Rocuronium-specific antibodies drive perioperative anaphylaxis but can also function as reversal agents in preclinical models.

Neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBAs) relax skeletal muscles to facilitate surgeries and ease intubation but can lead to adverse reactions, including complications because of postoperative residual neuromuscular blockade (rNMB) and, in rare cases, anaphylaxis. Both adverse reactions vary between types of NMBAs, with rocuronium, a widely used nondepolarizing NMBA, inducing one of the longest rNMB durations and highest anaphylaxis incidences. rNMB induced by rocuronium can be reversed by the synthetic γ-cyclodextrin sugammadex. However, in rare cases, sugammadex can provoke anaphylaxis. Thus, additional therapeutic options are needed. Rocuronium-induced anaphylaxis is proposed to rely on preexisting rocuronium-binding antibodies. To understand the pathogenesis of rocuronium-induced anaphylaxis and to identify potential therapeutics, we investigated the memory B cell antibody repertoire of patients with suspected hypersensitivity to rocuronium. We identified polyclonal antibody repertoires with a high diversity among V(D)J genes without evidence of clonal groups. When recombinantly expressed, these antibodies demonstrated specificity and low affinity for rocuronium without cross-reactivity for other NMBAs. Moreover, when these antibodies were expressed as human immunoglobulin E (IgE), they triggered human mast cell activation and passive systemic anaphylaxis in transgenic mice, although their affinities were insufficient to serve as reversal agents. Rocuronium-specific, high-affinity antibodies were thus isolated from rocuronium-immunized mice. The highest-affinity antibody was able to reverse rocuronium-induced neuromuscular blockade in nonhuman primates with kinetics comparable to that of sugammadex. Together, these data support the hypothesis that antibodies cause anaphylactic reactions to rocuronium and pave the way for improved diagnostics and neuromuscular blockade reversal agents.

An Experimental Study to Optimize Neuromuscular Blockade Protocols in Cynomolgus Macaques: Monitoring, Doses, and Antagonism.

BACKGROUND: Neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBAs) are a crucial component of anesthesia and intensive care through the relaxation of skeletal muscles. They can lead to adverse reactions such as postoperative residual neuromuscular block. Only one agent is capable of an instant block reversal in deep block situations, but is restricted to aminosteroid agents. Among animal models, non-human primates are an essential model for a great diversity of human disease models. The main objective of this study was to establish a model for NMBA monitoring with current available drugs before testing new reversal agents. METHODS: Seven healthy male cynomolgus macaques were randomly assigned to this study. Experiments using macaques were approved by the local ethical committee (CEtEA #44). All animals were anesthetized according to institutional guidelines, with ketamine and medetomidine, allowing IV line placement and tracheal intubation. Anesthesia was maintained with isoflurane. Either rocuronium bromine (with or without sugammadex reversal) or atracurium besylate was evaluated. Monitoring was performed with two devices, TOF-Watch and ToFscan, measuring the T4/T1 and the T4/Tref ratios, respectively. Nonparametric Mann-Whitney statistical analyses were done when indicated. RESULTS: NMBA monitoring required adaptation compared to humans, such as stimulus intensity and electrode placement, to be efficient and valid in cynomolgus macaques. When administered, both NMBAs induced deep and persistent neuro-muscular block at equivalent doses to clinical doses in humans. The rocuronium-induced profound neuromuscular block could be reversed using the cyclodextrin sugammadex as a reversal agent. We report no adverse effects in these models by clinical observation, blood chemistry, or complete blood count. CONCLUSION: These results support the use of non-human primate models for neuromuscular block monitoring. This represented the first step before the forthcoming testing of new NMBA-reversal agents.

Effect of sugammadex with neostigmine on postoperative bowel function and on recovery of neuromuscular functions: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Early recovery of neuromuscular and bowel function after abdominal surgery are important clinical indicators of postoperative recovery. This study aimed to investigate the effects of sugammadex, and neostigmine added to sugammadex, on postoperative bowel function and recovery from neuromuscular blocking agents. METHODS: Ninety gynecological surgery patients, aged 18 to 65 years, with American Society of Anesthesiologists of 1 to 2 were randomly assigned to 3 groups: sugammadex 2 mg/kg (Group S), sugammadex 1 m/kg with neostigmine 20 µg/kg + atropine 10 µg/kg (Group S1N), and sugammadex 1.5 mg/kg with neostigmine 20 µg/kg + atropine 10 µg/kg (Group S2N), for reversal at the end of surgery during moderate block (train-of-four [TOF] count 1-2). Propofol, remifentanil, rocuronium, and sevoflurane were used for general anesthesia, and neuromuscular function was assessed using kinemyography. The primary outcomes assessed the effects of sugammadex alone and in combination with neostigmine on the time to first flatus. The secondary outcomes included time to first defecation and recovery time; defined as the administration of reversal agent to TOF ratio 90%. RESULTS: Data from 90 female patients who underwent abdominal gynecological surgery were analyzed. No significant differences were found between the groups in term of the time to first flatus, defecation, or postoperative nausea and vomiting after surgery. However, significant differences were observed in the time to reach a TOF ratio 90% (P < .001) and extubation time (P = .003). CONCLUSION: The addition of neostigmine to sugammadex did not affect bowel function recovery. However, combining 20 µg/kg neostigmine with 1.5 mg/kg sugammadex or 2 mg/kg sugammadex alone antagonized moderate-depth nondepolarizing neuromuscular blockade with similar efficacy.

Effects of neuromuscular block reversal with neostigmine/glycopyrrolate versus sugammadex on bowel motility recovery after laparoscopic colorectal surgery: A randomized controlled trial.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of neostigmine/glycopyrrolate (a traditional agent) and sugammadex on bowel motility recovery and the occurrence of digestive system complications after colorectal surgery. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized controlled trial. SETTING: A single tertiary center. PATIENTS: 111 patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized into two groups based on the block reversal agent: 1) a mixture of 50 µg.kg-1 of neostigmine and 10 µg.kg-1 of glycopyrrolate (neostigmine group) and 2) 2 mg.kg-1 of sugammadex (sugammadex group). MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was the time from the surgery's completion to the first flatus. The time to the first postoperative defecation, incidences of postoperative nausea or vomiting, ileus, and dry mouth, as well as postoperative length of stay, were also assessed. MAIN RESULTS: The time to the first flatus was significantly shorter in the sugammadex group than in the neostigmine group (59 [42-79] h vs 69 [53-90] h, P = 0.027). The time to the first defecation and the incidences of postoperative nausea or vomiting and ileus did not differ between the groups, nor did the postoperative length of stay. However, the incidence of postoperative dry mouth was significantly lower in the sugammadex group than in the neostigmine group (7 patients [13%] vs 39 patients [71%], P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The time to the first flatus was shorter using 2 mg.kg-1 sugammadex to reverse the neuromuscular block for laparoscopic colorectal surgery compared to reversal with conventional neostigmine/glycopyrrolate.

Navigating Anesthesia: Muscle Relaxants and Reversal Agents in Patients with Renal Impairment.

This comprehensive review explores the interaction between neuromuscular blocking agents, reversal agents, and renal function, focusing on various drugs commonly used in anesthesia and their effects on kidney health. Succinylcholine, commonly used for anesthesia induction, can trigger elevated potassium levels in patients with specific medical conditions, leading to serious cardiac complications. While studies suggest the use of succinylcholine in patients with renal failure is safe, cases of postoperative hyperkalemia warrant further investigation. Some agents, such as atracurium and mivacurium, are minimally affected by impaired kidney function, whereas others, such as cisatracurium and rocuronium, can have altered clearance, necessitating dose adjustments in patients with renal failure. The reversal agents neostigmine and sugammadex affect renal markers, while cystatin C levels remain relatively stable with sugammadex use, indicating its milder impact on glomerular function, compared with neostigmine. Notably, the combination of rocuronium and sugammadex in rat studies shows potential nephrotoxic effects, cautioning against the simultaneous use of these agents. In conclusion, understanding the interplay between neuromuscular blocking agents and renal function is crucial for optimizing patient care during anesthesia. While some agents can be used safely in patients with renal failure, others can require careful dosing and monitoring. Further research is needed to comprehensively assess the long-term impact of these agents on kidney health, especially in high-risk patient populations. This article aims to review the use of muscle relaxants and reversal for anesthesia in patients with impaired renal function.

Sugammadex and neuromuscular disease: a systematic review with assessment of reporting quality and content validity.

BACKGROUND: Efficacy and safety of sugammadex for the reversal of neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBAs) in patients with neuromuscular diseases remains unclear. We summarised the available evidence and evaluated the quality of data reporting and the validity of published reports. METHODS: We searched for reports (any design) on the usage of sugammadex (any regimen) for the reversal of an NMBA in patients (any age) with any neuromuscular disease. We used a modified CARE checklist (maximum score 23) to assess the quality of data reporting and an original specific validity checklist (maximum score 41) that was developed through a Delphi process. RESULTS: We retrieved 126 observational reports (386 patients). Most dealt with myasthenia gravis patients receiving rocuronium. The train-of-four ratio returned to ≥0.9 in 258 of 265 (97.4%) patients in whom neuromonitoring was used. Adverse events occurred in 14 of 332 (4.2%) patients in whom adverse events were reported as present or absent. In 90 case reports, the median score of the 23-point CARE checklist was 13.5 (inter-quartile range [IQR] 11-16). In all 126 reports, the median score of the 41-point validity checklist was 23 (IQR 20-27). Scores were positively correlated. CONCLUSIONS: These uncontrolled observations (of mainly low to moderate quality and validity) do not allow confident assessment of the efficacy and safety of sugammadex for the reversal of NMBAs in patients with neuromuscular diseases. Reporting of observational data should follow established guidelines, include specific information to ensure validity, and emphasise what the new data add to current knowledge. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW PROTOCOL: PROSPERO 2019 (CRD42019119924).

A pharmacovigilance study of FDA adverse events for sugammadex.

BACKGROUND: Sugammadex, a selective steroidal neuromuscular blocking agent reversal agent, is increasingly employed for the rapid restoration of neuromuscular function. This study aimed to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of sugammadex's safety profile. METHODS: Adverse events (AEs) related to sugammadex reported in the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database from January 2009 to September 2023 were extracted. Disproportionality analysis with four measures: reporting odds ratio (ROR), proportional reporting ratio (PRR), Bayesian confidence propagation neural network (BCPNN), and multi-item gamma Poisson shrinker (MGPS) were employed to detect significant AEs. We also inspected for unexpected AEs absent from the sugammadex FDA approval documentation and categorized AEs based on the latest version (26.1) of 'Important Medical Event Terms List (IME list)' developed by the EudraVigilance Expert Working Group. RESULTS: A total of 1452 reports were linked to sugammadex. At the preferred terms (PTs) levels, 98 sugammadex-related AEs were identified, including "anaphylactic reaction", "bradycardia", "bronchospasm" and "cardiac arrest". Among them, 37 representing unexpected events were absent from official FDA labeling, and 50 AEs were recognized as IME warranting observation. Notably, 19 PTs denoted serious AEs were absent from labeling yet needing IME surveillance, including: "Kounis syndrome", "angioedema", "pulseless electrical activity" and "laryngeal edema". CONCLUSION: The study identified unexpected and potentially life-threatening AEs associated with sugammadex, a valuable agent for rapidly reversing neuromuscular blockade. Clinicians are advised to be mindful of these potential risks, particularly in patients with allergies or existing cardiovascular or respiratory conditions.

Sugammadex use in pediatric patients with stage IV-V chronic kidney disease in a quaternary referral hospital: a case series.

BACKGROUND: Sugammadex is a pharmacologic agent that provides rapid reversal of neuromuscular blockade via encapsulation of the neuromuscular blocking agent (NMBA). The sugammadex-NMBA complex is primarily cleared through glomerular filtration from the kidney, raising the possibility that alterations in renal function could affect its elimination. In pediatric patients, the benefits of sugammadex have led to widespread utilization; however, there is limited information on its application in pediatric renal impairment. This study examined sugammadex use and postoperative outcomes in pediatric patients with severe chronic renal impairment at our quaternary pediatric referral hospital. METHODS: After IRB approval, we performed a retrospective analysis in pediatric patients with stage IV and V chronic kidney disease who received sugammadex from January 2017 to March 2022. Postoperative outcomes studied included new or increased respiratory requirement, unplanned intensive care unit (ICU) admission, postoperative pneumonia, anaphylaxis, and death within 48 h postoperatively, unplanned deferral of intraoperative extubation, and repeat administrations of NMBA reversal after leaving the operating room. RESULTS: The final cohort included 17 patients ranging from 8 months to 16 years old. One patient required new postoperative noninvasive ventilation on postoperative day 2, which was credited to hypervolemia. Another patient had bronchospasm intraoperatively resolving with medication, which could not definitively be associated sugammadex administration. There were no instances of deferred extubation, unplanned ICU or need for supplemental oxygen after tracheal extubation identified. CONCLUSION: No adverse effects directly attributable to sugammadex in pediatric patients with severe renal impairment were detected. There may be a role for utilization of sugammadex for neuromuscular reversal in this population.

Sugammadex and oral contraceptives.

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.

A new pharmacological approach for tracheal intubation?

Anaesthesia induced with remimazolam and a fentanyl-series opioid can be reversed with flumazenil and naloxone. Concomitant paralysis with rocuronium can facilitate tracheal intubation whilst being reversible with sugammadex. Together, this combination might offer full reversibility of a 'routine' or a 'rapid-sequence' induction anaesthesia. Whether this is useful, or even safe, requires careful evaluation.

The safety and efficacy of sugammadex for reversing neuromuscular blockade in younger children and infants.

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.

The impact of sugammadex dosing and administration practices on potential cost savings for pharmacy departments.

PURPOSE: Neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBAs) are commonly used during surgery, and restoring neuromuscular function at the end of surgery is vital in preventing complications of residual paralysis. Recent guidelines from the American Society of Anesthesiology recommend using sugammadex over neostigmine; however, sugammadex is significantly more expensive than neostigmine and may increase drug expenditure for pharmacy departments. This review summarizes evidence evaluating sugammadex dose adjustments and the potential of these dose adjustments to lead to cost savings for pharmacy departments. SUMMARY: We found evidence suggesting that the manufacturer-recommended sugammadex dose may not be needed in many patients and that dosing based on an adjusted body weight or based on depth of neuromuscular blockade may lead to lower sugammadex usage. Combining sugammadex with neostigmine could also decrease the dose of sugammadex required. We have highlighted the importance of objective neuromuscular monitoring to guide sugammadex dosing and evaluation for residual neuromuscular blockade. Cost savings for pharmacy departments may be realized by these alternative dosing strategies and/or vial-splitting practices. CONCLUSION: Implementing practices related to sugammadex vial splitting and dose adjustment based on body weight and depth of neuromuscular blockade shows potential benefits in terms of sugammadex cost savings.

Comparison of Effects of Sugammadex and Neostigmine on Postoperative Neuromuscular Blockade Recovery in Patients with Interstitial Lung Diseases Undergoing Transbronchial Cryobiopsy: A Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND While many studies have been conducted on sugammadex sodium and neostigmine in patients undergoing general anesthesia, few have explored their effects in patients with interstitial lung diseases (ILDs). MATERIAL AND METHODS Sixty-three patients who underwent transbronchial cryobiopsy under general anesthesia were enrolled in a prospective randomized study. The patients were randomly divided into 2 groups: neostigmine combined with atropine group (group C, n=32) and sugammadex group (group S, n=31). Induction and maintenance of anesthesia were the same in both groups. Patients received rocuronium during anesthesia. At the end of the procedure, when the T2 of the train-of-four stimulation technique (TOF) monitoring appeared, neostigmine 0.04 mg/kg combined with atropine 0.02 mg/kg was injected intravenously in group C, and sodium sugammadex 2 mg/kg was injected intravenously in group S. Time from administration of muscle relaxant antagonist to recovery of TOF ratio (TOFr) to 0.9 and extubation time were recorded. The residual rate of neuromuscular blockade at 1, 3, 5, 7, and 10 min after extubation was calculated. RESULTS Compared to group C, group S had a significantly shorter recovery time of TOFr to 0.9 (4.0[2.0] min vs 14.0[11.0] min, P<0.001) and extubation time (4.0[3.0] min vs 11.0[7.0] min, P<0.001). The residual rate of neuromuscular blockade was remarkably lower in group S than in group C at 3, 5, and 7 min after extubation (3.2% vs 31%, 0% vs 25%, 0% vs 6%, P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS Sugammadex is more effective than neostigmine in reversing the muscle-relaxant effect of rocuronium bromide in patients with ILDs.

Association between reversal agents (sugammadex vs. neostigmine) for neuromuscular block and postoperative pulmonary complications: A retrospective analysis.

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.

Anesthesia for a Patient with Undiagnosed Myotonic Dystrophy.

ABSTRACT: Myotonic dystrophy (DM) is an autosomal dominant genetic disorder characterized by progressively worsening loss of muscle mass and weakness. Anesthesiologists face challenges in managing these patients due to risks such as prolonged intubation and delayed recovery associated with anesthesia in such conditions. We report a case of a 40-year-old male patient undergoing open total gastrectomy under general anesthesia. After the surgery, we administered sugammadex to reverse neuromuscular blockade and confirmed the patient's spontaneous breathing. We then proceeded to extubate the patient. However, the patient experienced complications such as apnea, desaturation, and mental changes. The patient was re-intubated and transferred to the intensive care unit for ventilator support. He was diagnosed with DM by genetic test later. Poor preoperative assessment or undiagnosed DM in surgical patients can lead to severe complications. Thus, it is important to carefully check preoperative laboratory results, patient history, and physical findings.

Use of sugammadex in prevention of post-operative urinary retention in minimally invasive hernia surgery.

PURPOSE: Post-operative urinary retention (POUR) is a known complication of hernia surgery. Minimally invasive inguinal hernia repair (IHR) is typically done under general anesthesia with neuromuscular blockade (NMB), which is commonly reversed with an anticholinesterase inhibitor paired with an anticholinergic agent. Sugammadex is a unique NMB reversal agent that does not have to be paired with an anticholinergic. We sought to explore the role of sugammadex in reducing the rate of POUR following these procedures. METHODS: Data were collected retrospectively at a single institution between February 2016 and October 2019. We identified and studied patients who underwent minimally invasive IHR and received either sugammadex or neostigmine/glycopyrrolate for NMB reversal. The primary endpoint was POUR requiring bladder catheterization. Secondary endpoints included post-operative and 30-day readmissions. RESULTS: 274 patients were included in this study (143 received neostigmine and glycopyrrolate, 131 sugammadex). The sugammadex patients were on average 5 years older than the neostigmine/ glycopyrrolate patients (63.2 vs 58.2, p = 0.003), and received less median intravenous fluids (IVF) (900 ml vs 1000 ml; p = 0.015). There was a significant difference in the rate of POUR between the sugammadex and neostigmine/glycopyrrolate patients (0.0% vs 8.4%, p ≤ 0.001). The difference remained significant after controlling for age and IVF. The odds of POUR for those who received neostigmine/glycopyrrolate were 25 × higher than the odds of those who received sugammadex. CONCLUSION: The results of this study reflect the protective role of sugammadex against POUR in minimally invasive IHR cases.