ArticleAnesthesiology research and practice2026
Postextubation Respiratory Muscle Recovery After Sugammadex or Neostigmine: A Randomized Controlled Ultrasonographic Trial in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy.
Article in Anesthesiology research and practice, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Sugammadex minimizes the residual neuromuscular block risk. By enhancing the function of expiratory muscles, it improves the clearance of secretions and helps prevent lung collapse, leading to a reduction in early postoperative respiratory issues. The study aims to compare the efficacy of sugammadex in promoting the recovery of expiratory muscle power to that of neostigmine following extubation. Study Objectives: The main objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of sugammadex and neostigmine as a reversal of neuromuscular block, assessed through ultrasonographic evaluation of expiratory muscle strength, specifically the thickening fraction of the internal oblique muscle (TFIO). The secondary objective was to assess diaphragmatic excursion (DE) and to explore the usefulness of ultrasonography in comparison to train-of-four (TOF) monitoring. Patients and Methods: The study involved a total of 60 patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy between August 2023 and September 2024. Patients were randomly assessed into two groups for a comparative study. Group A received sugammadex, while Group B received neostigmine. The study utilized ultrasonography to measure the TFIO, reflecting expiratory muscle power, and DE, representing inspiratory muscle strength. Measurements were taken at three points in time: preinduction (baseline), at the TOF ratio recovery (TOFR) to 0.9, and 30 minutes postarrival in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU). The primary outcome was the variation in TFIO from baseline to a TOFR of ≥ 0.9. Secondary outcomes included the postoperative variation in DE from baseline, the incidence of recovery to baseline TFIO and DE, and the time taken for TOFR recovery to 0.95 and 1. Results: A significant difference in the primary outcome was observed among 60 patients. The alteration in TFIO from baseline to TOFR ≥ 0.9 was markedly reduced with sugammadex relative to neostigmine (mean ± SD: 9.13 ± 6.25 vs. 19.32 ± 5.75; adjusted Conclusion: Sugammadex results in better expiratory muscle power recovery compared to neostigmine at TOFR of ≥ 0.9. These findings highlight that respiratory muscle function may remain compromised, although a TOFR of 1.0 is achieved.
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.