Observational studyMedicine2017
Use of neuromuscular blockers and neostigmine for general anesthesia and its association with neuraxial blockade: A retrospective study.
Observational study in Medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This research aimed to assess the use of neuromuscular blockers (NMB) and its reversal, associated or not with neuraxial blockade, after general anesthesia.This retrospective study analyzed 1295 patients that underwent surgery with general anesthesia at Prof. Dr. José Aristodemo Pinotti Hospital in 2013. The study included patients aged >1 year, with complete, readable medical charts and anesthetic records.Rocuronium (ROC) was the most used NMB (96.7%), with an initial dose of 0.60 (0.52-0.74) mg/kg and total dose of 0.38 (0.27-0.53) mg/kg/h. In 24.3% of the cases, neuraxial blockade was associated with a significantly longer anesthesia (P < .001) than in cases without neuraxial block, regardless of technique (total intravenous (TIV) vs intravenous and inhalational (IV+IN)). In 71.9% of the cases, a single dose of NMB was used. Patients under TIV general anesthesia associated with neuraxial blockade had a lower total dose of ROC (mg/kg/h) in comparison with TIV GA alone (0.30 (0.23-0.39) and 0.42 (0.30-0.56) mg/kg/h, respectively, P < .001). The same was observed for patients under IV+IN GA (0.32 (0.23-0.41) and 0.43 (0.31-0.56) mg/kg/h, respectively, P < .001). The duration of anesthesia was longer according to increasing number of additional NMB doses (P < .001). Dose of neostigmine was 2.00 (2.00-2.00) mg or 29.41 (25.31-33.89) μg/kg. The interval between neostigmine and extubation was >30 minutes in 10.9% of cases.The most widely used NMB was ROC. Neuroaxial blockade (spinal or epidural) was significantly associated with reduced total dose of ROC (mg/kg/h) during general anesthesia, even in the absence of neuromuscular monitoring and regardless of general anesthetic technique chosen. In most cases, neostigmine was used to reverse neuromuscular block. The prolonged interval between neostigmine and extubation (>30 minutes) was neither associated with total doses of ROC or neostigmine, nor with the time of NMB administration. This study corroborates the important role of quantitative neuromuscular monitors and demonstrates that neuraxial blockade is associated with reduced total ROC dose. Further studies are needed to evaluate the possible role of neuraxial blockade in reducing the incidence of postoperative residual curarization.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.