RESUMO
Introduction: Muscle relaxants are often given during general anesthesia to facilitate endotracheal intubation. However lingering effects after anesthesia-end may lead to respiratory compromise in the PACU. Strategies to reduce these adverse events include monitoring neuromuscular block, the use of short-acting agents and active pharmacological reversal before extubation. At Leiden University Medical Center (LUMC), a tertiary care academic hospital in the Netherlands, various muscle relaxants and reversal agents are freely available to all clinicians without restrictions. In this setting, we intended to evaluate how patient and surgical characteristics impacted the use of these agents for a variety of non-cardiac surgeries. Material and Methods: This is a retrospective database study of adult patients that had received elective, non-cardiac surgery and general anesthesia with endotracheal intubation between 2016 and 2020 at LUMC in the Netherlands. Exclusion criteria consisted of patients pharmacologically reversed with both sugammadex and neostigmine during the same procedure, diagnosed with myasthenia gravis, receiving pyridostigmine therapy, or with renal failure (eGFR <30 mL.min.1.73m2). Results: We retrieved 23,373 patient records of which 9742 were excluded because one or more exclusion criteria were met. The final cohort consisted of 13,631 cases. Rocuronium was the most commonly used muscle relaxant (88.5%); sugammadex was the most commonly used reversal agent (99.9% of those pharmacologically reversed). Of all cases that received rocuronium as muscle relaxant, 76.9% of patients were not reversed, while 23.1% were reversed with sugammadex. The odds of reversal increased with age, BMI, ASA class (1-3) and shorter duration of surgery. Conclusion: In an unrestricted clinical environment, rocuronium and sugammadex are the preferred agents for muscle relaxation and reversal. Pharmacologic reversal of neuromuscular block was uncommon overall, but more likely in older and obese patients, higher ASA classification and shorter lasting procedures. Sugammadex has largely replaced neostigmine for this purpose.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Deep neuromuscular block is associated with improved working conditions during laparoscopic surgery when propofol is used as a general anaesthetic. However, whether deep neuromuscular block yields similar beneficial effects when anaesthesia is maintained using volatile inhalation anaesthesia has not been systematically investigated. Volatile anaesthetics, as opposed to intravenous agents, potentiate muscle relaxation, which potentially reduces the need for deep neuromuscular block to obtain optimal surgical conditions. We examined whether deep neuromuscular block improves surgical conditions over moderate neuromuscular block during sevoflurane anaesthesia. METHODS: In this single-centre, prospective, randomised, double-blind study, 98 patients scheduled for elective renal surgery were randomised to receive deep (post-tetanic count 1-2 twitches) or a moderate neuromuscular block (train-of-four 1-2 twitches). Anaesthesia was maintained with sevoflurane and titrated to bispectral index values between 40 and 50. Pneumoperitoneum pressure was maintained at 12 mm Hg. The primary outcome was the difference in surgical conditions, scored at 15 min intervals by one of eight blinded surgeons using a 5-point Leiden-Surgical Rating Scale (L-SRS) that scores the quality of the surgical field from extremely poor1 to optimal5. RESULTS: Deep neuromuscular block did not improve surgical conditions compared with moderate neuromuscular block: mean (standard deviation) L-SRS 4.8 (0.3) vs 4.8 (0.4), respectively (P=0.94). Secondary outcomes, including unplanned postoperative readmissions and prolonged hospital admission, were not significantly different. CONCLUSIONS: During sevoflurane anaesthesia, deep neuromuscular block did not improve surgical conditions over moderate neuromuscular block in normal-pressure laparoscopic renal surgery. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NL7844 (www.trialregister.nl).
