 breaths per minute of the reference signal). Of the sensors evaluated, capnometers and abdominal accelerometers may be the most reliable sensors for identifying hypopnea and central apnea.

Anesthesiologists' Overconfidence in Their Perceived Knowledge of Neuromuscular Monitoring and Its Relevance to All Aspects of Medical Practice: An International Survey.

BACKGROUND: In patients who receive a nondepolarizing neuromuscular blocking drug (NMBD) during anesthesia, undetected postoperative residual neuromuscular block is a common occurrence that carries a risk of potentially serious adverse events, particularly postoperative pulmonary complications. There is abundant evidence that residual block can be prevented when real-time (quantitative) neuromuscular monitoring with measurement of the train-of-four ratio is used to guide NMBD administration and reversal. Nevertheless, a significant percentage of anesthesiologists fail to use quantitative devices or even conventional peripheral nerve stimulators routinely. Our hypothesis was that a contributing factor to the nonutilization of neuromuscular monitoring was anesthesiologists' overconfidence in their knowledge and ability to manage the use of NMBDs without such guidance. METHODS: We conducted an Internet-based multilingual survey among anesthesiologists worldwide. We asked respondents to answer 9 true/false questions related to the use of neuromuscular blocking drugs. Participants were also asked to rate their confidence in the accuracy of each of their answers on a scale of 50% (pure guess) to 100% (certain of answer). RESULTS: Two thousand five hundred sixty persons accessed the website; of these, 1629 anesthesiologists from 80 countries completed the 9-question survey. The respondents correctly answered only 57% of the questions. In contrast, the mean confidence exhibited by the respondents was 84%, which was significantly greater than their accuracy. Of the 1629 respondents, 1496 (92%) were overconfident. CONCLUSIONS: The anesthesiologists surveyed expressed overconfidence in their knowledge and ability to manage the use of NMBDs. This overconfidence may be partially responsible for the failure to adopt routine perioperative neuromuscular monitoring. When clinicians are highly confident in their knowledge about a procedure, they are less likely to modify their clinical practice or seek further guidance on its use.

Acceptance of a propofol and remifentanil infusion dosing algorithm to optimize postoperative emergence and analgesia.

We implemented a pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) based optimization algorithm recommending intraoperative Remifentanil and Propofol infusion rates to minimize time to emergence and maximize the duration of analgesia in a clinical setting. This feasibility study tested the clinical acceptance of the optimization algorithm's recommendations during scoliosis surgical repair for 14 patients. Anesthesiologist accepted 359/394 (91%) of the recommendations given on the basis of the optimization algorithm. While following the optimization's recommendations the anesthesiologist decreased Propofol infusions from an average of 164-135 mcg/kg/min [p = 0.002] and increased Remifentanil infusions from an average of 0.22-0.30 mcg/kg/min [p = 0.004]. The anesthesiologists appeared to accept and follow the recommendations from a PK/PD based optimization algorithm.

Optimizing intraoperative administration of propofol, remifentanil, and fentanyl through pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic simulations to increase the postoperative duration of analgesia.

Titrating an intraoperative anesthetic to achieve the postoperative goals of rapid emergence and prolonged analgesia can be difficult because of inter-patient variability and the need to provide intraoperative sedation and analgesia. Modeling pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of anesthetic administrations estimates drug concentrations and predicted responses to stimuli during anesthesia. With utility of these PK/PD models we created an algorithm to optimize the intraoperative dosing regimen. We hypothesized the optimization algorithm would find a dosing regimen that would increase the postoperative duration of analgesia, not increase the time to emergence, and meet the intraoperative requirements of sedation and analgesia. To evaluate these hypotheses we performed a simulation study on previously collected anesthesia data. We developed an algorithm to recommend different intraoperative dosing regimens for improved post-operative results. To test the post-operative results of the algorithm we tested it on previously collected anesthesia data. An anesthetic dataset of 21 patients was obtained from a previous study from an anesthetic database at the University of Utah. Using the anesthetic records from these surgeries we modeled 21 patients using the same patient demographics and anesthetic requirements as the dataset. The anesthetic was simulated for each of the 21 patients with three different dosing regimens. The three dosing regimens are: from the anesthesiologist as recorded in the dataset (control group), from the algorithm in the clinical scenario one (test group), and from the algorithm in the clinical scenario two (test group). We created two clinical scenarios for the optimization algorithm to perform; one with normal general anesthesia constraints and goals, and a second condition where a delayed time to emergence is allowed to further maximize the duration of analgesia. The algorithm was evaluated by comparing the post-operative results of the control group to each of the test groups. Comparing results between the clinical scenario 1 dosing to the actual dosing showed a median increase in the duration of analgesia by 6 min and the time to emergence by 0.3 min. This was achieved by decreasing the intraoperative remifentanil infusion rate, increased the fentanyl dosing regimen, and not changing the propofol infusion rate. Comparing results between the clinical scenario 2 dosing to the actual dosing showed a median increase in the duration of analgesia by 26 min and emergence by 1.5 min. To dosing regimen from clinical scenario 2 greatly increased the fentanyl dosing regimen and greatly decreased the remifentanil infusion rate with no change to the propofol infusion rate. The results from this preliminary analysis of the optimization algorithm appear to imply that it can operate as intended. However a clinical study is warranted to determine to what extent the optimization algorithm determined optimal dosing regimens can maximize the postoperative duration of analgesia without delaying the time to emergence in a clinical setting.

Airway rescue during sedation: a proposed airway rescue pathway for nonanesthesiologists.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review summarizes key features of adverse airway and respiratory events for which sedation providers must be prepared to diagnose and treat in a timely manner. Key features include elements of the presedation patient evaluation that predict adverse airway and respiratory events; patient profiles, target sedation levels, and procedure types that should prompt a consult with an anesthesiologist; necessary clinical skills, essential equipment, and reversal drugs necessary to manage adverse airway and respiratory events; and a proposed airway rescue pathway that describes a sequence of interventions and prompts to call for help when encountering an adverse airway or respiratory event. RECENT FINDINGS: Several studies have reported adverse events from sedation. Although the overall rate can approach 4.5%, the incidence of events associated with severe harm is low (e.g., <0.5%). Some that are most harmful are prolonged ventilatory compromise leading to hypoxic brain injury or death. Inadequate clinical skills that contribute to these poor outcomes include undetected or delayed detection of hypopnea, apnea, and partial or complete airway obstruction, inadequate rescue skills to manage drug-induced ventilatory depression or airway obstruction, and/or a delay or no attempt to call for expert help followed by a timely response and intervention from that expert help. SUMMARY: To improve outcomes in detecting and managing adverse airway and respiratory events, nonanesthesiologists sedation practitioners must be trained in patient selection, monitoring, pharmacology, physiology, and airway management. One gap in sedation training curriculum is a roadmap to use when managing an adverse airway or respiratory events. This review puts forth a suggested airway rescue pathway for nonanesthesiologist sedation practitioners to use as a decision aid during an adverse airway or respiratory event associated with procedural sedation.

Consensus Statement on Perioperative Use of Neuromuscular Monitoring.

A panel of clinician scientists with expertise in neuromuscular blockade (NMB) monitoring was convened with a charge to prepare a consensus statement on indications for and proper use of such monitors. The aims of this article are to: (a) provide the rationale and scientific basis for the use of quantitative NMB monitoring; (b) offer a set of recommendations for quantitative NMB monitoring standards; (c) specify educational goals; and (d) propose training recommendations to ensure proper neuromuscular monitoring and management. The panel believes that whenever a neuromuscular blocker is administered, neuromuscular function must be monitored by observing the evoked muscular response to peripheral nerve stimulation. Ideally, this should be done at the hand muscles (not the facial muscles) with a quantitative (objective) monitor. Objective monitoring (documentation of train-of-four ratio ≥0.90) is the only method of assuring that satisfactory recovery of neuromuscular function has taken place. The panel also recommends that subjective evaluation of the responses to train-of-four stimulation (when using a peripheral nerve stimulator) or clinical tests of recovery from NMB (such as the 5-second head lift) should be abandoned in favor of objective monitoring. During an interim period for establishing these recommendations, if only a peripheral nerve stimulator is available, its use should be mandatory in any patient receiving a neuromuscular blocking drug. The panel acknowledges that publishing this statement per se will not result in its spontaneous acceptance, adherence to its recommendations, or change in routine practice. Implementation of objective monitoring will likely require professional societies and anesthesia department leadership to champion its use to change anesthesia practitioner behavior.