Should Neuromuscular Blockade Be Routinely Reversed?
- 49 Downloads
Purpose of review
The purpose of this article is to present the consequences and incidence of residual paralysis and define solutions to reduce the risk of its occurrence.
Small degrees of residual paralysis, defined as a train-of-four (TOF) ratio < 0.9, may increase the risk of postoperative respiratory complications and influence outcomes following surgery. Routine monitoring of neuromuscular block can allow the detection of incomplete neuromuscular recovery and is an important factor in the prevention of residual paralysis. Administration of neostigmine or sugammadex to reverse residual paralysis should be based on the degree of spontaneous recovery. Sugammadex acts much faster than neostigmine and can even reverse deep levels of neuromuscular blockade.
Meticulous management of neuromuscular blockade, including routine reversal of the effects of muscle relaxants, is essential in avoiding residual block and associated complications.
KeywordsResidual paralysis Neuromuscular blocking agents Neuromuscular monitoring Postoperative respiratory complications Anticholinesterase agents Neostigmine Sugammadex
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
Julien Raft declares that he has no conflict of interest.
Claude Meistelman has received financial support through a grant as well as compensation from MSD for service as a consultant.
Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent
This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.
Paper of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance
- 2.Berg H, Viby-Mogensen J, Roed J, Mortensen CR, Engbaek J, Skovgaard LT, et al. Residual neuromuscular block is a risk factor for postoperative pulmonary complications. A prospective, randomised, and blinded study of postoperative pulmonary complications after atracurium, vecuronium and pancuronium. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 1997;41:1095–103.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 3.Sundman E, Witt H, Sandin R, Kuylenstierna R, Boden K, Ekberg O, et al. Pharyngeal function and airway protection during subhypnotic concentrations of propofol, isoflurane, and sevoflurane: volunteers examined by pharyngeal videoradiography and simultaneous manometry. Anesthesiology. 2001;95:1125–32.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 4.• Murphy GS, Szokol JW, Marymont JH, Greenberg SB, Avram MJ, Vender JS. Residual neuromuscular blockade and critical respiratory events in the postanesthesia care unit. Anesth Analg. 2008;107:130–7. This study demonstrates the relationship between residual paralysis and the occurrence of critical respiratory events in the PACU. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 12.Grosse-Sundrup M, Henneman JP, Sandberg WS, Bateman BT, Uribe JV, Nguyen NT, et al. Intermediate acting non-depolarizing neuromuscular blocking agents and risk of postoperative respiratory complications: prospective propensity score matched cohort study. BMJ. 2012;345:e6329.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 13.•• Bulka CM, Terekhov MA, Martin BJ, Dmochowski RR, Hayes RM, Ehrenfeld JM. Nondepolarizing neuromuscular blocking agents, reversal, and risk of postoperative pneumonia. Anesthesiology. 2016;125:647–55. A study using a large number of patients and a demonstration of the risks of failure to reverse NMBA. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 15.• Naguib M, Brull SJ, Kopman AF, Hunter JM, Fulesdi B, Arkes HR, et al. Consensus statement on perioperative use of neuromuscular monitoring. Anesth Analg. 2017 (in press). This article highlights the need for practice guidelines for the routine monitoring of neuromuscular blockade and detection fo residual paralysis. Google Scholar
- 19.•• Todd MM, Hindman BJ, King BJ. The implementation of quantitative electromyographic neuromuscular monitoring in an academic anesthesia department. Anesth Analg. 2014;119:323–31. This study investigates the effects of a sustained process of education to implement objective neuromuscular monitoring in an academic department. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 22.• Sasaki N, Meyer MJ, Malviya SA, Stanislaus AB, MacDonald T, Doran ME, et al. Effects of neostigmine reversal of nondepolarizing neuromuscular blocking agents on postoperative respiratory outcomes: a prospective study. Anesthesiology. 2014;121:959–68. This study demonstrates the consequences of unproper use of neostigmine without the help of a nerve stimulator. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 27.Herbstreit F, Zigrahn D, Ochterbeck C, Peters J, Eikermann M. Neostigmine/glycopyrrolate administered after recovery from neuromuscular block increases upper airway collapsibility by decreasing genioglossus muscle activity in response to negative pharyngeal pressure. Anesthesiology. 2010;113:1280–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 30.Murphy GS, Szokol JW, Avram MJ, Greenberg SB, Shear TD, Deshur MA, et al. Neostigmine administration after spontaneous recovery to a train-of-four ratio of 0.9 to 1.0: a randomized controlled trial of the effect on neuromuscular and clinical recovery. Anesthesiology. 2018;128:27–37.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 34.• Devine S, Babrowicz J, Hahn R, Vorrasi J, Farid A, Yong J. Intra-operative communication regarding neuromuscular blockade: a survey of anesthesiologists and surgeons. J Anesth Clin Res. 2015;6: doi https://doi.org/10.4172/2155-6148. This study highlights the discrepancies between surgeons and anesthesiologists regarding neuromuscular blockade management.