Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Anesthesiology ; 141(2): 365-374, 2024 Aug 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38728093

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The number of trials investigating the effects of deep neuromuscular blockade (NMB) on surgical conditions and patient outcomes is steadily increasing. Consensus on which surgical procedures benefit from deep NMB (a posttetanic count [PTC] of 1 to 2) and how to implement it has not been reached. The European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care does not advise routine application but recommends use of deep NMB to improve surgical conditions on indication. This study investigates the optimal dosing strategy to reach and maintain adequate deep NMB during total intravenous anesthesia. METHODS: Data from three trials investigating deep NMB during laparoscopic surgery with total intravenous anesthesia (n = 424) were pooled to analyze the required rocuronium dose, when to start continuous infusion, and how to adjust. The resulting algorithm was validated (n = 32) and compared to the success rate in ongoing studies in which the algorithm was not used (n = 180). RESULTS: The mean rocuronium dose based on actual bodyweight for PTC 1 to 2 was (mean ± SD) 1.0 ± 0.27 mg · kg-1 ·h-1 in the trials, in which mean duration of surgery was 116 min. An induction dose of 0.6 mg ·kg-1 led to a PTC of 1 to 5 in a quarter of patients after a mean of 11 min. The remaining patients were equally divided over too shallow (additional bolus and direct start of continuous infusion) or too deep; a 15-min wait after PTC of 0 for return of PTC to 1 or higher. Using the proposed algorithm, a mean 76% of all 5-min measurements throughout surgery were on target PTC 1 to 2 in the validation cohort. The algorithm performed significantly better than anesthesiology residents without the algorithm, even after a learning curve from 0 to 20 patients (42% on target, P ≤ 0.001, Cohen's d = 1.4 [95% CI, 0.9 to 1.8]) to 81 to 100 patients (61% on target, P ≤ 0.05, Cohen's d = 0.7 [95% CI, 0.1 to 1.2]). CONCLUSIONS: This study proposes a dosing algorithm for deep NMB with rocuronium in patients receiving total intravenous anesthesia.


Subject(s)
Algorithms , Anesthesia, Intravenous , Neuromuscular Blockade , Neuromuscular Nondepolarizing Agents , Rocuronium , Humans , Rocuronium/administration & dosage , Neuromuscular Blockade/methods , Male , Middle Aged , Neuromuscular Nondepolarizing Agents/administration & dosage , Female , Anesthesia, Intravenous/methods , Adult , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Aged , Laparoscopy/methods , Androstanols/administration & dosage
2.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 1: CD013197, 2024 01 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38288876

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic surgery is the preferred option for many procedures. To properly perform laparoscopic surgery, it is essential that sudden movements and abdominal contractions in patients are prevented, as it limits the surgeon's view. There has been a growing interest in the potential beneficial effect of deep neuromuscular blockade (NMB) in laparoscopic surgery. Deep NMB improves the surgical field by preventing abdominal contractions, and it is thought to decrease postoperative pain. However, it is uncertain if deep NMB improves intraoperative safety and thereby improves clinical outcomes. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the benefits and harms of deep neuromuscular blockade versus no, shallow, or moderate neuromuscular blockade during laparoscopic intra- or transperitoneal procedures in adults. SEARCH METHODS: We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was 31 July 2023. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised clinical trials (irrespective of language, blinding, or publication status) in adults undergoing laparoscopic intra- or transperitoneal procedures comparing deep NMB to moderate, shallow, or no NMB. We excluded trials that did not report any of the primary or secondary outcomes of our review. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were 1. all-cause mortality, 2. health-related quality of life, and 3. proportion of participants with serious adverse events. Our secondary outcomes were 4. proportion of participants with non-serious adverse events, 5. readmissions within three months, 6. short-term pain scores, 7. measurements of postoperative recovery, and 8. operating time. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome. MAIN RESULTS: We included 42 randomised clinical trials with 3898 participants. Most trials included participants undergoing intraperitoneal oncological resection surgery. We present the Peto fixed-effect model for most dichotomous outcomes as only sparse events were reported. Comparison 1: deep versus moderate NMB Thirty-eight trials compared deep versus moderate NMB. Deep NMB may have no effect on mortality, but the evidence is very uncertain (Peto odds ratio (OR) 7.22, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.45 to 115.43; 12 trials, 1390 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Deep NMB likely results in little to no difference in health-related quality of life up to four days postoperative (mean difference (MD) 4.53 favouring deep NMB on the Quality of Recovery-40 score, 95% CI 0.96 to 8.09; 5 trials, 440 participants; moderate-certainty evidence; mean difference lower than the mean clinically important difference of 10 points). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of deep NMB on intraoperatively serious adverse events (deep NMB 38/1150 versus moderate NMB 38/1076; Peto OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.52; 21 trials, 2231 participants; very low-certainty evidence), short-term serious adverse events (up to 60 days) (deep NMB 37/912 versus moderate NMB 42/852; Peto OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.42; 16 trials, 1764 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and short-term non-serious adverse events (Peto OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.35; 11 trials, 1232 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Deep NMB likely does not alter the duration of surgery (MD -0.51 minutes, 95% CI -3.35 to 2.32; 34 trials, 3143 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The evidence is uncertain if deep NMB alters the length of hospital stay (MD -0.22 days, 95% CI -0.49 to 0.06; 19 trials, 2084 participants; low-certainty evidence) or pain scores one hour after surgery (MD -0.31 points on the numeric rating scale, 95% CI -0.59 to -0.03; 22 trials, 1823 participants; very low-certainty evidence; mean clinically important difference 1 point) and 24 hours after surgery (MD -0.60 points on the numeric rating scale, 95% CI -1.05 to -0.15; 16 trials, 1404 participants; very low-certainty evidence; mean clinically important difference 1 point). Comparison 2: deep versus shallow NMB Three trials compared deep versus shallow NMB. The trials did not report on mortality and health-related quality of life. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of deep NMB compared to shallow NMB on the proportion of serious adverse events (RR 1.66, 95% CI 0.50 to 5.57; 2 trials, 158 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Comparison 3: deep versus no NMB One trial compared deep versus no NMB. There was no mortality in this trial, and health-related quality of life was not reported. The proportion of serious adverse events was 0/25 in the deep NMB group and 1/25 in the no NMB group. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There was insufficient evidence to draw conclusions about the effects of deep NMB compared to moderate NMB on all-cause mortality and serious adverse events. Deep NMB likely results in little to no difference in health-related quality of life and duration of surgery compared to moderate NMB, and it may have no effect on the length of hospital stay. Due to the very low-certainty evidence, we do not know what the effect is of deep NMB on non-serious adverse events, pain scores, or readmission rates. Randomised clinical trials with adequate reporting of all adverse events would reduce the current uncertainties. Due to the low number of identified trials and the very low certainty of evidence, we do not know what the effect of deep NMB on serious adverse events is compared to shallow NMB and no NMB. We found no trials evaluating mortality and health-related quality of life.


Subject(s)
Anesthetics , Laparoscopy , Neuromuscular Blockade , Adult , Humans , Neuromuscular Blockade/adverse effects , Quality of Life , Laparoscopy/adverse effects , Abdomen/surgery , Pain, Postoperative/drug therapy , Pain, Postoperative/prevention & control
3.
BMJ Open ; 13(8): e073537, 2023 08 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37640469

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: There is accumulating evidence that deep neuromuscular blockade (NMB) improves intraoperative surgical conditions during laparoscopic surgery. Studies investigating the effects of deep NMB in open surgery are scarce. In theory, by limiting surgical damage through deeper muscle relaxation, postoperative inflammation and concomitant immune suppression can be reduced. Therefore, this study will investigate the effects of deep NMB during total hip arthroplasty, which demands a relatively large exposure of the hip joint through and in between muscles. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study is a monocentre blinded randomised controlled trial in 100 patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty under general anaesthesia. Patients will be randomised in a 1:1 fashion to an intervention group of intraoperative deep NMB (a post-tetanic count of 1-2) or a control group receiving moderate NMB (a train-of-four count of 1-2). NMB will be achieved by continuous or bolus administration of rocuronium, respectively. The primary endpoint is the quality of recovery at postoperative day 1 measured by the Quality of Recovery-40 Questionnaire, analysed by Analysis of Variance. The secondary endpoint is postoperative innate immune function, measured by ex vivo production capacity of tumour necrosis factor and interleukin-1ß on endotoxin stimulation of whole blood. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval for this study was granted by the Medical Ethics Committee 'METC Oost-Nederland' (reference number 2022-15754). Informed consent will be obtained prior to study participation. Study results will be published in an international peer-reviewed journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT05562999) and EudraCT Registry (2022-002451-19).


Subject(s)
Anesthetics , Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip , Neuromuscular Blockade , Neuromuscular Diseases , Humans , Immunity , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...