Skip to main content
Log in

Recovery from prolonged deep rocuronium-induced neuromuscular blockade

A randomized comparison of sugammadex reversal with spontaneous recovery

Erholung von einer verlängerten, Rocurionium-induzierten, tiefen neuromuskulären Blockade

Ein randomisierter Vergleich der Reversion durch Sugammadex mit spontaner Erholung

  • Originalien
  • Published:
Der Anaesthesist Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Deep neuromuscular blockade (NMB) may not always be maintained to the end of surgery and the depth of block may be allowed to gradually diminish over time, particularly if reversal of NMB is not routinely performed.

Aim

The current study aimed to assess recovery from deep rocuronium-induced NMB with sugammadex compared with placebo, provide data regarding the extent of residual blockade after deep rocuronium-induced NMB (placebo group), and to determine whether complete and reliable recovery could be provided by sugammadex (sugammadex group).

Materials and methods

This was a randomized, placebo-controlled, safety-assessor-blinded study in adult patients of American Society of Anesthesiologists Class I to III. Patients with clinically relevant kidney or liver insufficiency were excluded. Anesthesia was administered as routinely practiced at each study site. Rocuronium 0.6 mg/kg was administered for intubation, with maintenance doses of 0.1–0.2 mg/kg as needed. After the last rocuronium dose, at deep NMB (target depth 1–2 post-tetanic counts), patients received a single dose of sugammadex 4.0 mg/kg or placebo as randomized. The primary endpoint was time from sugammadex or placebo administration to recovery of the train-of-four (TOF) ratio to 0.9. Safety was assessed through monitoring of adverse events, vital signs and physical examination. Patients were also assessed for evidence of residual or recurrence of NMB. With this design, the study will provide data regarding the extent of residual blockade under these conditions (placebo group), and determine whether complete and reliable recovery could be provided by sugammadex (sugammadex group).

Results

Recovery to a TOF ratio of ≥ 0.9 with sugammadex was significantly faster (~ 40 times) than spontaneous recovery: geometric mean (95 % confidence interval) times were 2.2 (1.9–2.5) and 89.8 (80.1–100.7) min, respectively (p < 0.0001, N = 134); maximum spontaneous recovery was 289.8 min. Safety was comparable between groups, with no recurrence of blockade.

Conclusions

This study confirms a prolonged residual blockade in patients who did not receive sugammadex, with median time to recovery > 1.5 h in the placebo group and one patient taking 4.8 h to achieve a safe level of neuromuscular function recovery following deep NMB. In contrast, sugammadex provided complete and reliable recovery of neuromuscular function (median time to recovery of 2.0 min). Thus, deep NMB with rocuronium until the end of the operation may be possible in combination with sugammadex reversal.

Zusammenfassung

Ziel der Arbeit

In der vorgestellten multizentrischen Studie sollte die Wirksamkeit und Sicherheit von Sugammadex für die Umkehrung von Rocuronium-induzierter, tiefer, neuromuskulärer Blockade untersucht werden und gleichzeitig die Frage geklärt werden, wie lange ohne Sugammadexgabe eine klinisch relevante Menge Rocuronium wirkt.

Materialien und Methoden

In dieser randomisierten und Sicherheits-Assessor-verblindeten Studie wurden Operationen unter tiefer Relaxation unter repetitiver Gabe von Rocuronium (Standard-intubationsdosis: 0,6 mg/kg; Erhaltungsdosis: 0,1–0,2 mg/kg) bis zur Naht durchgeführt. Am Operationsende erhielten Patienten entweder Sugammadex 4,0 mg/kg (n = 70) oder Plazebo (n = 70).

Ergebnisse

Die Muskelerholung zu einem Train-of-four von ≥ 0.9 war in der Sugammadexgruppe etwa 40-mal schneller als in der Plazebogrupe (2,2 min im geometrischen Mittel gegenüber 89,8 min; p < 0,0001; n = 134). Die spontane Erholung in der Plazebogruppe hatte zudem eine größere Streuung (80,1–100,7 min; Sugammadexgruppe: 1,9–2,5 min). Bei einem Patienten in der Plazebogruppe dauerte es sogar 4,8 h bis die Muskelfunktion wieder hergestellt war. Die Sicherheitsparameter waren in beiden Gruppen vergleichbar ohne Wiederauftreten von Blockaden.

Diskussion

Ohne Gabe von Sugammadex zeigte sich, dass noch über lange Zeit klinisch signifikante Restmengen Rocuronium vorhanden waren und die Erholungszeit wegen interindividueller Variabilität schwierig zu prognostizieren war. Im Gegensatz dazu bot eine Einmalgabe von Sugammadex 4,0 mg/kg eine schnelle, berechenbare und zuverlässige Erholung.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Baillard C, Gehan G, Reboul-Marty J et al (2000) Residual curarization in the recovery room after vecuronium. Br J Anaesth 84:394–395

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Berg H, Roed J, Viby-Mogensen J et al (1997) 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 41:1095–1103

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Murphy GS, Szokol JW, Marymont JH et al (2008) Residual neuromuscular blockade and critical respiratory events in the postanesthesia care unit. Anesth Analg 107:130–137

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Jones RK, Caldwell JE, Brull SJ, Soto RG (2008) Reversal of profound rocuronium-induced blockade with sugammadex: a randomized comparison with neostigmine. Anesthesiology 109:816–824

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Plaud B, Debaene B, Donati F, Marty J (2010) Residual paralysis after emergence from anesthesia. Anesthesiology 112:1013–1022

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Grayling M, Sweeney BP (2007) Recovery from neuromuscular blockade: a survey of practice. Anaesthesia 62:806–809

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Blobner M, Eriksson LI, Scholz J et al (2010) Reversal of rocuronium-induced neuromuscular blockade with sugammadex compared with neostigmine during sevoflurane anaesthesia: results of a randomised, controlled trial. Eur J Anaesthesiol 27:874–881

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Lemmens HJ, El-Orbany MI, Berry J et al (2010) Reversal of profound vecuronium-induced neuromuscular block under sevoflurane anesthesia: sugammadex versus neostigmine. BMC Anesthesiol 10:15

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Khuenl-Brady KS, Wattwil M, Vanacker BF et al (2010) Sugammadex provides faster reversal of vecuronium-induced neuromuscular blockade compared with neostigmine: a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial. Anesth Analg 110:64–73

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Fuchs-Buder T, Claudius C, Skovgaard LT et al (2007) Good clinical research practice in pharmacodynamic studies of neuromuscular blocking agents II: the Stockholm revision. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 51:789–808

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Aldrete JA (1995) The post-anesthesia recovery score revisited. J Clin Anesth 7:89–91

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Bhananker SM, Posner KL, Cheney FW et al (2006) Injury and liability associated with monitored anesthesia care: a closed claims analysis. Anesthesiology 104:228–234

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Geldner G, Niskanen M, Laurila P et al (2012) A randomised controlled trial comparing sugammadex and neostigmine at different depths of neuromuscular blockade in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery. Anaesthesia 67:991–998

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Duvaldestin P, Kuizenga K, Saldien V et al (2010) A randomized, dose-response study of sugammadex given for the reversal of deep rocuronium- or vecuronium-induced neuromuscular blockade under sevoflurane anesthesia. Anesth Analg 110:74–82

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Maybauer DM, Geldner G, Blobner M et al (2007) Incidence and duration of residual paralysis at the end of surgery after multiple administrations of cisatracurium and rocuronium. Anaesthesia 62:12–17

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Naguib M, Kopman AF, Lien CA et al (2010) A survey of current management of neuromuscular block in the United States and Europe. Anesth Analg 111:110–119

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Ledowski T, Falke L, Johnston F et al (2014) Retrospective investigation of postoperative outcome after reversal of residual neuromuscular blockade: sugammadex, neostigmine or no reversal. Eur J Anaesthesiol 31:423–429

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The overall design and conduct of the study, as well as final analysis of the study data and opinions, conclusions and interpretation of the data, are the responsibility of the authors.

The authors would like to thank all investigators and clinical staff involved in the conduct of this study. In addition, Professor Sorin J Brull, M.D., F.C.A.R.C.S.I. (Hon), Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida, is thanked for his help in revising the manuscript. Medical writing assistance was provided by Caroline Shapland and Neil Venn, of Prime Medica Ltd (Knutsford, UK); this assistance was also funded by Merck Sharp and Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Whitehouse Station, NJ. The study sponsor was allowed to review the manuscript before submission, but final decisions on content remained the responsibility of the authors and all authors approved the final text of the manuscript before submission.

Funding

The study sponsor, Merck Sharp and Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Whitehouse Station, NJ, was involved in both the study design and analysis of the data.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to N. Rahe-Meyer.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Niels Rahe-Meyer received research support and speaker’s honoraria from Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp and CSL-Behring. Esther A. M. Abels is a former employee of MSD, Oss, the Netherlands. Henk Rietbergen is a former employee of MSD, Oss, the Netherlands. Christian Berger, Maria Wittmann, Cristina Solomon and Daniel A. Reuter have nothing to declare.

The study was conducted in accordance with principles of Good Clinical Practice and was approved by the appropriate institutional review boards and regulatory agencies. All patients provided written informed consent before enrollment.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rahe-Meyer, N., Berger, C., Wittmann, M. et al. Recovery from prolonged deep rocuronium-induced neuromuscular blockade. Anaesthesist 64, 506–512 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00101-015-0048-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00101-015-0048-0

Keywords

Schlüsselwörter

Navigation