Sugammadex versus neostigmine for reversal of rocuronium-induced neuromuscular blockade: A randomized, double-blinded study of thoracic surgical patients evaluating hypoxic episodes in the early postoperative period.

Study Objective: This objective of this study was to determine if reversal of rocuronium-induced neuromuscular blockade with sugammadex versus neostigmine results in a decreased number of hypoxic episodes in the early postoperative period in patients undergoing thoracic surgery with single lung ventilation.
Design: Single-center, randomized, double-blind, two-arm clinical trial.
Setting: Operating room and postanesthesia care unit.
Patients: 92 subjects aged ≥18, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status II-IV, and undergoing a thoracic operation necessitating single lung ventilation.
Interventions: Subjects received either 2 mg/kg sugammadex or 50 μg/kg neostigmine with 8 μg/kg glycopyrrolate for reversal of moderate neuromuscular blockade.
Measurements: For the first 90 min postoperatively, all episodes of hypoxia were recorded. Neuromuscular monitoring was performed with acceleromyography (TOF-Watch® SX) and the train of four (TOF) was recorded at 2, 5, 10, and 15 min after administration of the neuromuscular reversal agent.
Main Results: Subjects who received neostigmine had a median of 1 episode (interquartile range IQR: 0-2.2) of hypoxia versus subjects who received sugammadex who had a median of 0 episodes (IQR: 0-1) (p = 0.009). The mean time to recovery of TOF ≥ 0.9 was significantly faster with sugammadex at 10 min (95% confidence interval CI: 5-15) compared with neostigmine at 40 min (95% CI: 15-53) (p < 0.001).
Conclusions: In thoracic surgical patients necessitating single lung ventilation, sugammadex provides faster reversal of moderate neuromuscular blockade and results in a decreased number of postoperative hypoxic episodes compared with neostigmine.
Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. Disclosures Supported in part by a research grant from the Investigator-Initiated Studies Program of Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. The opinions expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
(Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Inc.)