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.

Shortened time to neuromuscular recovery with lower doses of rocuronium in elderly patients.

INTRODUCTION: The effect of neuromuscular blocking agents may be reversed by administration of neostigmine, when two twitches are present using train-of-four (TOF) stimulation. However, in elderly patients, limited data are available about when to administer neostigmine. We hypothesised that time to two twitches after TOF (TOF-2) was shorter after rocuronium 0.6 mg/kg than after rocuronium 0.9 mg/kg. Also, we hypothesised that time to TOF-2 would be shorter after rocuronium 0.3 mg/kg than after rocuronium 0.6 mg/kg. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of 50 elderly patients > 80 years; 16 patients received rocuronium 0.6 mg/kg, another 16 patients received rocuronium 0.9 mg/kg; and, finally, 18 patients received rocuronium 0.3 mg/kg. Patients received total intravenous anaesthesia, and neuromuscular block was monitored with acceleromyography. RESULTS: Time to TOF-2 was shorter after rocuronium 0.6 mg/kg than after rocuronium 0.9 mg/kg: 37 min. versus 59 min. (difference: 22 min. (95% confidence intervals (CI): 10 to 33 min.), p = 0.0007). Time to TOF-2 after rocuronium 0.3 mg/kg was shorter than after rocuronium 0.6 mg/kg: 19 min. versus 37 min. (difference: 18 min. (95% CI: 11 to 25 min.), p = 0.00006). However, only 33% of the patients receiving 0.3 mg/kg obtained full effect i.e. TOF-0. CONCLUSION: Time to TOF-2 was shorter after rocuronium 0.6 mg/kg than after 0.9 mg/kg and shorter after rocuronium 0.3 mg/kg than after 0.6 mg/kg. FUNDING: This work was supported by departmental sources. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was a secondary analysis of two clinical trials. CLINICALTRIALS: gov (NCT04512313), (NCT03857750).

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.

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.

Effect of coadministration of 10 mg/kg calcium chloride and neostigmine on extubation time: A randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Some studies investigating the effect of calcium on neostigmine-induced recovery of neuromuscular blockade have shown that this combination promotes neuromuscular recovery, but does not significantly affect the incidence of postoperative residual curarization and time to extubation. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of 10 mg/kg calcium chloride co-administered with neostigmine on early recovery and time to extubation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This prospective, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study included 88 ASA I-II patients aged between 18 and 65 years who were scheduled for elective surgery lasting at least 1 h under general anaesthesia in which 10 mg/kg of calcium chloride or the same volume of normal saline was co-administered with 5 µg/kg of neostigmine at the end of surgery. Time to extubation (time from neostigmine administration to extubation), time from neostigmine administration to TOF ratio (TOFr) 0.9 (neuromuscular recovery), and the incidence of residual neuromuscular blockade (RNMB) and other adverse effects were recorded. RESULTS: Median (Q1, Q3) extubation time was significantly shorter in the calcium group vs. the placebo group (6.5 min [5.52-7.43] vs. 9.78 min [8.35-11]), P < .001. Median neuromuscular recovery time in the calcium group was 5 min vs. 7.1 min in the placebo group, P < .001. Patients in the calcium group had significantly higher TOFr and lower incidence of RNMB at 5 and 10 min vs. the placebo group, and no significant side effects. CONCLUSION: Calcium chloride at a dose of 10 mg/kg co-administered with neostigmine promotes early neuromuscular recovery and reduces time to extubation by about 32%.

Optimal dose of neostigmine antagonizing cisatracurium-induced shallow neuromuscular block in elderly patients: a randomized control study.

BACKGROUND: Residual neuromuscular block after using neuromuscular blocking agents is a common and potentially harmful complication of general anesthesia. Neostigmine is a widely used antagonist, but its optimal dose for elderly patients is unclear. OBJECTIVES: To compare the optimal dosage and safety of neostigmine for reversing shallow residual block in elderly patients after cisatracurium-induced neuromuscular block. METHODS: A randomized controlled trial was conducted in 196 elderly patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery under general anesthesia with cisatracurium. Patients were assigned to receive either no neostigmine (control group) or neostigmine at 20 µg/kg, 40 µg/kg or 50 µg/kg when train-of-four (TOF) ratio reached 0.2 at the end of surgery. The primary outcome was the time to reach TOF ratio of 0.9 after administration. Secondary outcomes included TOF ratio at 10 min after administration, postoperative nausea and vomiting, postoperative cognitive impairment and post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) stay time. RESULTS: The time to reach TOF ratio of 0.9 in the 20 µg/kg, 40 µg/kg and 50 µg/kg groups was significantly shorter than the control group (H = 104.257, P < 0.01), and the time of 40 µg/kg group and 50 µg/kg group was significantly shorter than the 20 µg/kg group (P < 0.001). There was no significant difference between 40 µg/kg and 50 µg/kg groups (P = 0.249). The TOF ratio at 10 min after administration showed similar results. There were no significant differences among groups in postoperative nausea and vomiting, postoperative cognitive impairment or post-operation hospital stay. CONCLUSIONS: Timely use of neostigmine after general anesthesia in elderly patients can significantly shorten time of TOF value reaching 0.9, among which 40 µg/kg dosage may be a more optimized choice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: this study was registered on chictr.org.cn (ChiCTR2100054685, 24/12/2021).

Required dose of sugammadex or neostigmine for reversal of vecuronium-induced shallow residual neuromuscular block at a train-of-four ratio of 0.3.

Residual shallow neuromuscular block (NMB) is potentially harmful and contributes to critical respiratory events. Evidence for the optimal dose of sugammadex required to reverse vecuronium-induced shallow NMB is scarce. The aims of the present study were to find suitable doses of sugammadex and neostigmine to reverse a residual vecuronium-induced NMB from a time of flight (TOF) ratio of 0.3-0.9 and evaluate their safety and efficacy. In total, 121 patients aged 18-65 years were randomly assigned to 11 groups to receive placebo, sugammadex (doses of 0.125, 0.25, 0.5, 1.0, or 2.0 mg/kg), or neostigmine (doses of 10, 25, 40, 55, or 70 µg/kg). The reversal time of sugammadex and neostigmine to antagonize a vecuronium-induced shallow residual NMB (i.e., TOF ratio of 0.3) and related adverse reactions were recorded. Several statistical models were tested to find an appropriate statistical model to explore the suitable doses of sugammadex and neostigmine required to reverse a residual vecuronium-induced NMB. Based on a monoexponential model with the response variable on a logarithmic scale, sugammadex 0.56 mg/kg may be sufficient to reverse vecuronium-induced shallow residual NMB at a TOF ratio of 0.3 under anesthesia maintained with propofol. Neostigmine may not provide prompt and satisfactory antagonism as sugammadex, even in shallow NMB.

Sugammadex Reduces PACU Recovery Time after Abdominal Surgery Compared with Neostigmine.

OBJECTIVE: This study blindly evaluated sugammadex compared with neostigmine on length of stay in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU). METHODS: Fifty patients undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy or abdominal wall hernia repair consented to receive either sugammadex (2 mg/kg) or neostigmine (0.07 mg/kg) for the reversal of rocuronium neuromuscular blockade. Reversal agents were administered during surgical closing, and the train of four was measured until a twitch ratio of T4:T1 ≥ 0.9 was obtained to signify a robust reversal. Postreversal outcomes also were measured during PACU stay. Aldrete scores, pain visual analog scale score, and nausea were measured during the PACU stay. RESULTS: Patients receiving sugammadex experienced a shorter PACU stay at the time of discharge than patients receiving neostigmine, by an average of 12 minutes (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Sugammadex patients had a significantly shorter PACU stay.

A randomized trial evaluating the safety profile of sugammadex in high surgical risk ASA physical class 3 or 4 participants.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this randomized, double-blind trial was to evaluate the safety and tolerability profile, including cardiac safety, of sugammadex-mediated recovery from neuromuscular block in participants undergoing surgery who met the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Physical Class 3 or 4 criteria. Specifically, this study assessed the impact of sugammadex on cardiac adverse events (AEs) and other prespecified AEs of clinical interest. METHODS: Participants meeting ASA Class 3 and 4 criteria were stratified by ASA Class and NMBA (rocuronium or vecuronium) then randomized to one of the following: 1) Moderate neuromuscular block, sugammadex 2 mg/kg; 2) Moderate neuromuscular block, neostigmine and glycopyrrolate (neostigmine/glycopyrrolate); 3) Deep neuromuscular block, sugammadex 4 mg/kg; 4) Deep neuromuscular block, sugammadex 16 mg/kg (rocuronium only). Primary endpoints included incidences of treatment-emergent (TE) sinus bradycardia, TE sinus tachycardia and other TE cardiac arrhythmias. RESULTS: Of 344 participants randomized, 331 received treatment (61% male, BMI 28.5 ± 5.3 kg/m2, age 69 ± 11 years). Incidence of TE sinus bradycardia was significantly lower in the sugammadex 2 mg/kg group vs neostigmine/glycopyrrolate. The incidence of TE sinus tachycardia was significantly lower in the sugammadex 2 and 4 mg/kg groups vs neostigmine/glycopyrrolate. No significant differences in other TE cardiac arrythmias were seen between sugammadex groups and neostigmine/glycopyrrolate. There were no cases of adjudicated anaphylaxis or hypersensitivity reactions in this study. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with neostigmine/glycopyrrolate, incidence of TE sinus bradycardia was significantly lower with sugammadex 2 mg/kg and incidence of TE sinus tachycardia was significantly lower with sugammadex 2 mg/kg and 4 mg/kg. These results support the safety of sugammadex for reversing rocuronium- or vecuronium-induced moderate and deep neuromuscular block in ASA Class 3 or 4 participants. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03346057 .

Sugammadex Versus Neostigmine for Reversal of Rocuronium Neuromuscular Block in Patients Having Catheter-Based Neurointerventional Procedures: A Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Catheter-based endovascular neurointerventions require deep neuromuscular blocks during the procedure and rapid subsequent recovery of strength to facilitate neurological evaluation. We tested the primary hypothesis that sugammadex reverses deep neuromuscular blocks faster than neostigmine reverses moderate neuromuscular blocks. METHODS: Patients having catheter-based cerebral neurointerventional procedures were randomized to: (1) deep rocuronium neuromuscular block with posttetanic count 1 to 2 and 4-mg/kg sugammadex as the reversal agent or (2) moderate rocuronium neuromuscular block with train-of-four (TOF) count 1 during the procedure and neuromuscular reversal with 0.07-mg/kg neostigmine to a maximum of 5 mg. Recovery of diaphragmatic function was assessed by ultrasound at baseline before the procedure and 90 minutes thereafter. The primary outcome-time to reach a TOF ratio ≥0.9 after administration of the designated reversal agent-was analyzed with a log-rank test. Secondary outcomes included time to successful tracheal extubation and the difference between postoperative and preoperative diaphragmatic contraction speed and distance. RESULTS: Thirty-five patients were randomized to sugammadex and 33 to neostigmine. Baseline characteristics and surgical factors were well balanced. The median time to reach TOF ratio ≥0.9 was 3 minutes (95% confidence interval [CI], 2-3 minutes) in patients given sugammadex versus 8 minutes (95% CI, 6-10 minutes) in patients given neostigmine. Sugammadex was significantly faster by a median of 5 minutes (95% CI, 3-6 minutes; P < .001). However, times to tracheal extubation and diaphragmatic function at 90 minutes did not differ significantly. CONCLUSIONS: Sugammadex reversed deep rocuronium neuromuscular blocks considerably faster than neostigmine reversed moderate neuromuscular blocks. However, times to extubation did not differ significantly, apparently because extubation was largely determined by the time required for awaking from general anesthesia and because clinicians were willing to extubate before full neuromuscular recovery. Sugammadex may nonetheless be preferable to procedures that require a deep neuromuscular block and rapid recovery.

Comparison of neuromuscular blockade recovery co-administered with neostigmine and different doses of calcium gluconate: a randomized control trial.

BACKGROUND: Calcium increases the probability of transmitter release at the neuromuscular junction. It is not known whether there is a dose-dependent relationship between the dosage of calcium gluconate and the probability of transmitter release for non-depolarizing neuromuscular blockade (NMB) recovery by acetylcholinesterase inhibitors (AchEIs). This study compared the neuromuscular recovery time and the incidence of postoperative residual curarization (PORC) according to the dosage of calcium gluconate co-administered with neostigmine in three patient groups. METHODS: Patients were randomly allocated to a control group, a 5 mg/kg calcium gluconate group (calcium 5 group), or a 10 mg/kg calcium gluconate group (calcium 10 group). In patients with a TOF ratio (TOFr) between 0.2-0.7, 0.04 mg/kg of neostigmine was administered and both 0.2 mg of glycopyrrolate and 0.4 mg of atropine per 1 mg of neostigmine were administered. And additional 5 or 10 mg/kg of calcium gluconate were administrated to the calcium 5 and 10 groups. The primary endpoint was neuromuscular recovery time (the time between reversal and TOFr≥0.9). The secondary endpoints were the incidence of PORC at 5, 10, and 20 min after reversal administration and the train-of-four ratio (TOFr) at each time point. RESULTS: The neuromuscular recovery time was 5.3 min in the control group, 3.9 min in the calcium 5 group, and 4.1 min in the calcium 10 group, respectively (P = 0.004). The incidence of PORC at 5 min after neostigmine administration was 12 in the control group, 4 in the calcium 5 group, and 4 in the calcium 10 group, respectively, with statistical significance (P = 0.014). CONCLUSIONS: The co-administration of calcium gluconate with neostigmine safely promoted early NMB recovery, and the neuromuscular recovery time of the calcium 10 group tended to be more evenly distributed than that of the calcium 5 group. TRIAL REGISTRATION: https://cris.nih.go.kr/cris/index.jsp(KCT0004182 ). Date of registration: August 122,019.

Effects of Sugammadex versus Neostigmine on Intraoperative Coagulation Profiles in Patients with Thyroidectomy.

BACKGROUND: Sugammadex has been a revolutionary reversal of neuromuscular blockade. It is known to be highly efficient. However, a change in the coagulation profile is one of the most dangerous potential complications which is a concern for both surgeon and anesthetist. Bleeding may cause hypovolemic shock, hematoma, and so on. To investigate the effects of sugammadex on coagulation profiles in patients with thyroidectomy, we compared patients that were treated with either sugammadex or neostigmine. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eighty patients with thyroid neoplasms undergoing thyroidectomy were randomly allocated to sugammadex group (group S) or neostigmine group (group N). Induction of anesthesia was preformed using propofol, sufentanil, and rocuronium. Group S received sugammadex 2.0mg/kg after trachea intubation, similarly Group N received neostigmine 40 µg/kg, for reversal of rocuronium-induced neuromuscular blockade. The intraoperative coagulation profiles were monitored after the rocuronium injection (T0), 10 minutes after reversal (T1) and 30 minutes after reversal (T2) by testing activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT), prothrombin time (PT), fibrinogen (FIB), thrombin time (TT), and TEG-Haemonetics. Amount of bleeding was recorded during perioperative period. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the thromboelastogram, APTT, PT, FIB, or TT measurements at each time point in Group N. The reaction time (R time) and kinetics time (K time) of Group S in T1 were significantly longer than the corresponding times at T0 and T2, and the R times were significantly longer than those in Group N at the same time points (P<0.05). Additionally, in Group S, the APTT was prolonged in T1 and returned to normal in T2. CONCLUSION: The result showed that sugammadex provided transient efficacy in prolonging the coagulation parameters, while neostigmine did not change the coagulation profile.

Effects of Sugammadex Plus Rocuronium vs Neostigmine Plus Cisatracurium During Renal Transplantation on Graft Function: A Retrospective, Case-Control Study.

BACKGROUND: Rocuronium can be used in patients with severe renal failure (creatinine clearance <30 mL/min), but the duration of muscle relaxation is longer and results in an increased risk of postoperative residual neuromuscular block. Rocuronium can be antagonized by sugammadex, but the elimination of the complex they make (rocuronium-sugammadex complex) varies according to the renal function. Two case reports/series have reported the use of rocuronium-sugammadex complex during renal transplantation. A recently published retrospective study showed no differences in postoperative creatinine levels in patients receiving kidney transplantation. This retrospective case-control study aims to investigate the effects of rocuronium-sugammadex, used during renal transplantation, on transplanted kidney function. METHODS: We analyzed 113 medical records of patients undergoing kidney transplantation from January 2015 to December 2018. Forty-seven medical records were excluded because they did not report the administration of one of the following drugs during the transplantation: rocuronium, sugammadex, cisatracurium, neostigmine. The demographics of patients and donors were collected along with the following data: blood urea and creatinine, serum and urinary electrolytes, and diuresis. Marginal, single, or double kidney transplantations; Karpinski scores; and histologic evaluations of transplanted kidney were collected. RESULTS: We included data from 66 medical reports from January 2015 to December 2018. Blood creatinine levels at 6, 12, and 24 hours were significantly lower in the rocuronium + sugammadex group than in the cisatracurium + neostigmine group (creatinine 6 hours P = .05, creatinine 12 hours P = .038, creatinine 24 hours P = .049). Blood urea levels for 24 hours after transplantation were significantly lower in the rocuronium + sugammadex group than in the cisatracurium + neostigmine group (urea 0 hours P = .025, urea 6 hours P = .011, urea 12 hours P = .03, urea 24 hours P = .011). We found no statistically significant differences in blood sodium, blood potassium, blood calcium, diuresis, urinary sodium, or urinary potassium levels before and after transplantation. CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective case-control study, the use of rocuronium and sugammadex during renal transplant surgery did not affect relevant kidney recovery outcomes in the first week after transplantation.

The rodent model of impaired gastric motility induced by allyl isothiocyanate, a pungent ingredient of wasabi, to evaluate therapeutic agents for functional dyspepsia.

Functional dyspepsia (FD) is thought to be mainly based on gastric motility dysfunction and chronic hypersensitivity, yet FD animal models has been reported a few. We studied to establish the mouse model of impaired gastric motility induced by a pungent ingredient of wasabi allyl isothiocyanate (AITC), which is reliable to evaluate prokinetic agents. Male ddY mice were used. Gastric motility was measured by 13C-acetic acid breath test in conscious mice. AITC (80 mM) was given 60 min before the measurement of motility. Prokinetic agents including itopride (30, 100 mg/kg), mosapride (0.1-1 mg/kg), neostigmine (30 µg/kg), acotiamide (10-100 mg/kg), and daikenchuto (100-1000 mg/kg) were given 40 min before the measurement. AITC impaired gastric motility without mucosal damages, which reverted 24 h after AITC treatment. The decreased motility induced by AITC was restored by prokinetic agents such as itopride, mosapride, neostigmine, and acotiamide. In separate experiment, daikenchuto recovered the decreased motility induced by AITC, although daikenchuto had no effect on motility in normal condition. In conclusion, it is considered that the AITC-induced impaired gastric motility mouse model is useful to develop new prokinetic agents for treatment of FD, and to re-evaluate traditional Japanese herbal medicines.

Comparison of the effects of sugammadex and neostigmine on hospital stay in robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: a retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Sugammadex reduces postoperative complications. We sought to determine whether it could reduce the length of hospital stay, post-anesthetic recovery time, unplanned readmission, and charges for patients who underwent robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) when compared to neostigmine. METHODS: This was a retrospective observational study of patients who underwent RALP between July 2012 and July 2017, in whom rocuronium was used as a neuromuscular blocker. The primary outcome was the length of hospital stay after surgery in patients who underwent reversal with sugammadex when compared to those who underwent reversal with neostigmine. The secondary outcomes were post-anesthetic recovery time, hospital charges, and unplanned readmission within 30 days after RALP. RESULTS: In total, 1430 patients were enrolled. Using a generalized linear model in a propensity score-matched cohort, sugammadex use was associated with a 6% decrease in the length of hospital stay (mean: sugammadex 7.7 days vs. neostigmine 8.2 days; odds ratio [OR] 0.94, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.89, 0.98], P = 0.008) and an 8% decrease in post-anesthetic recovery time (mean: sugammadex 36.7 min vs. neostigmine 40.2 min; OR 0.92, 95% CI [0.90, 0.94], P < 0.001) as compared to neostigmine use; however, it did not reduce the 30-day unplanned readmission rate (P = 0.288). The anesthesia charges were higher in the sugammadex group than in the neostigmine group (P < 0.001); however, there were no significant differences between the groups in terms of postoperative net charges (P = 0.061) and total charges (P = 0.100). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to the reversal of rocuronium effects with neostigmine, reversal with sugammadex after RALP was associated with a shorter hospital stay and post-anesthetic recovery time, and was not associated with 30-day unplanned readmission rates and net charges.

Strategies of analgesic treatment after cesarean delivery. Current state and new alternatives. / Estrategias de tratamiento analgésico tras cesárea. Estado actual y nuevas alternativas.

The number of caesarean sections performed worldwide is increasing, and with it, the need for the optimal analgesia strategies. Deficient postoperative analgesia increases the need for opioids, delays recovery, and is associated with chronic pain and postpartum depression. It is essential to find good postoperative pain control strategies that facilitate early mobility, early recovery, and early hospital discharge with minimal side effects on the mother and infant. Multimodal analgesia based on neuroaxial anaesthesia with morphine in combination with non-opioids such as non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and paracetamol, gives the best post-caesarean analgesia outcome, and allows anaesthesiologists to reserve opioids, corticoids, gabapentin, magnesium or ketamine for situations where neuroaxial anaesthesia cannot be performed, for high-risk patients, or when pain is difficult to control. Peripheral nerve block techniques can also be added, such as transverse abdominis plane block, erector spinae block, or continuous wound infiltration.