Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32213163›Full record

Trial reportBMC anesthesiology2020

SUGAMMADEX versus neostigmine after ROCURONIUM continuous infusion in patients undergoing liver transplantation.

Cristian Deana, Federico Barbariol, Stefano D'Incà, Livia Pompei, Giorgio Della Rocca

Abstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC anesthesiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Observational
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Impact of Liver Disease on Use of Muscle Relaxants in Anesthesia: A Comprehensive Review.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2025
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
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

5 authors.

Cristian DeanaAnesthesia and Intensive Care 1, Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Academic Hospital "S. Maria della Misericordia", Piazzale S. M. della Misericordia, 15, 33100, Udine, Italy. deana.cristian@gmail.com.
Federico BarbariolAnesthesia and Intensive Care 1, Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Academic Hospital "S. Maria della Misericordia", Piazzale S. M. della Misericordia, 15, 33100, Udine, Italy.
Stefano D'IncàAnesthesia and Intensive Care, Department of Emergency, Azienda per l' Assistenza Sanitaria n° 3 Alto Friuli-Collinare-Medio Friuli, Tolmezzo, Italy.
Livia PompeiAnesthesia and Intensive Care Clinic, Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Academic Hospital "S. Maria della Misericordia", Udine, Italy.
Giorgio Della RoccaFull Professor of Anaesthesiology of the Department of Medical Area, University of Udine, Udine, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRapid neuromuscular block reversal at the end of major abdominal surgery is recommended to avoid any postoperative residual block. To date, no study has evaluated sugammadex performance after rocuronium administration in patients undergoing liver transplantation. This is a randomized controlled trial with the primary objective of assessing the neuromuscular transmission recovery time obtained with sugammadex versus neostigmine after rocuronium induced neuromuscular blockade in patients undergoing orthotopic liver transplantation.

methodsThe TOF-Watch SX®, calibrated and linked to a portable computer equipped with TOF-Watch SX Monitor Software®, was used to monitor and record intraoperative neuromuscular block maintained with a continuous infusion of rocuronium. Anaesthetic management was standardized as per our institution's internal protocol. At the end of surgery, neuromuscular moderate block reversal was obtained by administration of 2 mg/kg of sugammadex or 50 mcg/kg of neostigmine (plus 10 mcg/kg of atropine).

resultsData from 41 patients undergoing liver transplantation were analysed. In this population, recovery from neuromuscular block was faster following sugammadex administration than neostigmine administration, with mean times±SD of 9.4 ± 4.6 min and 34.6 ± 24.9 min, respectively (p < 0.0001).

conclusionSugammadex is able to reverse neuromuscular block maintained by rocuronium continuous infusion in patients undergoing liver transplantation. The mean reversal time obtained with sugammadex was significantly faster than that for neostigmine. It is important to note that the sugammadex recovery time in this population was found to be considerably longer than in other surgical settings, and should be considered in clinical practice.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.govNCT02697929 (registered 3rd March 2016).

Indexed as

Liver TransplantationAnesthesia Recovery PeriodCholinesterase InhibitorsFemaleHumansInfusions, IntravenousMaleMiddle AgedNeostigmineNeuromuscular Nondepolarizing AgentsRocuroniumSugammadexCholinesterase InhibitorsNeostigmineNeuromuscular Nondepolarizing AgentsRocuroniumSugammadexLiver transplantationNeostigmineRecovery timeReversalRocuronium

Identifiers

PMID32213163
PMCPMC7093942

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.