Deep neuromuscular blocking and sugammadex reversing-drug is an efficient strategy permitting successful laparoscopic surgery under low insufflation pressure: Prospective multicenter study

IF 0.6 Q3 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Hany A. Shehab, Ibrahim E.M. Mostafa, Samar A. Salman
{"title":"Deep neuromuscular blocking and sugammadex reversing-drug is an efficient strategy permitting successful laparoscopic surgery under low insufflation pressure: Prospective multicenter study","authors":"Hany A. Shehab, Ibrahim E.M. Mostafa, Samar A. Salman","doi":"10.1080/11101849.2023.2285132","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Objectives To compare using deep neuromuscular blockade during low abdominal insufflation pressure (DNMB/LAIP; n = 67) to conventional blockade and pressure (CNMB/CAIP; n = 68) for laparoscopic cholecystectomy and to evaluate the speed and efficacy of NMB recovery using sugammadex (SGX) as assessed by the Postoperative Quality Recovery Scale. Patients & Methods Rocuronium initiation and maintenance doses were 0.6 and 0.15 mg/Kg, respectively, and neostigmine or SGX was used as reverse agent for CNMB and DNMB, respectively. Abdominal insufflation was terminated at 15 and 8-mmHg, for CAIP and LAIP, respectively. The study outcome is the surgical feasibility under DNMB/LAIP, as judged by the frequency of shift-to-CAIP, surgical field visibility and operative time. Results The frequency of shift-to-CAIP was 2.9% due to surgeons’ inconvenience of LAIP. DNMB allowed significant control of intraoperative (IO) hemodynamic response to surgical manipulations. SGX allowed 3.2 times faster NMB-reversal with significantly higher percentages of patients returned to baseline physiologic statuses. The percentage of patients free of pain and nausea was significantly higher after DNMB/LAIP. At hospital discharge and day-7 PO, 86.6% and 98.5% of patients regained normalcy of their overall perspectives after DNMB/LAIP with a significant difference than after CNMB/CIAP. At 2-week PO, the frequency of shoulder-tip pain (STP) was significantly lower and surgeons’ satisfaction rate was significantly with DNMB/LAIP. Conclusion Laparoscopic cholecystectomy under DNMB/LAIP procedure is feasible and safe with lower incidence and severity of STP and high surgeons’ satisfaction. Sugammadex hastened the recovery of DNMB 3.2 times that of neostigmine-induced recovery of CNMB. Registration NO: RC.3.9.2023","PeriodicalId":11437,"journal":{"name":"Egyptian Journal of Anaesthesia","volume":"18 1","pages":"883 - 893"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Egyptian Journal of Anaesthesia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/11101849.2023.2285132","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT Objectives To compare using deep neuromuscular blockade during low abdominal insufflation pressure (DNMB/LAIP; n = 67) to conventional blockade and pressure (CNMB/CAIP; n = 68) for laparoscopic cholecystectomy and to evaluate the speed and efficacy of NMB recovery using sugammadex (SGX) as assessed by the Postoperative Quality Recovery Scale. Patients & Methods Rocuronium initiation and maintenance doses were 0.6 and 0.15 mg/Kg, respectively, and neostigmine or SGX was used as reverse agent for CNMB and DNMB, respectively. Abdominal insufflation was terminated at 15 and 8-mmHg, for CAIP and LAIP, respectively. The study outcome is the surgical feasibility under DNMB/LAIP, as judged by the frequency of shift-to-CAIP, surgical field visibility and operative time. Results The frequency of shift-to-CAIP was 2.9% due to surgeons’ inconvenience of LAIP. DNMB allowed significant control of intraoperative (IO) hemodynamic response to surgical manipulations. SGX allowed 3.2 times faster NMB-reversal with significantly higher percentages of patients returned to baseline physiologic statuses. The percentage of patients free of pain and nausea was significantly higher after DNMB/LAIP. At hospital discharge and day-7 PO, 86.6% and 98.5% of patients regained normalcy of their overall perspectives after DNMB/LAIP with a significant difference than after CNMB/CIAP. At 2-week PO, the frequency of shoulder-tip pain (STP) was significantly lower and surgeons’ satisfaction rate was significantly with DNMB/LAIP. Conclusion Laparoscopic cholecystectomy under DNMB/LAIP procedure is feasible and safe with lower incidence and severity of STP and high surgeons’ satisfaction. Sugammadex hastened the recovery of DNMB 3.2 times that of neostigmine-induced recovery of CNMB. Registration NO: RC.3.9.2023
深部神经肌肉阻断和苏加麦克斯逆转药物是在低充气压力下成功进行腹腔镜手术的有效策略:前瞻性多中心研究
摘要 目的 比较腹腔镜胆囊切除术中在低腹腔充气压力下使用深部神经肌肉阻滞(DNMB/LAIP;n = 67)与传统阻滞和压力(CNMB/CAIP;n = 68)的效果,并通过术后质量恢复量表评估使用苏加麦克斯(SGX)的 NMB 恢复速度和效果。患者和方法 罗库溴铵的起始和维持剂量分别为 0.6 和 0.15 毫克/千克,新斯的明或 SGX 分别用作 CNMB 和 DNMB 的反向药剂。CAIP 和 LAIP 分别在 15 和 8 mmHg 时终止腹腔充气。研究结果是 DNMB/LAIP 下的手术可行性,根据转为 CAIP 的频率、手术视野能见度和手术时间来判断。结果 由于外科医生对 LAIP 的不便,转为 CAIP 的频率为 2.9%。DNMB 可显著控制术中 (IO) 血流动力学对手术操作的反应。SGX 的 NMB 逆转速度比 DNMB 快 3.2 倍,患者恢复到基线生理状态的比例明显更高。使用 DNMB/LAIP 后,无疼痛和恶心感的患者比例明显提高。在出院和第 7 天的观察期,86.6% 和 98.5% 的患者在 DNMB/LAIP 后总体视力恢复正常,与 CNMB/CIAP 后相比差异显著。在术后两周,肩尖疼痛(STP)发生率明显降低,外科医生对 DNMB/LAIP 的满意度明显提高。结论 DNMB/LAIP 术式下的腹腔镜胆囊切除术可行且安全,STP 的发生率和严重程度较低,外科医生的满意度较高。舒降之可加快DNMB的恢复速度,是新斯的明诱导CNMB恢复速度的3.2倍。注册编号:RC.3.9.2023
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Egyptian Journal of Anaesthesia
Egyptian Journal of Anaesthesia Medicine-Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
78
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信