ArticleIndian journal of anaesthesia2019
Optimised reversal without train-of-four monitoring versus reversal using quantitative train-of-four monitoring: An equivalence study.
Article in Indian journal of anaesthesia, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06210165 (Effects of Sugammadex and Conventional Reversal on Lung Function in Laparoscopic Abdominal Surgery), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
Effects of Sugammadex and Conventional Reversal on Lung Function in Laparoscopic Abdominal Surgery
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dynamometer based hand grip strength as a clinical tool for objective assessment of post-operative residual muscle weakness.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2022Article
- Hypoglossal nerve injury - another rare cause for a common problem.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2022Article
- Evaluation of intubating conditions with rocuronium 0.6 mg/kg using train of four stimulation in elective surgery.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsLess residual paralysis in recovery room was demonstrated when train-of-four (TOF) monitoring was applied. The aim of this study was to know whether optimisation of neostigmine reversal without TOF monitoring was equivalent to reversal using TOF monitoring.
methodsSeventy two patients, aged 18-60 years, undergoing elective surgery under general anaesthesia (sevoflurane and rocuronium) with intubation were randomised into two interventions: an optimised neostigmine reversal strategy without TOF monitoring (group A,
resultsSix residual paralyses occurred in group A in the recovery room, whereas one case occurred in group B. The equivalence test showed that the 95% confidence interval of this study was outside the range of equivalence margin (15%). The absolute difference was 13.9%: standard error (SE) =0.068 (
conclusionAn optimised reversal strategy without TOF monitoring is not equivalent to a reversal strategy based on quantitative TOF monitoring. TOF monitoring should be used whenever applicable, although neostigmine is optimised.
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.