Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40380116›Full record

Trial reportBMC anesthesiology2025

Sugammadex or neostigmine for reversal of neuromuscular block on the quality of postoperative recovery in elderly adults undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy: a randomised controlled trial.

Yu Yang, Zeyang Wang, Xueqing He, Xiaoyun Shen, Wensen Jia, Xinfang Sheng, Xiangyu Yao, Hao Jiao

Abstract readRandomized Controlled TrialComparative Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC anesthesiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors.

Yu Yang *School of Anesthesiology, Xuzhou Medical University, 209 Tongshan Road, Xuzhou, 221004, Jiangsu, China.
Zeyang Wang *School of Anesthesiology, Xuzhou Medical University, 209 Tongshan Road, Xuzhou, 221004, Jiangsu, China.
Xueqing He *School of Anesthesiology, Xuzhou Medical University, 209 Tongshan Road, Xuzhou, 221004, Jiangsu, China.
Xiaoyun ShenSchool of Anesthesiology, Xuzhou Medical University, 209 Tongshan Road, Xuzhou, 221004, Jiangsu, China.
Wensen JiaSchool of Anesthesiology, Xuzhou Medical University, 209 Tongshan Road, Xuzhou, 221004, Jiangsu, China.
Xinfang ShengSchool of Anesthesiology, Xuzhou Medical University, 209 Tongshan Road, Xuzhou, 221004, Jiangsu, China.
Xiangyu YaoSchool of Anesthesiology, Xuzhou Medical University, 209 Tongshan Road, Xuzhou, 221004, Jiangsu, China.
Hao JiaoSchool of Anesthesiology, Xuzhou Medical University, 209 Tongshan Road, Xuzhou, 221004, Jiangsu, China. 13512560960@139.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough neostigmine has been traditionally used for neuromuscular blockade reversal in thoracic surgery, incomplete reversal and potential pulmonary complications remain concerns. However, we did not preclude its clinical use. In contrast, sugammadex offers more predictable recovery of neuromuscular function with a superior safety profile. This study aims to compare the efficacy of sugammadex versus neostigmine in improving postoperative recovery outcomes.

methodsThis study is a prospective, randomized, double-blind trial. Patients above 65 years old undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy were randomly assigned to receive either sugammadex (2 mg/kg) or neostigmine (0.04 mg/kg) with atropine for neuromuscular block reversal after T2 appearance on TOF. The primary outcome was the quality of recovery at postoperative day (POD) 1, assessed by the QoR-15 questionnaire. Secondary outcomes included extubation time, PACU stay, incidence of hypoxaemia, PRNB, and postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs).

resultsData analysis included 77 patients (39 in Group S and 38 in Group N). The QoR-15 scores were significantly higher in the sugammadex group at day 1 (125 vs. 122, P < 0.001). Sugammadex significantly reduced extubation time (18 vs. 27.5 min, P = 0.001) and PACU stay (52 vs. 62 min, P = 0.001). Hypoxaemia (28% vs. 53%, P = 0.029) and PRNB (5% vs. 24%, P = 0.020) were less frequent in the sugammadex group. The sugammadex group had fewer PPCs, the difference was not statistically significant (26% vs. 45%, P = 0.079).

conclusionsFor elderly patients receiving VATS lobectomy, sugammadex is beneficial for acute recovery except PONV up to POD1 recovery quality mainly in ease of breath, eating, resting but not in postoperative outcomes over one month.

trial registrationRetrospectively registered, Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR2400089863(Date:18/09/2024).

Indexed as

Anesthesia Recovery PeriodNeostigmineNeuromuscular BlockadeSugammadexThoracic Surgery, Video-AssistedAgedDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansMalePostoperative ComplicationsProspective StudiesNeostigmineSugammadexElderly adultsNeostigmineNeuromuscular blockPostoperative recoveryQoR-15 scoreSugammadexVideo-assisted thoracoscopic surgery

Identifiers

PMID40380116
PMCPMC12082888

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.