The effect of sugammadex on patient morbidity and quality of recovery after general anaesthesia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Residual neuromuscular block is associated with increased patient morbidity. Therefore prevention of residual neuromuscular block is an important component of general anaesthesia where neuromuscular blocking agents are used. Whereas sugammadex improves reversal based on neuromuscular twitch monitoring parameters, there have been no prospective, adequately powered definitive studies demonstrating that sugammadex is also associated with less patient morbidity. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of randomised trials comparing sugammadex with anticholinesterase-based reversal or placebo reversal that reported important patient outcomes beyond the postanaesthesia care unit. RESULTS: We identified 43 articles, including 5839 trial participants. Only one trial reported days alive and out of hospital to 30 days (DAOH-30), which showed that the number of DAOH-30 was similar in those allocated to sugammadex compared with neostigmine-based reversal (25 days [19-27] vs 24 days [21-27], median difference 0.00 [-2.15 to 2.15]). Pooled analyses of data from 16 trials showed an estimated odds ratio (OR) for postoperative pulmonary complications of 0.67 (95% confidence interval 0.47-0.95) with sugammadex use. Pooled analysis showed that pneumonia (eight trials OR 0.51 [0.24-1.01] with sugammadex use), hospital length of stay (23 trials, mean difference -0.31 [-0.84 to 0.22] with sugammadex use), and patient-reported quality of recovery (11 trials, varied depending on metric used) are similar in those allocated to sugammadex vs control. The difference seen in mortality (11 trials, OR 0.39 [0.15-1.01] with sugammadex use) would be considered to be clinically significant and warrants further investigation, however, the rarity of these events precludes drawing definitive conclusions. CONCLUSION: Although few trials reported on DAOH-30 or important patient outcomes, sugammadex is associated with a reduction in postoperative pulmonary complications, however, this might not translate to a difference in hospital length of stay, patient-reported quality of recovery, or mortality. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO database (CRD42022325858).

Effects of magnesium sulphate on neostigmine-induced recovery from moderate neuromuscular blockade with rocuronium: a randomized controlled trial.

Magnesium enhances the effects of neuromuscular blocking agents. However, there is a paucity of evidence demonstrating possible effects of magnesium on neostigmine-induced recovery from neuromuscular blockade with rocuronium. This study compared the profiles of recovery from neuromuscular blockade between groups treated with magnesium (Group M) and placebo controls (Group C). Sixty-four patients were randomly allocated to Group M or Group C. Patients in Group M received a loading dose of 50 mg/kg magnesium and continuous infusion of 15 mg/kg/hr. Patients in Group C received a comparable amount of saline. Rocuronium at 0.6 mg/kg was used for tracheal intubation and 0.1 mg/kg of rocuronium was additionally administered to maintain train-of-four (TOF) status of 2-3 during surgery. At the end of surgery, neostigmine (50 µg/kg) plus glycopyrrolate (10 µg/kg) were administered, and the recovery time for TOF ratios of 0.7, 0.8, and 0.9 was measured. The primary outcome was the time from neostigmine administration to recovery with a TOF ratio of 0.9. In addition, rocuronium onset time (time from administration of rocuronium to 95% suppression of the first TOF twitch response), additional requirements for rocuronium and spontaneous recovery period (the time from administration of rocuronium to reappearance of the first TOF twitch response) were also measured. Neostigmine-induced recovery time was comparable between Group M and Group C (10.6 ± 4.3 vs. 9.1 ± 5.0 min, respectively, p = 0.22). The rocuronium onset time was shorter in Group M, and the spontaneous recovery period was longer in Group M. The amount of additional rocuronium administered was 27% lower in Group M, but this difference was not significant. Magnesium was not shown to prolong neostigmine-induced recovery time from neuromuscular blockade with rocuronium, however, it enhanced the clinical effects of rocuronium.

Update on the Diagnosis and Management of Acute Colonic Pseudo-obstruction (ACPO).

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Acute Colonic Pseudo-obstruction (ACPO) is a cause of large intestinal dilation and obstruction without any physical transition point. It remains difficult to diagnose and treat. We review the recent updates on diagnosis and management of ACPO. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent guidelines have posited that conservative management can be tried in most cases of ACPO, but that early decompression and surgery should be considered. Use of neostigmine is still a viable option but there is also promising data on pyridostigmine as well as prucalopride. Resolution of ACPO should be followed by daily use of polyethylene glycol (PEG) to help prevent recurrence. ACPO warrants early and accurate diagnosis with exclusion of alternate causes of large bowel dilation. Conservative management can be attempted for 48-72 h in those with cecal diameters < 12 cm and without signs of peritonitis and perforation. Early escalation of management should be attempted with neostigmine followed by endoscopy and/or surgery as needed, given that longer periods of dilation are associated with worse outcomes. There is promising new evidence for use of pyridostigmine and prucalopride, but further trials are needed prior to incorporating them into regular use. Finally, studies are lacking regarding prevention of ACPO after initial resolution.

Sugammadex Is Associated With Reduced Pulmonary Complications in Patients With Respiratory Dysfunction.

INTRODUCTION: Use of sugammadex is associated with fewer postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs). This study investigated the relationship between sugammadex and PPCs in specific patients with respiratory dysfunction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed the electronic medical and anesthesia records of patients with respiratory dysfunction who underwent laparoscopic gastric or intestinal surgery at a single center between May 1, 2018 and December 31, 2019. The patients were divided into the sugammadex group and the nonsugammadex group, based on whether they received sugammadex or neostigmine. Binary logistic regression analyses were used to characterize the differences in incidence of PPC. RESULTS: A total of 112 patients were included, of which 46 patients (41.1%) received sugammadex. In the logistic regression analysis, the incidences of PPC were fewer in the sugammadex group. Postoperative fever (odds ratio [OR] 0.330; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.137-0.793, P = 0.0213), postoperative intensive care unit admission (OR 0.204; 95% CI 0.065-0.644, P = 0.007), cough (OR 0.143; 95% CI 0.061- 0.333, P < 0.001), pleural effusion (all) (OR: 0.280; 95% CI 0.104- 0.759, P = 0.012), pleural effusion (massive) (OR: 0.142; 95% CI 0.031- 0.653, P = 0.012), and difficulty in breathing (OR: 0.111; 95% CI 0.014-0.849, P = 0.039) showed significant differences between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Sugammadex is associated with a reduction in PPC in patients with respiratory dysfunction.

Sugammadex Reduced the Incidence of Postoperative Pulmonary Complications in Susceptible Patients Identified by ARISCAT Risk Index: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The efficacy of sugammadex on postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) in susceptible patients, compared with neostigmine, remains indeterminate. The Assess Respiratory Risk in Surgical Patients in Catalonia (ARISCAT) Group Investigators proposed a risk index for the early identification of susceptible patients, with excellent externally validated discrimination ability. Meta-analytical techniques were applied to evaluate the efficacy of sugammadex on PPCs in patients with ARISCAT-defined risk factors. METHODS: The study is registered on PROSPERO, number CRD42021261156. We searched PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane library, GreyNet, and OpenGrey for eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) without restricting the language or year of publication. RESULTS: Twelve RCTs consisting of 1182 patients susceptible to PPCs were included. A robust reduction was observed on the incidence of PPCs in susceptible patients who received sugammadex [RR 0.66; 95% CI (0.54, 0.80), p < 0.01], with a low level of between-study heterogeneity (I2 = 45.98%; H2 = 1.85). Similar protective effects were also proved in avoiding residual neuromuscular block (NMB) [RR 0.25; 95% CI (0.11, 0.56); p < 0.01], atelectasis [RR 0.74; 95% CI (0.59, 0.95); p = 0.02], pneumonia [RR 0.49; 95% CI (0.28, 0.88); p = 0.02], and respiratory failure [RR 0.61; 95% CI (0.39, 0.96); p = 0.03]. No difference was observed regarding adverse events [RR 0.85; 95% CI (0.72, 1.01); p = 0.06]. CONCLUSION: Low to moderate quality of evidence demonstrated the edge of sugammadex over neostigmine for NMB reversal in reducing the likelihood of PPCs and residual NMB in patients with ARISCAT-defined risk factors. Clinicians may reassess the type of reversal agent when treating patients susceptible to PPCs.

Generalised neuromuscular blockade after intraurethral administration of atracurium besilate in a male cat with urethral obstruction.

A 4-year-old, entire, male, domestic long-haired cat was presented with an acute history of stranguria and dysuria and diagnosed with urolithiasis causing urethral obstruction. The patient was induced to general anaesthesia and several unsuccessful attempts to flush the uroliths retrogradely towards the bladder were made. An intraurethral administration of the neuromuscular blocking agent atracurium was performed as it has been reported to facilitate urethral catheterisation without any side effects. Respiratory arrest developed after 15 minutes from atracurium administration, which was promptly recognized and treated with mechanical ventilation. The absence of muscle contraction in response to a nerve stimulation confirmed a generalised muscle blockade. Approximately 35 minutes after, a muscle response to nerve stimulation appeared. Neostigmine combined with glycopyrrolate was administered resulting in complete recovery from neuromuscular blockade. In conclusion, the use of intraurethral atracurium can result in systemic absorption of the drug with subsequent generalised neuromuscular blockade.

The efficacy and results of medical treatment in postoperative ileus.

Background: Postoperative paralytic ileus refers to the disruption of the normal coordinated propulsive motor activity of the gastrointestinal system following surgery. Surgery causes inflammation in the muscle walls of organs with an intestinal lumen that, in turn, leads to a decrease in intestinal motility. Aim: The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of gastrografin, neostigmine, and their combined administration in patients diagnosed with paralytic ileus in the postoperative period. Patients and Methods: One-hundred twelve patients were included from January 2017 and November 2019. The retrospective study is involving prolonged postoperative ileus cases following colorectal surgery. The effect of gastrografin, neostigmine, and gastrografin neostigmine combination was compared retrospectively in the treatment of prolonged ileus after surgery. Results: The study covered 112 patients. Gastrografin was administered to 63 patients; neostigmine was administered to 29, while 20 patients received the combination of the two. Data pertaining to the comparison of the two groups revealed that patients in the gastrografin group were discharged earlier than those in the neostigmine group. Further, patients in the combined group had earlier gas and/or stool discharge and were also discharged from the hospital earlier than those in the neostigmine group. Conclusion: Gastrografin and combined use of gastrografin and neostigmine are effective and viable methods for postoperative ileus cases. Gastrografin can safely be used in patients with anastomoses.

Superiority of sugammadex in preventing postoperative pulmonary complications.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative pulmonary complications often lead to increased mortality and financial burden. Residual paralysis plays a critical role in postoperative pulmonary complications. This meta-analysis was performed to determine whether sugammadex overmatches neostigmine in reducing postoperative pulmonary complications. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Medline through Ovid, Cochrane Library, Wanfang, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Chinese BioMedical Literature Databases were searched from their inception to 24 June, 2021. Random effects models were used for all analyses. Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to assess the quality of RCTs, while Newcastle Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale was used to assess for the quality of cohort studies. RESULTS: Seventeen studies were included in the meta-analysis. Pooled data from cohort studies showed reversing neuromuscular blocking with sugammadex had less risk of compound postoperative pulmonary complications (relative risk [RR]: 0.73; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.60-0.89; P  = 0.002; I2  = 81%), pneumonia (RR: 0.64; 95% CI: 0.48-0.86; I2  = 42%) and respiratory failure (RR: 0.48; 95% CI: 0.41-0.56; I2  = 0%). However, pooled data from RCTs did not show any difference between the two groups in pneumonia (RR: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.24-1.40; I2  = 0%) and no respiratory failure was reported in the included RCTs. The difference was not found between sugammadex and neostigmine about atelectasis in pooled data from either RCTs (RR: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.69-1.05; I2  = 0%) or cohort studies (RR: 1.01; 95% CI: 0.87-1.18; I2  = 0%). CONCLUSION: The evidence of superiority of sugammadex was limited by the confounding factors in cohort studies and small scale of RCTs. Whether sugammadex precedes neostigmine in preventing pulmonary complications after surgery is still unknown. Well-designed RCTs with large scale are needed. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO ( https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/ ); CRD 42020191575.

Ultrasound-guided Techniques for Perioperative Analgesia in Pediatric Lower Abdominal Surgeries: Quadratus Lumborum Block with Bupivacaine versus Caudal Bupivacaine and Neostigmine.

BACKGROUND: Ultrasound-guided  regional anesthesia techniques for perioperative analgesia in pediatric patients scheduled for lower abdominal surgeries can be achieved either by quadratus lumborum block (QLB) or caudal block (CB). Neostigmine was co-administered with caudal bupivacaine to shorten the onset and extend the duration of analgesia. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to compare between 2 ultrasound-guided techniques used for perioperative analgesia (QLB with bupivacaine vs. CB with bupivacaine/neostigmine) regarding the total amount of rescue analgesic (acetaminophen mg/kg) used for pain relief at 24 hours postsurgery in pediatric patients undergoing lower abdominal surgeries in a developing country and to discuss existing barriers during the implementation of both techniques. STUDY DESIGN: A randomized, double-blind, prospective, single-center study. SETTING: Ain-Shams University Hospitals. METHODS: Eighty pediatric patients scheduled for lower abdominal surgeries under general anesthesia were randomly allocated to receive either ultrasound-guided QLB using bupivacaine or ultrasound-guided CB using a bupivacaine/neostigmine mixture. The total amount of rescue analgesic (acetaminophen mg/kg) 24 hours postsurgery was considered as the primary outcome while the time to first rescue analgesia, pain score, postoperative nausea and vomiting, bradycardia, hypotension, and urinary retention were considered as secondary outcomes. RESULTS: In the QLB group, the time to first rescue analgesia was longer whereas the total analgesic dose (mg/kg) was lower than the CB group (P < 0.001, P = 0.007, respectively). While, on the other hand, in CB group, the time to perform the block was shorter and Parents Satisfaction Score 24 h postsurgery was lower than the QLB group (P < 0.001, P < 0.001, respectively). Side effects were infrequent and comparable between the study groups. LIMITATIONS: First, the researchers did not assess the dermatomal level before or after the operation in either group. Second, the investigators should have noticed the first voiding time to demonstrate accurately the incidence of urine retention. Third, a cost-effectiveness analysis of perioperative costs (drugs, staff, resources being used) of these regional anesthesia techniques when applied in an ambulatory setting should have been done, which would be helpful for those in resource-limited settings. CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative analgesia for pediatric patients undergoing lower abdominal surgeries can be safely and effectively achieved by QLB with bupivacaine  and a CB with a bupivacaine/neostigmine mixture with priority given to CB, especially in resource-limited settings.

Effect of patient decision aids on choice between sugammadex and neostigmine in surgeries under general anesthesia: a multicenter randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Shared decision making using patient decision aids (PtDAs) was established over a decade ago, but few studies have evaluated its efficacy in Asian countries. We therefore evaluated the application of PtDAs in a decision conflict between two muscle relaxant reversal agents, neostigmine and sugammadex, and sequentially analyzed the regional differences and operating room turnover rates. METHODS: This multicenter, outcome-assessor-blind, randomized controlled trial included 3,132 surgical patients from two medical centers admitted between March 2020 and August 2020. The patients were randomly divided into the classical and PtDA groups for pre-anesthesia consultations. Their clinicodemographic characteristics were analyzed to identify variables influencing the choice of reversal agent. On the day of the pre-anesthesia consultation, the patients completed the four SURE scale (sure of myself, understand information, risk-benefit ratio, encouragement) screening items. The operating turnover rates were also evaluated using anesthesia records. RESULTS: Compared with the classical group, the PtDA group felt more confident about receiving sufficient medical information (P < 0.001), felt better informed about the advantages and disadvantages of the medications (P < 0.001), exhibited a superior understanding of the benefits and risks of their options (P < 0.001), and felt surer about their choice (P < 0.001). Moreover, the PtDA group had a significantly greater tendency to choose sugammadex over neostigmine (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: PtDA interventions in pre-anesthesia consultations provided surgical patients with clear knowledge and better support. PtDAs should be made available in other medical fields to enhance shared clinical decision-making.

Acute Colonic Pseudo-obstruction: Colonoscopy Versus Neostigmine First?

INTRODUCTION: Neostigmine (NEO) and decompressive colonoscopy (COL) are two efficacious treatment modalities for acute colonic pseudo-obstruction (ACPO). We hypothesize that a COL first strategy is associated with better outcomes compared to a NEO first strategy. METHODS: A single-center retrospective analysis was performed from 2013 to 2020. Patients ≥18 y with a diagnosis of ACPO were included. The outcome was a composite measure of acute operative intervention, 30-day readmission with ACPO, and 30-day ACPO-related mortality. A P-value of ≤ 0.05 indicated statistical significance. RESULTS: Of 910 encounters in 849 patients, 50 (5.5%) episodes of ACPO in 39 patients were identified after exclusion of one patient with colon perforation on presentation. The median (interquartile range) age was 68 (62-84) y. NEO and COL were administered in 21 and 25 episodes, respectively. In 16 (32%) episodes, no NEO or COL was administered. When patients were given NEO first, COL or additional NEO was required in 12/18 (67%) compared with a COL first strategy where a second COL and/or NEO was given in 5/16 (32%) (P = 0.05). Both strategies had similar outcomes (NEO, 4/18 versus COL, 4/16, P = 0.85). Twenty-two (44%) episodes had an early intervention (≤48 h) with NEO and/or COL. There was no difference in outcome between those that received an early intervention and those who did not (5/22 versus 5/28, P = 0.71). CONCLUSIONS: For patients failing conservative measures, a COL first approach was associated with fewer subsequent interventions, but with similar composite outcomes compared to a NEO first approach. Early (≤48 h) intervention with NEO and/or COL was not associated with improved outcomes.

Neostigmine for the treatment of acute pancreatitis: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Acute pancreatitis (AP) is a common disease with substantial mortality. Gut dysfunction may result in abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS) and delay enteral nutrition, worsening AP condition. Neostigmine is used as a prokinetic drug for the treatment of AP. But there are no recommendations from guidelines due to the lack of evidence. Therefore, we plan to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the efficacy and safety of neostigmine for AP, aiming to provide current evidence for clinical practice. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We prepared this protocol following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols. We will search the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, Wanfang, conference proceedings and ongoing trials registers for eligible studies comparing neostigmine plus conventional therapy with conventional therapy. Primary outcomes include new-onset ACS and serious adverse events caused by neostigmine. Evaluation of the risk of bias, heterogeneity and quality of evidence will follow recommendations of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Trial sequential analysis will be used to control the risk of random errors and assess conclusions in the meta-analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval is unnecessary as the systematic review is based on published studies. Study findings will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022369536.

The effect of sugammadex versus neostigmine on postoperative nausea and vomiting: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials with trial sequential analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Association between sugammadex and risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting remains unclear. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We performed meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials with trial sequential analysis to compare sugammadex with neostigmine in adults receiving elective surgery under general anesthesia with postoperative extubation. Databases of MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception to April 15, 2022. Primary outcome was risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting after patients received sugammadex or neostigmine. Secondary outcomes were incidences of sugammadex-related complications. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Meta-analysis of 40 trials with 5455 patients showed an overall lower risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting in the sugammadex group than in the neostigmine group (risk ratio: 0.85, 95% CI [0.76-0.94], heterogeneity I2=4%, P=0.002). Subgroup analyses demonstrated a lower risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting associated with sugammadex than with neostigmine: 1) in the postanesthesia care unit (risk ratio: 0.77, 95% CI [0.66-0.90], I2=8%, P=0.001) but not in wards; 2) under volatile anesthetics but not total intravenous anesthesia; 3) regardless of the administration of prophylactic antiemetics; and 4) when sugammadex was administered at 2 mg/kg but not 4 mg/kg. No major complications such as cardiac arrest or refractory bradycardia were noted and every patient achieved adequate neuromuscular recovery before extubation in all of the included trials. The overall quality of evidence was moderate. CONCLUSIONS: Sugammadex was associated with a lower risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting compared with neostigmine immediately after surgery, especially for patients receiving volatile anesthetics regardless of the use of prophylactic antiemetics.

Analysis of the association of sugammadex with the length of hospital stay in patients undergoing abdominal surgery: a retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Sugammadex is a newer medication used for rapid and reliable reversal of neuromuscular blockade. This study evaluated whether sugammadex could reduce the length of postoperative hospital stay in patients undergoing abdominal surgery. METHODS: This single center retrospective cohort study included patients who underwent major abdominal surgery between January 2015 and October 2019. Patients were randomized according to reversal with sugammadex or spontaneous recovery. The primary outcome was length of postoperative hospital stay. The secondary outcomes were length of post-anesthetic care unit (PACU) stay, postoperative ambulation time, time-to-first-defecation, and incidence of pulmonary complications. After 1:1 propensity score matching, univariate and multiple linear regression analyses estimated the differences in outcomes. RESULTS: Of the 1614 patients, 517 received sugammadex and 645 spontaneously recovered. After adjusting for potential confounders, non-linear relationship was detected between administration of sugammadex and the length of postoperative hospital stay (ß = 0.29 95% confidence interval {CI}: [- 1.13, - 0.54], P = 0.4912). However, it was associated with shorter PACU stay (ß = - 20.30 95% CI: [- 24.48, - 17.11], P < 0.0001), shorter time to postoperative ambulation movement (ß = - 0.43 95% CI: [- 0.62, - 0.23], P < 0.0001), and reduced time-to-first-defecation (ß = - 2.25 95% CI: [- 0.45, - 0.05], P = 0.0129), when compared to the spontaneously recovered group. The incidence of pneumonia in the sugammadex group was significantly lower than that in the spontaneously recovered group (18.6% [44/237] vs. 39.2% [93/237] P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Neuromuscular blockade reversal with sugammadex after abdominal surgery demonstrated an excellent recovery profile and was associated with decreased risk of pneumonia, although it did not affect the length of postoperative hospital stay.

Nebulized dexmedetomidine versus neostigmine/atropine for treating post-dural puncture headache after cesarean section: a double-blind randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Post-dural puncture headache (PDPH) is one of the most common complications of neuraxial anesthesia after an accidental dural puncture. This study aimed to test non-interventional alternatives to treat PDPH. Our goals were to compare the effectiveness of nebulized dexmedetomidine (DEX) versus neostigmine/atropine in the conservative management of PDPH. METHODS: A randomized double-blind controlled study of ninety (90) women divided into three equal groups: group C (given nebulization of saline 0.9% placebo in four mL), group N (given nebulization of 20 µ/kg neostigmine and 10 µ/kg atropine diluted in four mL normal saline), and group D (given nebulization of dexmedetomidine 1 µg/kg diluted in four mL normal saline). Nebulization was done twice daily for three days, and a Visual Analogue Scale pain score (VAS) was recorded for seventy-two hours after the intervention for the three groups with a VAS Score equal or less than three being the cutoff value. RESULTS: VAS was significantly decreased in dexmedetomidine, and neostigmine/atropine groups compared to the control group at six hours (median VAS: 5, 2, and 2 for groups C, N, and D respectively [P=0.001]). There was a significant difference in VAS trends between the three groups (at six, twelve, twenty-four, thirty-six, and forty-eight hours [P=0.001], and at seventy-two hours [P=0.003]). No patients in group D, but one patient in group N and seven patients in group C needed an epidural blood patch. CONCLUSIONS: Nebulized dexmedetomidine and neostigmine/atropine had a rapid effect on relieving PDPH after cesarean section.

Effects of Reversal Technique for Neuromuscular Paralysis on Time to Recovery of Bowel Function after Craniotomy.

BACKGROUND: Non-depolarizing neuromuscular blockade can be reversed with neostigmine/glycopyrrolate or sugammadex. We test the hypothesis that sugammadex is associated with earlier postoperative recovery of bowel function (first bowel movement, BM). METHODS: In adult patients undergoing craniotomy from 2016 to 2019, we identified time of first postoperative BM after receiving neostigmine/glycopyrrolate or sugammadex to reverse neuromuscular blockade. Logistic and proportional hazard regression, with and without inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW), were used to assess whether sugammadex is associated with earlier recovery of bowel function. RESULTS: Seven hundred and thirty-one patients underwent craniotomy, 323 (44.2%) received neostigmine/glycopyrrolate, and 408 (55.8%) sugammadex. From logistic regression analysis, the proportion of patients having a BM within the first 24 and 48 hours was higher in sugammadex group (unadjusted OR [95% CI]) 1.79 [1.16 to 2.77] P = .009; and 1.45 [1.08 to 1.94] P = .014; IPTW adjusted OR [95% CI]) 1.58 [.95, 2.61] P = .078; and 1.38 [.95 to 2.02] P = .095 for 24 and 48 h, respectively). From proportional hazards regression, sugammadex was associated with improved bowel function recovery (unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) [95% CI] 1.35 [1.08, 1.68], P = .008; IPTW adjusted HR 1.29 [.97 to 1.71], P = .076). CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing craniotomy who had neuromuscular blockade reversed with sugammadex may have earlier recovered bowel function compared to patients reversed with neostigmine/glycopyrrolate.