Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
1.
Paediatr Anaesth ; 32(3): 436-445, 2022 Mar.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34878707

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Few randomized studies have assessed recovery from rocuronium- or vecuronium-induced moderate or deep neuromuscular blockade with sugammadex in pediatric participants. AIM: To assess sugammadex for reversal of neuromuscular blockade in pediatric participants. METHODS: This was a randomized, phase IV, active comparator-controlled, double-blind study. Participants aged 2 to <17 years, under moderate or deep neuromuscular blockade, were administered sugammadex (2 or 4 mg/kg) or neostigmine (50 µg/kg; for moderate neuromuscular blockade only). Predefined adverse events of clinical interest, including clinically relevant bradycardia, hypersensitivity, and anaphylaxis, were monitored. The primary efficacy endpoint was time to recovery to a train-of-four ratio of ≥0.9 in participants receiving sugammadex 2 mg/kg versus neostigmine for reversal of moderate neuromuscular blockade, analyzed by analysis of variance adjusted for neuromuscular blocking agent and age. RESULTS: Of 288 randomized participants, 272 completed the study and 276 were included in the analyses. Clinically relevant bradycardia was experienced by 2.0%, 1.6%, and 5.9% of participants in the sugammadex 2 mg/kg, sugammadex 4 mg/kg, and neostigmine groups, respectively. No hypersensitivity or anaphylaxis events were observed. Recovery to a train-of-four ratio of ≥0.9 with sugammadex 2 mg/kg was faster than neostigmine (1.6 min, 95% CI 1.3 to 2.0 vs. 7.5 min, 95% CI 5.6 to 10.0; p < .0001) and was comparable to sugammadex 4 mg/kg (2.0 min, 95% CI 1.8 to 2.3). CONCLUSIONS: Pediatric participants recovered from rocuronium- or vecuronium-induced moderate neuromuscular blockade significantly faster with sugammadex 2 mg/kg than with neostigmine. Time to reversal of deep neuromuscular blockade with sugammadex 4 mg/kg was consistent with that of moderate neuromuscular blockade reversal. No meaningful differences in clinically relevant bradycardia, hypersensitivity, or anaphylaxis were seen with sugammadex vs neostigmine. These results support the use of sugammadex for reversal of moderate and deep rocuronium- and vecuronium-induced neuromuscular blockade in patients aged 2 to <17 years. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03351608/EudraCT 2017-000692-92.


Asunto(s)
Anafilaxia , Anestésicos , Bloqueo Neuromuscular , Fármacos Neuromusculares no Despolarizantes , Anafilaxia/inducido químicamente , Anestésicos/efectos adversos , Bradicardia/inducido químicamente , Niño , Humanos , Neostigmina , Bloqueo Neuromuscular/métodos , Fármacos Neuromusculares no Despolarizantes/efectos adversos , Rocuronio , Sugammadex/efectos adversos , Bromuro de Vecuronio/efectos adversos
2.
BMC Anesthesiol ; 21(1): 62, 2021 02 27.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33639839

RESUMEN

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 .


Asunto(s)
Periodo de Recuperación de la Anestesia , Peso Corporal/fisiología , Bloqueo Neuromuscular/métodos , Obesidad Mórbida/fisiopatología , Rocuronio/farmacología , Sugammadex/administración & dosificación , Bromuro de Vecuronio/farmacología , Relación Dosis-Respuesta a Droga , Método Doble Ciego , Femenino , Humanos , Peso Corporal Ideal/fisiología , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Fármacos Neuromusculares no Despolarizantes/farmacología , Factores de Tiempo
3.
Anesthesiology ; 121(5): 969-77, 2014 Nov.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25208233

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Previous studies show a prolongation of activated partial thromboplastin time and prothrombin time in healthy volunteers after treatment with sugammadex. The authors investigated the effect of sugammadex on postsurgical bleeding and coagulation variables. METHODS: This randomized, double-blind trial enrolled patients receiving thromboprophylaxis and undergoing hip or knee joint replacement or hip fracture surgery. Patients received sugammadex 4 mg/kg or usual care (neostigmine or spontaneous recovery) for reversal of rocuronium- or vecuronium-induced neuromuscular blockade. The Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel method, stratified by thromboprophylaxis and renal status, was used to estimate relative risk and 95% confidence interval (CI) of bleeding events with sugammadex versus usual care. Safety was further evaluated by prespecified endpoints and adverse event reporting. RESULTS: Of 1,198 patients randomized, 1,184 were treated (sugammadex n = 596, usual care n = 588). Bleeding events within 24 h (classified by an independent, blinded Adjudication Committee) were reported in 17 (2.9%) sugammadex and 24 (4.1%) usual care patients (relative risk [95% CI], 0.70 [0.38 to 1.29]). Compared with usual care, increases of 5.5% in activated partial thromboplastin time (P < 0.001) and 3.0% in prothrombin time (P < 0.001) from baseline with sugammadex occurred 10 min after administration and resolved within 60 min. There were no significant differences between sugammadex and usual care for other blood loss measures (transfusion, 24-h drain volume, drop in hemoglobin, and anemia), or risk of venous thromboembolism, and no cases of anaphylaxis. CONCLUSION: Sugammadex produced limited, transient (<1 h) increases in activated partial thromboplastin time and prothrombin time but was not associated with increased risk of bleeding versus usual care.


Asunto(s)
Pérdida de Sangre Quirúrgica , Bloqueo Neuromuscular , gamma-Ciclodextrinas/farmacología , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Periodo de Recuperación de la Anestesia , Coagulación Sanguínea/efectos de los fármacos , Pérdida de Sangre Quirúrgica/mortalidad , Método Doble Ciego , Determinación de Punto Final , Femenino , Fibrinolíticos/efectos adversos , Fibrinolíticos/uso terapéutico , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Sugammadex , Trombosis/prevención & control , Adulto Joven , gamma-Ciclodextrinas/efectos adversos
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA