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.

Phase III clinical trial comparing the efficacy and safety of adamgammadex with sugammadex for reversal of rocuronium-induced neuromuscular block.

BACKGROUND: Preliminary clinical trials of adamgammadex, a new cyclodextrin-based selective reversal agent, have demonstrated its efficacy in reversing neuromuscular block by rocuronium. METHODS: This multicentre, randomised, double-blind, positive-controlled, non-inferiority phase III clinical trial compared the efficacy and safety of adamgammadex and sugammadex. We randomised 310 subjects to receive adamgammadex (4 mg kg-1) or sugammadex (2 mg kg-1) at reappearance of the second twitch of the train-of-four (TOF), and standard safety data were collected. RESULTS: For the primary outcome, the proportion of patients with TOF ratio ≥0.9 within 5 min was 98.7% in the adamgammadex group vs 100% in the sugammadex group, with a point estimate and 95% confidence interval (CI) of 1.3% (-4.6%, +1.3%); the lower limit was greater than the non-inferiority margin of -10%. For the key secondary outcome, the median (inter quartile range) time from the start of administration of adamgammadex or sugammadex to recovery of TOF ratio to 0.9 was 2.25 (1.75, 2.75) min and 1.75 (1.50, 2.00) min, respectively. The difference was 0.50 (95% CI: 0.25, 0.50); the upper limit was lower than the non-inferiority margin of 5 min. In addition, there were no inferior results observed in secondary outcomes. Adamgammadex had a lower incidence of adverse drug reactions compared with sugammadex (anaphylactic reaction, recurarisation, decreased heart rate, and laryngospasm; P=0.047). CONCLUSIONS: Adamgammadex was non-inferior to sugammadex with a possible lower incidence of adverse drug reactions compared with sugammadex. Adamgammadex may have a potential advantage in terms of its overall risk-benefit profile. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR2000039525. Registered October 30, 2020. https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=56825.

A new pharmacological approach for tracheal intubation?

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

Is adamgammadex the brother of sugammadex or the next generation of reversal agent?

Sugammadex is now in widespread use to reverse the neuromuscular blocking effects of rocuronium. Adverse effects from sugammadex are rare, but anaphylactic and cardiovascular reactions to the drug have been reported. In an attempt to reduce such side-effects, a modified gamma-cyclodextrin, adamgammadex, has been developed. Phase 3 clinical trials suggest that it is slightly less potent than sugammadex and has a non-inferior speed of onset. In a multicentre trial of 310 patients, there was a suggestion of a lower incidence of allergic responses and recurarisation after adamgammadex compared with sugammadex. The clinical implications of this study are discussed in this editorial.

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).

Impact of neuromuscular block on myocardial injury after non-cardiac surgery (MINS) incidence in the early postoperative stage of older patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection: a randomized controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Myocardial injury after non-cardiac surgery (MINS) is a common and serious complication in older patients. This study investigates the impact of neuromuscular block on the MINS incidence and other cardiovascular complications in the early postoperative stage of older patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection. METHODS: 70 older patients who underwent laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection were separated into the deep neuromuscular block group and moderate neuromuscular block group for 35 cases in each group (n = 1:1). The deep neuromuscular block group maintained train of four (TOF) = 0, post-tetanic count (PTC) 1-2, and the moderate neuromuscular block group maintained TOF = 1-2 during the operation. Sugammadex sodium was used at 2 mg/kg or 4 mg/kg for muscle relaxation antagonism at the end of surgery. The MINS incidence was the primary outcome and compared with Fisher's exact test. About the secondary outcomes, the postoperative pain was analyzed with Man-Whitney U test, the postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) and the incidence of cardiovascular complications were analyzed with Chi-square test, intraoperative mean artery pressure (MAP) and cardiac output (CO) ratio to baseline, length of stay and dosage of anesthetics were compared by two independent samples t-test. RESULTS: MINS was not observed in both groups. The highest incidence of postoperative cardiovascular complications was lower limbs deep vein thrombosis (14.3% in deep neuromuscular block group and 8.6% in moderate neuromuscular group). The numeric rating scale (NRS) score in the deep neuromuscular block group was lower than the moderate neuromuscular block group 72 h after surgery (0(1,2) vs 0(1,2), P = 0.018). The operation time in the deep neuromuscular block group was longer (356.7(107.6) vs 294.8 (80.0), min, P = 0.008), the dosage of propofol and remifentanil was less (3.4 (0.7) vs 3.8 (1.0), mg·kg-1·h-1, P = 0.043; 0.2 (0.06) vs 0.3 (0.07), µg·kg-1·min-1, P < 0.001), and the length of hospital stay was shorter than the moderate neuromuscular block group (18.4 (4.9) vs 22.0 (8.3), day, P = 0.028). The differences of other outcomes were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Maintaining different degrees of the neuromuscular block under TOF guidance did not change the MINS incidence within 7 days after surgery in older patients who underwent laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The present study was registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (10/02/2021, ChiCTR2100043323).

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

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

Analysis of the factors contributing to residual weakness after sugammadex administration in pediatric patients under 2 years of age.

BACKGROUND: Sugammadex reverses the neuromuscular blockade induced by rocuronium and vecuronium and is approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for use in patients aged over 2 years. There is, however, a paucity of data regarding its dosing profile in infants and children younger than 2 years. AIMS: The aim of this study was to assess the risk of recurarization, or re-paralysis, in children under 2 years of age to increase awareness on the importance of appropriate neuromuscular blocked monitoring and reversal. METHODS: All patients aged ≤24 months who underwent an operative procedure at a tertiary medical center between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2021, and received both rocuronium for neuromuscular blockade and sugammadex for neuromuscular blockade reversal, were identified in the electronic medical record. Patients were excluded from analysis if they (1) received vecuronium, cisatracurium, atracurium, or succinylcholine for neuromuscular blockade, (2) received neostigmine for reversal, or (3) underwent more than one operation within 24 h. We performed a survival analysis of sugammadex redose using a Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: We reviewed 2923 records. Sugammadex was redosed in 123 (4.2%) cases. The median [IQR] time to redose was 7 [4-17] min, and the median [IQR] amount of redose administered was 2.74 [1.96-3.99] mg/kg. Increasing patient age (p < .01) and weight (p < .01) were associated with reduced hazard rate of sugammadex redose. For a patient of median weight, increasing age from 3 to 13 months was associated with a 53% risk reduction (HR: 0.47; 95% CI: 0.24-0.91). For a patient of median age, increasing weight from 4.7 to 9.2 kg was associated with 41% risk reduction (HR: 0.59; 95% CI: 0.32-1.07). We failed to detect any other associations. CONCLUSIONS: In this single-center, retrospective cohort study of pediatric surgery patients, there was an association between the hazard of sugammadex redose with both increased age and weight.

Postoperative residual curarisation in geriatric patients: a prospective, observational cohort study.

Objective: To evaluate the occurrence and potential risk factors of residual curarisation after surgery and the subsequent acute respiratory events in elderly patients. METHODS: The prospective, cohort study was conducted at Ankara City Hospital from July to December 2021, and comprised data of geriatric patients undergoing elective surgery under general anaesthesia using moderate-acting nondepolarising muscle relaxants. Postoperative acute respiratory events in the post-anaesthesia care unit were subsequently noted. Data was analysed using SPSS 25. RESULTS: Of the 185 patients aged >65 years evaluated, 174(94%) were included; 88(50.6%) females and 86(49.4%) males. The incidence of residual curarisation was in 6(3.4%) patients. Postoperative residual curarisation was significantly associated with smooth recovery process (p<0.05). The recovery was associated with intraoperative bleeding, total dose of neuromuscular blocker, and the length of time from the last dose of neuromuscular blocker to antagonist administration (p<0.05). Postoperative critical respiratory events were more common in patients with postoperative residual curarisation (p< 0.001). The length of stay in post-anaesthesia care unit was 1.57 times longer in such patients (p=0.001). Conclusion: Postoperative residual curarisation increased length of hospital stay and respiratory complications.

Safety of sugammadex for reversal of neuromuscular block: A postmarketing study based on the World Health Organization pharmacovigilance database.

AIM: Residual neuromuscular blockade is a common complication after general anaesthesia. Sugammadex can reverse the action of aminosteroid neuromuscular blockers. This study aimed to explore sugammadex safety issues in the real world and determine the spectrum of adverse reactions. METHODS: All sugammadex-related adverse events reported in VigiBase between 2010 and 2019 were classified by group queries according to the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities. A disproportionality analysis of data was performed using the information component (IC); positive IC values were deemed significant. RESULTS: Overall, 16 219 410 adverse events were reported and 2032 were associated with sugammadex. The frequent reactions were recurrence of neuromuscular blockade (n = 54, IC 6.74, IC025 6.33), laryngospasm (n = 53, IC 6.05, IC025 5.64), bronchospasm (n = 119, IC 5.63, IC025 5.36) and bradycardia (n = 169, IC 5.13, IC025 4.90). Fatal cases were more likely among patients with cardiac disorders, especially those over 65 years. In addition, the common adverse drug reactions (ADRs) differed between different age groups (P < .01). ADRs were higher in the 0-17 years age group than in other age groups. The onset time of common ADRs was typically within 1 day and 68.9% occurred within half an hour after sugammadex administration. CONCLUSIONS: Anaesthesiologists should carefully monitor the anaesthesia recovery period to correct the ADRs caused by sugammadex and recommend monitoring neuromuscular function throughout the anaesthesia process. Sugammadex should be used carefully in patients with cardiovascular diseases, and electrocardiography and hemodynamic changes should be monitored after medication.

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.

Effect of sugammadex on processed EEG parameters in patients undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.

BACKGROUND: Sugammadex has been associated with increases in the bispectral index (BIS). We evaluated the effects of sugammadex administration on quantitative electroencephalographic (EEG) and electromyographic (EMG) measures. METHODS: We performed a prospective observational study of adult male patients undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. All patients received a sevoflurane-based general anaesthetic and a continuous infusion of rocuronium, which was reversed with 2 mg kg-1 of sugammadex i.v. BIS, EEG, and EMG measures were captured with the BIS Vista™ monitor. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients were included in this study. Compared with baseline, BIS increased at 4-6 min (ß coefficient: 3.63; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.22-5.04; P<0.001), spectral edge frequency 95 (SEF95) increased at 2-4 min (ß coefficient: 0.29; 95% CI: 0.05-0.52; P=0.016) and 4-6 min (ß coefficient: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.47-0.94; P<0.001), and EMG increased at 4-6 min (ß coefficient: 1.91; 95% CI: 1.00-2.81; P<0.001) after sugammadex administration. Compared with baseline, increased beta power was observed at 2-4 min (ß coefficient: 93; 95% CI: 1-185; P=0.046) and 4-6 min (ß coefficient: 208; 95% CI: 116-300; P<0.001), and decreased delta power was observed at 4-6 min (ß coefficient: -526.72; 95% CI: -778 to -276; P<0.001) after sugammadex administration. Neither SEF95 nor frequency band data analysis adjusted for EMG showed substantial differences. None of the patients showed clinical signs of awakening. CONCLUSIONS: After neuromuscular block reversal with 2 mg kg-1 sugammadex, BIS, SEF95, EMG, and beta power showed small but statistically significant increases over time, while delta power decreased.

Comparison of the effects of sugammadex versus neostigmine for reversal of neuromuscular block on hospital costs of care.

BACKGROUND: Sugammadex reversal of neuromuscular block facilitates recovery of neuromuscular function after surgery, but the drug is expensive. We evaluated the effects of sugammadex on hospital costs of care. METHODS: We analysed 79 474 adult surgical patients who received neuromuscular blocking agents and reversal from two academic healthcare networks between 2016 and 2021 to calculate differences in direct costs. We matched our data with data from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project-National Inpatient Sample (HCUP-NIS) to calculate differences in total costs in US dollars. Perioperative risk profiles were defined based on ASA physical status and admission status (ambulatory surgery vs hospitalisation). RESULTS: Based on our registry data analysis, administration of sugammadex vs neostigmine was associated with lower direct costs (-1.3% lower costs; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.5 to -2.2%; P=0.002). In the HCUP-NIS matched cohort, sugammadex use was associated with US$232 lower total costs (95% CI, -US$376 to -US$88; P=0.002). Subgroup analysis revealed that sugammadex was associated with US$1042 lower total costs (95% CI, -US$1198 to -US$884; P<0.001) in patients with lower risk. In contrast, sugammadex was associated with US$620 higher total costs (95% CI, US$377 to US$865; P<0.001) in patients with a higher risk (American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status ≥3 and preoperative hospitalisation). CONCLUSIONS: The effects of using sugammadex on costs of care depend on patient risk, defined based on comorbidities and admission status. We observed lower costs of care in patients with lower risk and higher costs of care in hospitalised surgical patients with severe comorbidities.

How robust are the STRONGER and STIL-STRONGER studies?

In 2020, the Sugammadex vs Neostigmine for Reversal of Neuromuscular Blockade and Postoperative Pulmonary Complications (STRONGER) study provided evidence for the first time that use of sugammadex is associated with fewer postoperative pulmonary complications than use of neostigmine. In a recent publication in the British Journal of Anaesthesia, a secondary analysis of the same data, the Association Between Neuromuscular Blockade Reversal Agent Choice and Postoperative Pulmonary Complications (STIL-STRONGER) study, has produced similar evidence of the advantages of sugammadex over neostigmine in high-risk and older patients undergoing prolonged, elective surgery. Here we consider the implications of the detailed statistical analysis used in these two studies and how its limitations could possibly have enhanced the statistical differences between the two drugs with respect to postoperative pulmonary complications.

Reversal of neuromuscular block: what are the costs?

Patients requiring neuromuscular block for anaesthesia have a higher risk of adverse postoperative outcomes. The choice of reversal drug and its corresponding dose is critical for improving clinical outcomes. Although drug costs are higher for sugammadex relative to neostigmine, additional factors need to be considered when choosing one drug over the other. New data from a recent study in the British Journal of Anaesthesia indicate cost advantages for sugammadex in low-risk and ambulatory patients, but for neostigmine in high-risk patients. These findings highlight the need to take local and temporal factors into consideration in addition to clinical effectiveness when performing cost analyses for administrative decision-making.

An educational intervention to reduce the incidence of postoperative residual curarisation: a cluster randomised crossover trial in patients undergoing general anaesthesia.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of postoperative residual curarisation remains unacceptably high. We assessed whether an educational intervention on perioperative neuromuscular block management can reduce it. METHODS: In this multicentre, cluster randomised crossover trial, centres were allocated to receive an educational intervention either in a first or a second period. The educational intervention consisted of a lecture about neuromuscular management key points, including quantitative neuromuscular monitoring and use of reversal agents. The lecture was streamed to allow repetition. Additionally, memory cards were distributed in each operating theatre. The primary outcome was postoperative residual curarisation in the PACU. Secondary outcomes were frequency of quantitative neuromuscular monitoring, use of reversal agents, and incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications during hospital stay. Measurements were performed before randomisation and after the first and the second period. The effect of the educational intervention was estimated using multivariable mixed effects logistic regression models. RESULTS: We included 2314 subjects in 34 Spanish centres. Postoperative residual curarisation incidence was not affected by the educational intervention (odds ratio [OR] 0.90 [95% confidence interval {CI}: 0.51-1.58]; P=0.717 and 1.30 [0.73-2.30]; P=0.371] for first and second time-period interaction). The educational intervention increased the quantitative neuromuscular monitor usage (OR 2.04 [95% CI: 1.31-3.19]; P=0.002), the use of reversal agents was unchanged (OR 0.79 [95% CI: 0.50-1.26]; P=0.322), and the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications decreased (OR 0.19 [95% CI: 0.10-0.35]; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: An educational intervention on perioperative neuromuscular block management did not reduce the incidence of postoperative residual curarisation nor increase reversal, despite increased quantitative neuromuscular monitoring. Sugammadex reversal was associated with reduced postoperative residual curarisation. The educational intervention was associated with a decrease in postoperative pulmonary complications. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03128151.

Association between choice of reversal agent for neuromuscular block and postoperative pulmonary complications in patients at increased risk undergoing non-emergency surgery: STIL-STRONGER, a multicentre matched cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative pulmonary complications are a source of morbidity after major surgery. In patients at increased risk of postoperative pulmonary complications we sought to assess the association between neuromuscular blocking agent reversal agent and development of postoperative pulmonary complications. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective matched cohort study, a secondary analysis of data collected in the prior STRONGER study. Data were obtained from the Multicenter Perioperative Outcomes Group. Included patients were aged 18 yr and older undergoing non-emergency surgery under general anaesthesia with tracheal intubation with neuromuscular block and reversal, who were predicted to be at elevated risk of postoperative pulmonary complications. This risk was defined as American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status 3 or 4 in patients undergoing either intrathoracic or intra-abdominal surgery who were either aged >80 yr or underwent a procedure lasting >2 h. Cohorts were defined by reversal with neostigmine or sugammadex. The primary composite outcome was the occurrence of pneumonia or respiratory failure. RESULTS: After matching by institution, sex, age (within 5 yr), body mass index, anatomic region of surgery, comorbidities, and neuromuscular blocking agent, 3817 matched pairs remained. The primary postoperative pulmonary complications outcome occurred in 224 neostigmine cases vs 100 sugammadex cases (5.9% vs 2.6%, odds ratio 0.41, P<0.01). After adjustment for unbalanced covariates, the adjusted odds ratio for the association between sugammadex use and the primary outcome was 0.39 (P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: In a cohort of patients at increased risk for pulmonary complications compared with neostigmine, use of sugammadex was independently associated with reduced risk of subsequent development of pneumonia or respiratory failure.

Association of sugammadex reversal of neuromuscular block and postoperative length of stay in the ambulatory care facility: a multicentre hospital registry study.

BACKGROUND: Encapsulation of rocuronium or vecuronium with sugammadex can reverse neuromuscular block faster than neostigmine reversal. This pharmacodynamic profile might facilitate patient discharge after ambulatory surgery. METHODS: We included patients who underwent ambulatory surgery with general anaesthesia and neuromuscular block between 2016 and 2021 from hospital registries at two large academic healthcare networks in the USA. The primary outcome was postoperative length of stay in the ambulatory care facility (PLOS-ACF). We examined post hoc whether the type of reversal affects postoperative nausea and vomiting and direct hospital costs. RESULTS: Among the 29 316 patients included, 8945 (30.5%) received sugammadex and 20 371 (69.5%) received neostigmine for reversal. PLOS-ACF and costs were lower in patients who received sugammadex vs neostigmine (adjusted difference in PLOS-ACF: -9.5 min; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], -10.5 to -8.5 min; adjusted difference in direct hospital costs: -US$77; 95% CI, -$88 to -$66; respectively; P<0.001). The association was magnified in patients over age 65 yr, with ASA physical status >2 undergoing short procedures (<2 h) (adjusted difference in PLOS-ACF: -18.2 min; 95% CI, -23.8 to -12.4 min; adjusted difference in direct hospital costs: -$176; 95% CI, -$220 to -$128; P<0.001). Sugammadex use was associated with reduced postoperative nausea and vomiting (17.2% vs 19.6%, P<0.001), which mediated its effects on length of stay. CONCLUSIONS: Reversal with sugammadex compared with neostigmine was associated with a small decrease in postoperative length of stay in the ambulatory care unit. The effect was magnified in older and high-risk patients, and can be explained by reduced postoperative nausea and vomiting. Sugammadex reversal in ambulatory surgery may also help reduce cost of care.

Use of rocuronium and sugammadex for video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery is associated with reduced duration of chest tube drainage: a propensity score-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: We investigated the influence of different neuromuscular blocking agents and reversal agents during anaesthesia on early removal of chest tube drainage after video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS). METHODS: This retrospective single-centre study included patients who underwent VATS after tracheal intubation under general anaesthesia. Patients received either cisatracurium and neostigmine (n=547) or rocuronium and sugammadex (n=151). Quantitative neuromuscular monitoring was used and one chest tube (size 24 Fr) was inserted. To reduce potential bias, 140 patients from each group were matched by propensity score for sex, age, body mass index and indication for VATS. Primary outcome was duration of chest tube drainage after surgery. RESULTS: Use of rocuronium and sugammadex was associated with a shorter duration of chest tube drainage (2 [1-2] vs 2 [1-3] days; P=0.049) and a 63% reduction in delayed chest tube removal (odds ratio 0.37; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.20-0.67; P=0.005). This group also had a lower incidence of postoperative atelectasis (P=0.047) and consolidation (P=0.008). Each 1 h increase in the duration of anaesthesia was associated with a 1.57-fold increase in the delayed removal of the chest tube (95% CI: 1.25-1.96; P=0.005). CONCLUSIONS: During general anaesthesia for VATS, compared with cisatracurium and neostigmine, use of rocuronium and sugammadex was associated with a significant decrease in the incidence of postoperative delayed removal of the chest tube, atelectasis, and pulmonary consolidation.

The Japanese Epidemiologic Study for Perioperative Anaphylaxis, a prospective nationwide study: allergen exposure, epidemiology, and diagnosis of anaphylaxis during general anaesthesia.

BACKGROUND: Diagnosis of perioperative anaphylaxis is often challenging. This study describes the utility of a newly developed tool for identifying patients with a high possibility of anaphylaxis, and aimed to investigate the frequency of anaphylaxis with each drug during the perioperative period in Japan. METHODS: This study included patients with anaphylaxis of Grade 2 or higher severity during general anaesthesia at 42 facilities across Japan in 2019 and 2020. We developed and adopted a unique objective evaluation tool yielding a composite score for diagnosing anaphylaxis, which includes the results of skin tests and basophil activation tests, and clinical scores for perioperative anaphylaxis. The number of cases using each drug and the total number of anaphylaxis cases were investigated to calculate the frequency of anaphylaxis. RESULTS: General anaesthesia was performed in 218 936 cases, which included 55 patients with suspected perioperative anaphylaxis. The developed composite score diagnosed 43 of them with a high probability of anaphylaxis. The causative agent was identified in 32 cases. Plasma histamine levels showed high diagnostic accuracy for anaphylaxis. The top causative agents were rocuronium (10 cases in 210 852 patients, 0.005%), sugammadex (7 cases in 150 629 patients, 0.005%), and cefazolin (7 cases in 106 005 patients, 0.007%). CONCLUSIONS: We developed a composite tool to diagnose anaphylaxis, and found that the combination of tryptase levels, skin testing, and basophil activation testing results and clinical score improved the certainty of anaphylaxis diagnosis. The incidence of perioperative anaphylaxis in our study was 1 in about 5000 general anaesthesia cases. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: UMIN000035350.