Article Notes
Early reversal of rocuronium when suxamethonium is contraindicated. For example in ECT for patients with a pseudocholinesterase deficiency or neuromuscular denervation conditions.
Reversal of rocuronium when even very mild residual neuromuscular block carries significant patient risk. For example, patients with neuromuscular disorders such as myotonic dystrophy or myasthenia gravis; and patients with severe pulmonary disease with limited reserve.
Unplanned early reversal of rocuronium during a failed intubation where rapid reversal may allow awakening of the patient.
Rescue from residual paralysis despite having given neostigmine.
- 2 mg/kg - for reversal of rocuronium neuromuscular blockade at TOF-T2 reappearance.
- 4 mg/kg - for reversal at post-tetanic count of 1 to 2.
- 16 mg/kg - for reversal 3 to 5 minutes after a rocuronium intubating dose.
This retrospective propensity-matched cohort study, used 5 years of data to study 2,644 matched pairs-of-patients with a preoperative diagnosis of severe COPD.
Important exclusions were patients already ventilated, already with pulmonary infections, along with cardiac, emergency & transplant surgery, and those receiving repeat surgery within 30 days.
Receiving general anesthesia was associated with a 43% higher risk of respiratory infection (3.3% vs 2.3%, P = 0.0384), 133% greater risk of prolonged ventilation (2.1% vs 0.9%, P = 0.0008) and 44% greater risk of unplanned post-op intubation (2.6% vs 1.8%, P = 0.0487), when compared with regional anesthesia.
Nonetheless there was no significant mortality difference at 30 days (3.0% vs 2.7%, P = 0.6788).
The mix of regional techniques was 341 epidural, 1713 spinal, and 590 peripheral blocks. Notably, sub-group analysis of epidural-patients showed no difference in pulmonary complications or composite morbidity between epidural and general anesthesia. (Though given relatively small number of epidural patients, this might reflect a lack of power).
This retrospective audit identified an association between the introduction of unrestricted access to sugammadex and a fall in 'anaesthetic theatre time'. Mean hospital stay was also observed to be 0.8 days shorter after introduction of sugammadex, but was not statistically significant after adjusting for confounders.
Ledowski et al. investigated the effect of unrestricted access to sugammadex in an Australian teaching hospital with a retrospective observational audit.
Use of both sugammadex and amino steroid relaxants increased dramatically, with average reversal costs per case increasing by AUS$85.
Although there was no change in anaesthesia, surgical or PACU time, there was a statistically significant decrease in median time from surgery to hospital discharge (0.2 days shorter) after introduction of sugammadex. Do to the nature of the study, it is nevertheless impossible to infer a causal link.
An early review and economic study of the cost effectiveness of sugammadex, concluding that it may be cost effective to routinely reverse with sugammadex if there are significant time savings in the operating theatre, but not if the time savings occur instead in the PACU.
The study assumed NHS costs of operating room time of £266/h (US$412/h) and PACU time of £20/h (US$31/h).
Neville Gibbs and Peter Kam outline three evidence-based indications for use of sugammadex in 2012, even with its high cost:
Abrishami et al.'s Cochrane review of 18 RCTs totalling 1,300 patients confirmed the superiority of sugammadex compared with neostigmine at all studied levels of blockade. They identified sugammadex dosing of:
Importantly there was similar frequency of adverse events compared to neostigmine (< 1%), although overall small sample sizes mean no conclusion can be made regarding rare serious adverse events.