Pediatric Intraoperative Electromyographic Responses at the Adductor Pollicis and Flexor Hallucis Brevis Muscles: A Prospective, Comparative Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Peripheral nerve stimulation with a train-of-four (TOF) pattern can be used intraoperatively to evaluate the depth of neuromuscular block and confirm recovery from neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBAs). Quantitative monitoring can be challenging in infants and children due to patient size, equipment technology, and limited access to monitoring sites. Although the adductor pollicis muscle is the preferred site of monitoring, the foot is an alternative when the hands are unavailable. However, there is little information on comparative evoked neuromuscular responses at those 2 sites. METHODS: Pediatric patients undergoing inpatient surgery requiring NMBA administration were studied after informed consent. Electromyographic (EMG) monitoring was performed simultaneously in each participant at the hand (ulnar nerve, adductor pollicis muscle) and the foot (posterior tibial nerve, flexor hallucis brevis muscle). RESULTS: Fifty patients with a mean age of 3.0 ± standard deviation (SD) 2.9 years were studied. The baseline first twitch amplitude (T1) of TOF at the foot (12.46 mV) was 4.47 mV higher than at the hand (P <.0001). The baseline TOF ratio (TOFR) before NMBA administration and the maximum TOFR after antagonism with sugammadex were not different at the 2 sites. The onset time until the T1 decreased to 10% or 5% of the baseline value (T1) was delayed by approximately 90 seconds (both P =.014) at the foot compared with the hand. The TOFR at the foot recovered (TOFR ≥0.9) 191 seconds later than when this threshold was achieved at the hand (P =.017). After antagonism, T1 did not return to its baseline value, a typical finding with EMG monitoring, but the fractional recovery (maximum T1 at recovery divided by the baseline T1) at the hand and foot was not different, 0.81 and 0.77, respectively (P =.68). The final TOFR achieved at recovery was approximately 100% and was not different between the 2 sites. CONCLUSIONS: Although this study in young children demonstrated the feasibility of TOF monitoring, interpretation of the depth of neuromuscular block needs to consider the delayed onset and the delayed recovery of TOFR at the foot compared to the hand. The delay in achieving these end points when monitoring the foot may impact the timing of tracheal intubation and assessment of adequate recovery of neuromuscular block to allow tracheal extubation (ie, TOFR ≥0.9).

Machine learning based analysis and detection of trend outliers for electromyographic neuromuscular monitoring.

PURPOSE: Neuromuscular monitoring is frequently plagued by artefacts, which along with the frequent unawareness of the principles of this subtype of monitoring by many clinicians, tends to lead to a cynical attitute by clinicians towards these monitors. As such, the present study aims to derive a feature set and evaluate its discriminative performance for the purpose of Train-of-Four Ratio (TOF-R) outlier analysis during continuous intraoperative EMG-based neuromuscular monitoring. METHODS: Patient data was sourced from two devices: (1) Datex-Ohmeda Electromyography (EMG) E-NMT: a dataset derived from a prospective observational trial including 136 patients (21,891 TOF-R observations), further subdivided in two based on the type of features included; and (2) TetraGraph: a clinical case repository dataset of 388 patients (97,838 TOF-R observations). The two datasets were combined to create a synthetic set, which included shared features across the two. This process led to the training of four distinct models. RESULTS: The models showed an adequate bias/variance balance, suggesting no overfitting or underfitting. Models 1 and 2 consistently outperformed the others, with the former achieving an F1 score of 0.41 (0.31, 0.50) and an average precision score (95% CI) of 0.48 (0.35, 0.60). A random forest model analysis indicated that engineered TOF-R features were proportionally more influential in model performance than basic features. CONCLUSIONS: Engineered TOF-R trend features and the resulting Cost-Sensitive Logistic Regression (CSLR) models provide useful insights and serve as a potential first step towards the automated removal of outliers for neuromuscular monitoring devices. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04518761 (clinicaltrials.gov), registered on 19 August 2020.

Good clinical research practice (GCRP) in pharmacodynamic studies of neuromuscular blocking agents III: The 2023 Geneva revision.

The set of guidelines for good clinical research practice in pharmacodynamic studies of neuromuscular blocking agents was developed following an international consensus conference in Copenhagen in 1996 (Viby-Mogensen et al., Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 1996, 40, 59-74); the guidelines were later revised and updated following the second consensus conference in Stockholm in 2005 (Fuchs-Buder et al., Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2007, 51, 789-808). In view of new devices and further development of monitoring technologies that emerged since then, (e.g., electromyography, three-dimensional acceleromyography, kinemyography) as well as novel compounds (e.g., sugammadex) a review and update of these recommendations became necessary. The intent of these revised guidelines is to continue to help clinical researchers to conduct high-quality work and advance the field by enhancing the standards, consistency, and comparability of clinical studies. There is growing awareness of the importance of consensus-based reporting standards in clinical trials and observational studies. Such global initiatives are necessary in order to minimize heterogeneous and inadequate data reporting and to improve clarity and comparability between different studies and study cohorts. Variations in definitions of endpoints or outcome variables can introduce confusion and difficulties in interpretation of data, but more importantly, it may preclude building of an adequate body of evidence to achieve reliable conclusions and recommendations. Clinical research in neuromuscular pharmacology and physiology is no exception.

Comparison of visual and electromyographic assessments with train-of-four stimulation of the ulnar nerve: a prospective cohort study.

PURPOSE: The use of a peripheral nerve stimulator to assess the level of neuromuscular blockade tasks the anesthesia clinician with subjectively assessing the response to neurostimulation. In contrast, objective neuromuscular monitors provide quantitative information. The purpose of this study was to compare subjective evaluations from a peripheral nerve stimulator with objective measurements of neurostimulation responses from a quantitative monitor. METHODS: Patients were enrolled preoperatively, and intraoperative neuromuscular blockade management was at the discretion of the anesthesiologist. Electromyography electrodes were placed over the dominant or nondominant arm in a randomized fashion. Following onset of nondepolarizing neuromuscular blockade, the ulnar nerve was stimulated, the response was measured with electromyography, and anesthesia clinicians, who were blinded to the objective measurements, subjectively (visually) evaluated the response to neurostimulation. RESULTS: Fifty patients were enrolled and 666 neurostimulations were performed at 333 different time points. Anesthesia clinicians subjectively overestimated the response of the adductor pollicis muscle following neurostimulation of the ulnar nerve 155/333 (47%) of the time when compared with objective electromyographic measurements. When subjective evaluations and objective measurements differed to any degree, subjective evaluations were higher than objective measurements 155/166 (92%) of the time (95% CI, 87 to 95; P < 0.001), representing significant evidence that subjective evaluation overestimates the response to train-of-four stimulation. CONCLUSIONS: Subjective observations of a "twitch" do not consistently correspond to objective measurements of neuromuscular blockade with electromyography. Subjective evaluation overestimates the response to neurostimulation and may be unreliable for determining the depth of block or confirming adequate recovery.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Lors de l'utilisation d'un stimulateur nerveux périphérique pour évaluer le niveau de bloc neuromusculaire, le clinicien en anesthésie doit évaluer de manière subjective la réponse à la neurostimulation. Les moniteurs neuromusculaires objectifs fournissent quant à eux des informations quantitatives. L'objectif de cette étude était de comparer les évaluations subjectives d'un stimulateur nerveux périphérique avec des mesures objectives des réponses de neurostimulation provenant d'un moniteur quantitatif. MéTHODE: Les patients ont été recrutés avant leur opération, et la gestion du bloc neuromusculaire peropératoire était à la discrétion de l'anesthésiologiste. Des électrodes d'électromyographie ont été placées sur le bras dominant ou non dominant de manière aléatoire. Après l'amorce du bloc neuromusculaire non dépolarisant, le nerf cubital a été stimulé, la réponse a été mesurée par électromyographie, et les cliniciens en anesthésie, qui n'avaient pas accès aux mesures objectives, ont évalué subjectivement (visuellement) la réponse à la neurostimulation. RéSULTATS: Cinquante patients ont été recrutés et 666 neurostimulations ont été réalisées à 333 moments différents. Les cliniciens en anesthésie ont subjectivement surestimé la réponse du muscle adducteur du pouce après neurostimulation du nerf cubital 155/333 (47 %) fois par rapport aux mesures électromyographiques objectives. Lorsque les évaluations subjectives et les mesures objectives différaient à quelque degré que ce soit, les évaluations subjectives étaient plus élevées que les mesures objectives 155/166 (92 %) du temps (IC 95 %, 87 à 95; P < 0,001), ce qui représente une preuve significative que l'évaluation subjective surestime la réponse à la stimulation par train-de-quatre. CONCLUSION: Les observations subjectives d'une « contraction ¼ ne correspondent pas systématiquement aux mesures objectives d'un bloc neuromusculaire telles qu'obtenues par électromyographie. L'évaluation subjective surestime la réponse à la neurostimulation et pourrait ne pas être fiable pour déterminer la profondeur du bloc ou confirmer une récupération adéquate.

A survey on the availability, usage and perception of neuromuscular monitors in Europe.

PURPOSE: Neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBAs) are routinely administered to patients in a multiplicity of anesthetic settings. Absence of postoperative residual neuromuscular block is widely considered an anesthetic patient safety mandate. Despite the increasing availability of a wider range of commercial quantitative neuromuscular monitors, the availability and use of neuromuscular monitoring devices is deemed to be suboptimal even in countries with above-average health system ratings. The present study aims to more precisely characterize the perceived availability, cost sensitivity and usability of neuromuscular monitoring devices within European anesthesia departments. METHODS: A pre-registered internet-based survey assessing the availability, cost sensitivity and usability of neuromuscular monitoring devices was distributed as e-mail newsletter by the European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care (ESAIC) to all of its active full members. The survey was available online for a total of 120 days. RESULTS: Having targeted a total of 7472 ESAIC members, the survey was completed by a total of 692 anesthesiologists (9.3%) distributed across 37 different European countries. Quantitative monitors were reported to be proportionally more available than qualitative ones (87.6% vs. 62.6%, respectively), as well as in greater monitor-per-operating room ratios. Most anesthesiologists (60.5%) expressed moderate confidence in quantitative monitors, with artifactual recordings and inaccurate measurements being the most frequently encountered issues (25.9%). The commercial pricing of quantitative devices was considered more representative of a device's true value, when compared to qualitative instruments (average cost of €4.500 and €1.000 per device, respectively). CONCLUSION: The availability of quantitative NMM in European operating theaters has increased in comparison with that reported in previous decades, potentially indicating increasing monitoring rates. European anesthesiologists express moderate confidence in quantitative neuromuscular monitors, along with a sentiment of adequate pricing when compared to their qualitative counterparts. Trust in quantitative monitors is marked by caution and awareness for artifactual recordings, with a consequent expectation that developments focusing on accuracy, reliability and ergonomics of neuromuscular monitors be prioritized.

Quantitative Neuromuscular Monitoring and Postoperative Outcomes: A Narrative Review.

Over the past five decades, quantitative neuromuscular monitoring devices have been used to examine the incidence of postoperative residual neuromuscular block in international clinical practices, and to determine their role in reducing the risk of residual neuromuscular block and associated adverse clinical outcomes. Several clinical trials and a recent meta-analysis have documented that the intraoperative application of quantitative monitoring significantly reduces the risk of residual neuromuscular blockade in the operating room and postanesthesia care unit. In addition, emerging data show that quantitative monitoring minimizes the risk of adverse clinical events, such as unplanned postoperative reintubations, hypoxemia, and postoperative episodes of airway obstruction associated with incomplete neuromuscular recovery, and may improve postoperative respiratory outcomes. Several international anesthesia societies have recommended that quantitative monitoring be performed whenever a neuromuscular blocking agent is administered. Therefore, a comprehensive review of the literature was performed to determine the potential benefits of quantitative monitoring in the perioperative setting.

Ipsilateral and Simultaneous Comparison of Responses from Acceleromyography- and Electromyography-based Neuromuscular Monitors.

BACKGROUND: The paucity of easy-to-use, reliable objective neuromuscular monitors is an obstacle to universal adoption of routine neuromuscular monitoring. Electromyography (EMG) has been proposed as the optimal neuromuscular monitoring technology since it addresses several acceleromyography limitations. This clinical study compared simultaneous neuromuscular responses recorded from induction of neuromuscular block until recovery using the acceleromyography-based TOF-Watch SX and EMG-based TetraGraph. METHODS: Fifty consenting patients participated. The acceleromyography and EMG devices analyzed simultaneous contractions (acceleromyography) and muscle action potentials (EMG) from the adductor pollicis muscle by synchronization via fiber optic cable link. Bland-Altman analysis described the agreement between devices during distinct phases of neuromuscular block. The primary endpoint was agreement of acceleromyography- and EMG-derived normalized train-of-four ratios greater than or equal to 80%. Secondary endpoints were agreement in the recovery train-of-four ratio range less than 80% and agreement of baseline train-of-four ratios between the devices. RESULTS: Acceleromyography showed normalized train-of-four ratio greater than or equal to 80% earlier than EMG. When acceleromyography showed train-of-four ratio greater than or equal to 80% (n = 2,929), the bias was 1.3 toward acceleromyography (limits of agreement, -14.0 to 16.6). When EMG showed train-of-four ratio greater than or equal to 80% (n = 2,284), the bias was -0.5 toward EMG (-14.7 to 13.6). In the acceleromyography range train-of-four ratio less than 80% (n = 2,802), the bias was 2.1 (-16.1 to 20.2), and in the EMG range train-of-four ratio less than 80% (n = 3,447), it was 2.6 (-14.4 to 19.6). Baseline train-of-four ratios were higher and more variable with acceleromyography than with EMG. CONCLUSIONS: Bias was lower than in previous studies. Limits of agreement were wider than expected because acceleromyography readings varied more than EMG both at baseline and during recovery. The EMG-based monitor had higher precision and greater repeatability than acceleromyography. This difference between monitors was even greater when EMG data were compared to raw (nonnormalized) acceleromyography measurements. The EMG monitor is a better indicator of adequate recovery from neuromuscular block and readiness for safe tracheal extubation than the acceleromyography monitor.

The Clinical Use of Cricoid Pressure: First, Do No Harm.

Application of cricoid pressure (CP) during rapid sequence induction and intubation sequence has been a "standard" of care for many decades, despite limited scientific proof of its efficacy in preventing pulmonary aspiration of gastric contents. While some of the current rapid sequence induction and intubation guidelines recommend its use, other international guidelines do not, and many clinicians argue that there is insufficient evidence to either continue or abandon its use. Recently published articles and accompanying editorials have reignited the debate on the efficacy and safety of CP application and have generated multiple responses that pointed out the various (and significant) limitations of the available evidence. Thus, a critical discussion of available data must be undertaken before making a final clinical decision on such an important patient safety issue. In this review, the authors will take an objective look at the available scientific evidence about the effectiveness and safety of CP in patients at risk of pulmonary aspiration of gastric contents. We suggest that current data are inadequate to impose clinical guidelines on the use of CP because we acknowledge that currently there is not, and there may never be, a method to prevent aspiration in all patients. In addition, we reiterate that a universally accepted medical-legal standard for approaching the high-risk aspiration patient does not exist, discuss the differences in practice between the US and international practitioners regarding use of CP, and propose 5 recommendations on how future studies might be designed to obtain optimal scientific evidence about the effectiveness and safety of CP in patients at risk for pulmonary aspiration.

Perceptions of gender equity in departmental leadership, research opportunities, and clinical work attitudes: an international survey of 11 781 anaesthesiologists.

BACKGROUND: Women make up an increasing proportion of the physician workforce in anaesthesia, but they are consistently under-represented in leadership and governance. METHODS: We performed an internet-based survey to investigate career opportunities in leadership and research amongst anaesthesiologists. We also explored gender bias attributable to workplace attitudes and economic factors. The survey instrument was piloted, translated into seven languages, and uploaded to the SurveyMonkey® platform. We aimed to collect between 7800 and 13 700 responses from at least 100 countries. Participant consent and ethical approval were obtained. A quantitative analysis was done with χ2 and Cramer's V as a measure of strength of associations. We used an inductive approach and a thematic content analysis for qualitative data on current barriers to leadership and research. RESULTS: The 11 746 respondents, 51.3% women and 48.7% men, represented 148 countries; 35 respondents identified their gender as non-binary. Women were less driven to achieve leadership positions (P<0.001; Cramer's V: 0.11). Being a woman was reported as a disadvantage for leadership and research (P<0.001 for both; Cramer's V: 0.47 and 0.34, respectively). Women were also more likely to be mistreated in the workplace (odds ratio: 10.6; 95% confidence interval: 9.4-11.9; P<0.001), most commonly by surgeons. Several personal, departmental, institutional, and societal barriers in leadership and research were identified, and strategies to overcome them were suggested. Lower-income countries were associated with a significantly smaller gender gap (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Whilst certain trends suggest improvements in the workplace, barriers to promotion of women in key leadership and research positions continue within anaesthesiology internationally.

Detrimental Effects of Filling Laryngotracheal Airways To Excessive Pressure (DEFLATE-P): a quality improvement initiative.

BACKGROUND: This quality improvement (QI) project was performed at a single center to determine the incidence of postoperative complications associated with use of cuffed airway devices. An educational program was then completed that involved training our anesthesia providers about complications related to excessive cuff pressure and how to utilize a quantitative cuff pressure measurement device (manometer). The impact of this educational initiative was assessed by comparing the incidence of postoperative complications associated with the use of airway devices before and after the training period. METHODS: After approval by our institution's Institutional Review Board, a pre-intervention (baseline) survey was obtained from 259 adult patients after having undergone surgery with general anesthesia with the use of an endotracheal tube (ETT) or laryngeal mask airway (LMA). Survey responses were used to determine the baseline incidence of sore throat, hoarseness, and dysphagia. Once these results were obtained, education was provided to the anesthesia department members addressing the complications associated with excessive cuff pressures, appropriate cuff pressures based on manufacturer recommendations, and instructions on the use of a quantitative monitor to determine cuff pressure (manometry). Clinical care was then changed by requiring intraoperative cuff pressure monitoring throughout our institution for all surgical patients. After this educational period, 299 patients completed the same survey describing postoperative airway complications. RESULTS: The use of manometry reduced the incidence of moderate-to-severe postoperative sore throat in the pre- vs. post-intervention groups (35 patients vs 31 patients, p = 0.045), moderate to severe hoarseness (30 patients vs 13, patients p = 0.0001), and moderate-to-severe dysphagia (13 patients vs 5 patients, p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Caring for patients in the perioperative setting frequently entails placement of an airway device. This procedure is associated with several potential complications, including sore throat, coughing, and vocal cord damage. Our quality improvement initiative has shown that intraoperative management of intra-cuff pressure based on manometry is feasible to implement in clinical practice and can reduce postoperative airway complications.

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

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

Patient Survey of Referral From One Surgeon to Another to Reduce Maximum Waiting Time for Elective Surgery and Hours of Overutilized Operating Room Time.

BACKGROUND: Studies of shared (patient-provider) decision making for elective surgical care have examined both the decision whether to have surgery and patients' understanding of treatment options. We consider shared decision making applied to case scheduling, since implementation would reduce labor costs. METHODS: Study questions were presented in sequence of waiting times, starting with 4 workdays. "Assume the consultant surgeon (ie, the surgeon in charge) you met in clinic did not have time available to do your surgery within the next 4 workdays, but his/her colleague would have had time to do your surgery within the next 4 workdays. Would you have wanted to discuss with a member of the surgical team (eg, the scheduler or the surgeon) the availability of surgery with a different, equally qualified surgeon at Mayo Clinic who had time available within the next 4 workdays, on a date of your choosing?" There were 980 invited patients who underwent lung resection or cholecystectomy between 2011 and 2016; 135 respondents completed the study and 6 respondents dropped out after the study questions were displayed. RESULTS: The percentages of patients whose response to the study questions was "4 days" were 58.8% (40/68) among lung resection patients and 58.2% (39/67) among cholecystectomy patients. The 97.5% 2-sided confidence interval for the median maximum wait was 4 days to 4 days. Patients' choices for the waiting time sufficient to discuss having another surgeon perform the procedure did not differ between procedures (P = .91). Results were insensitive to patients' sex, age, travel time to hospital, or number of office visits before surgery (all P ≥ .20). CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that bringing up the option with the patient of changing surgeons when a colleague is available and has the operating room time to perform the procedure sooner is being respectful of most patients' individual preferences (ie, patient-centered).

Consensus Statement on Perioperative Use of Neuromuscular Monitoring.

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

World Health Organization-World Federation of Societies of Anaesthesiologists (WHO-WFSA) International Standards for a Safe Practice of Anesthesia.

The International Standards for a Safe Practice of Anesthesia were developed on behalf of the World Federation of Societies of Anaesthesiologists (WFSA), a nonprofit organization representing anesthesiologists in 150 countries, and the World Health Organization (WHO). The recommendations have been approved by WHO and the membership of WFSA. These Standards are applicable to all anesthesia providers throughout the world. They are intended to provide guidance and assistance to anesthesia providers, their professional organizations, hospital and facility administrators, and governments for maintaining and improving the quality and safety of anesthesia care. The Standards cover professional aspects; facilities and equipment; medications and intravenous fluids; monitoring; and the conduct of anesthesia. HIGHLY RECOMMENDED standards, the functional equivalent of mandatory standards, include (amongst other things): the continuous presence of a trained and vigilant anesthesia provider; continuous monitoring of tissue oxygenation and perfusion by clinical observation and a pulse oximeter; intermittent monitoring of blood pressure; confirmation of correct placement of an endotracheal tube (if used) by auscultation and carbon dioxide detection; the use of the WHO Safe Surgery Checklist; and a system for transfer of care at the end of an anesthetic. The International Standards represent minimum standards and the goal should always be to practice to the highest possible standards, preferably exceeding the standards outlined in this document.

Is lower-dose sugammadex a cost-saving strategy for reversal of deep neuromuscular block? Facts and fiction.

BACKGROUND: Sugammadex, a γ-cyclodextrin derivative, belongs to a new class of selective relaxant binding agents. Sugammadex was approved 10-years ago by the European medicines agency and today is used in clinical anesthesia and emergency medicine globally. In this review, indications for neuromuscular block, the challenge of neuromuscular monitoring and the practice of under-dosing of sugammadex as a potential cost-saving strategy are discussed. MAIN BODY: Reversal of neuromuscular block is important to accelerate the spontaneous recovery of neuromuscular function. Sugammadex is able to reverse a rocuronium- or vecuronium-induced neuromuscular block rapidly and efficiently from every depth of neuromuscular block. However, since sugammadex was introduced in clinical anesthesia, several studies have reported administration of a lower-than-recommended dose of sugammadex. The decision to under-dose sugammadex is often motivated by cost reduction concerns, as the price of sugammadex is much higher than that of neostigmine outside the United States. However, under-dosing of sugammadex leads to an increased risk of recurrence of neuromuscular block after an initial successful (but transient) reversal. Similarly, when not using objective neuromuscular monitoring, under-dosing of sugammadex may result in residual neuromuscular block in the postoperative care unit, with its attendant negative pulmonary outcomes. Therefore, an appropriate dose of sugammadex, based on objective determination of the depth of neuromuscular block, should be administered to avoid residual or recurrent neuromuscular block and attendant postoperative complications. Whether the reduction in perioperative recovery time of the patient can be translated into additional procedural cases performed, faster operative turnover times, or improved organizational resource utilization, has yet to be determined in actual clinical practice that includes verification of neuromuscular recovery prior to tracheal extubation. CONCLUSIONS: The current review addresses the indications for neuromuscular block, the challenge of neuromuscular monitoring, the practice of under-dosing of sugammadex as a potential cost-saving strategy in reversal of deep neuromuscular block, the economics of sugammadex administration and the potential healthcare cost-saving strategies.

Current Status of Neuromuscular Reversal and Monitoring: Challenges and Opportunities.

Postoperative residual neuromuscular block has been recognized as a potential problem for decades, and it remains so today. Traditional pharmacologic antagonists (anticholinesterases) are ineffective in reversing profound and deep levels of neuromuscular block; at the opposite end of the recovery curve close to full recovery, anticholinesterases may induce paradoxical muscle weakness. The new selective relaxant-binding agent sugammadex can reverse any depth of block from aminosteroid (but not benzylisoquinolinium) relaxants; however, the effective dose to be administered should be chosen based on objective monitoring of the depth of neuromuscular block.To guide appropriate perioperative management, neuromuscular function assessment with a peripheral nerve stimulator is mandatory. Although in many settings, subjective (visual and tactile) evaluation of muscle responses is used, such evaluation has had limited success in preventing the occurrence of residual paralysis. Clinical evaluations of return of muscle strength (head lift and grip strength) or respiratory parameters (tidal volume and vital capacity) are equally insensitive at detecting neuromuscular weakness. Objective measurement (a train-of-four ratio greater than 0.90) is the only method to determine appropriate timing of tracheal extubation and ensure normal muscle function and patient safety.