Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40754949›Full record

SynthesisBiomolecules & biomedicine2025

Sugammadex vs neostigmine in post-anesthesia recovery: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Ni Zhu, Yongli Li

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-AnalysisComparative Study
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Biomolecules & biomedicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

2 authors.

Ni ZhuDepartment of Anesthesiology, Hospital of Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Sichuan, China.
Yongli LiDepartment of Anesthesiology, Hospital of Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Sichuan, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Residual neuromuscular blockade (RNB) is linked to an increased risk of perioperative adverse events. This study systematically evaluates the impact of neuromuscular blockade antagonists on postoperative complications and quality of recovery in surgical patients. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the efficacy of sugammadex and neostigmine. Comprehensive searches were performed across medical databases, including Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library, with a final search date of April 6, 2025. A total of thirty-five randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 4,275 patients, along with two retrospective studies comprising 49,642 participants, met the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis revealed that sugammadex facilitated faster reversal of RNB compared to neostigmine, as indicated by a quicker recovery to a train-of-four ratio (TOFR) ≥ 0.9 (standardized mean difference [SMD] -3.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], -4.42 to -2.48), a shorter extubation time (SMD -1.44; 95% CI, -2.02 to -0.85), and a decreased incidence of RNB (risk ratio [RR] 0.18; 95% CI, 0.07 to 0.47). Moreover, sugammadex significantly reduced postoperative complications compared to neostigmine, including the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) (RR 0.64; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.88), postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) (RR 0.62; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.99), and bradycardia (RR 0.32; 95% CI, 0.20 to 0.50). In conclusion, sugammadex provides a faster reversal of neuromuscular blockade compared to neostigmine and is associated with a reduction in postoperative complications. However, this expedited reversal does not result in measurable improvements in overall recovery quality, nor do either sugammadex or neostigmine significantly affect postoperative cognitive function.

Indexed as

Anesthesia Recovery PeriodNeostigmineSugammadexHumansNeuromuscular BlockadePostoperative ComplicationsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicNeostigmineSugammadex

Identifiers

PMID40754949
PMCPMC12505526

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.