Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30400850›Full record

ReviewBMC anesthesiology2018

Is lower-dose sugammadex a cost-saving strategy for reversal of deep neuromuscular block? Facts and fiction.

Hans D de Boer, Ricardo V Carlos, Sorin J Brull

Registry-linked trialAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMC anesthesiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04762420 (Sugammadex Dosing), which is not on this map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT04762420 completednot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

Sugammadex Dosing: Anaesthesiologist Clinical Perception Versus Quantitative Monitoring

TypeobservationalSponsorHospital do Divino Espírito Santo de Ponta DelgadaRan2019 to 2019Enrolled66ConditionsNeuromuscular Blockade, Anesthesia, TOF, Curarization, Postoperative ResidualArmsDose of sugammadex according to SSD and QSD
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Observational
  11. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Hans D de BoerDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Martini General Hospital Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands. hd.de.boer@mzh.nl.ORCID 0000-0002-0490-2074
Ricardo V CarlosDepartment of Anesthesiology, Child Institute, Hospital das Clinicas, Sao Paulo University Medical School, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
Sorin J BrullDepartment of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Jacksonville, Florida, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSugammadex, a γ-cyclodextrin derivative, belongs to a new class of selective relaxant binding agents. Sugammadex was approved 10-years ago by the European medicines agency and today is used in clinical anesthesia and emergency medicine globally. In this review, indications for neuromuscular block, the challenge of neuromuscular monitoring and the practice of under-dosing of sugammadex as a potential cost-saving strategy are discussed. MAIN BODY: Reversal of neuromuscular block is important to accelerate the spontaneous recovery of neuromuscular function. Sugammadex is able to reverse a rocuronium- or vecuronium-induced neuromuscular block rapidly and efficiently from every depth of neuromuscular block. However, since sugammadex was introduced in clinical anesthesia, several studies have reported administration of a lower-than-recommended dose of sugammadex. The decision to under-dose sugammadex is often motivated by cost reduction concerns, as the price of sugammadex is much higher than that of neostigmine outside the United States. However, under-dosing of sugammadex leads to an increased risk of recurrence of neuromuscular block after an initial successful (but transient) reversal. Similarly, when not using objective neuromuscular monitoring, under-dosing of sugammadex may result in residual neuromuscular block in the postoperative care unit, with its attendant negative pulmonary outcomes. Therefore, an appropriate dose of sugammadex, based on objective determination of the depth of neuromuscular block, should be administered to avoid residual or recurrent neuromuscular block and attendant postoperative complications. Whether the reduction in perioperative recovery time of the patient can be translated into additional procedural cases performed, faster operative turnover times, or improved organizational resource utilization, has yet to be determined in actual clinical practice that includes verification of neuromuscular recovery prior to tracheal extubation.

conclusionsThe current review addresses the indications for neuromuscular block, the challenge of neuromuscular monitoring, the practice of under-dosing of sugammadex as a potential cost-saving strategy in reversal of deep neuromuscular block, the economics of sugammadex administration and the potential healthcare cost-saving strategies.

Indexed as

Cost SavingsDose-Response Relationship, DrugHumansNeostigmineNeuromuscular BlockadeNeuromuscular MonitoringNeuromuscular Nondepolarizing AgentsRocuroniumSugammadexVecuronium BromideNeostigmineNeuromuscular Nondepolarizing AgentsRocuroniumSugammadexVecuronium BromideNeuromuscular monitoringResidual and recurring neuromuscular blockReversal drug under-dosingReversal of neuromuscular blockSugammadex

Identifiers

PMID30400850
PMCPMC6220468

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.