Cargando…

Comparison of onset of neuromuscular blockade with electromyographic and acceleromyographic monitoring: a prospective clinical trial

BACKGROUND: Reliable devices that quantitatively monitor the level of neuromuscular blockade after neuromuscular blocking agents’ administration are crucial. Electromyography and acceleromyography are two monitoring modalities commonly used in clinical practice. The primary outcome of this study is...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chaves-Cardona, Harold E., Fouda, Eslam A., Hernandez-Torres, Vivian, Torp, Klaus D., Logvinov, Ilana I., Heckman, Michael G., Renew, Johnathan Ross
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10362458/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37137388
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bjane.2023.04.004
_version_ 1785076428240322560
author Chaves-Cardona, Harold E.
Fouda, Eslam A.
Hernandez-Torres, Vivian
Torp, Klaus D.
Logvinov, Ilana I.
Heckman, Michael G.
Renew, Johnathan Ross
author_facet Chaves-Cardona, Harold E.
Fouda, Eslam A.
Hernandez-Torres, Vivian
Torp, Klaus D.
Logvinov, Ilana I.
Heckman, Michael G.
Renew, Johnathan Ross
author_sort Chaves-Cardona, Harold E.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Reliable devices that quantitatively monitor the level of neuromuscular blockade after neuromuscular blocking agents’ administration are crucial. Electromyography and acceleromyography are two monitoring modalities commonly used in clinical practice. The primary outcome of this study is to compare the onset of neuromuscular blockade, defined as a Train-Of-Four Count (TOFC) equal to 0, as measured by an electromyography-based device (TetraGraph) and an acceleromyography-based device (TOFscan). The secondary outcome was to compare intubating conditions when one of these two devices reached a TOFC equal to 0. METHODS: One hundred adult patients scheduled for elective surgery requiring neuromuscular blockade were enrolled. Prior to induction of anesthesia, TetraGraph electrodes were placed over the forearm of patients’ dominant/non-dominant hand based on randomization and TOFscan electrodes placed on the contralateral forearm. Intraoperative neuromuscular blocking agent dose was standardized to 0.5 mg.kg(−1) of rocuronium. After baseline values were obtained, objective measurements were recorded every 20 seconds and intubation was performed using video laryngoscopy once either device displayed a TOFC = 0. The anesthesia provider was then surveyed about intubating conditions. RESULTS: Baseline TetraGraph train-of-four ratios were higher than those obtained with TOFscan (Median: 1.02 [0.88, 1.20] vs. 1.00 [0.64, 1.01], respectively, p < 0.001). The time to reach a TOFC = 0 was significantly longer when measured with TetraGraph compared to TOFscan (Median: 160 [40, 900] vs. 120 [60, 300] seconds, respectively, p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in intubating conditions when either device was used to determine the timing of endotracheal intubation. CONCLUSIONS: The onset of neuromuscular blockade was longer when measured with TetraGraph than TOFscan, and a train-of-four count of zero in either device was a useful indicator for adequate intubating conditions. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER AND REGISTRY: URL NCT05120999, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05120999.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10362458
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-103624582023-07-23 Comparison of onset of neuromuscular blockade with electromyographic and acceleromyographic monitoring: a prospective clinical trial Chaves-Cardona, Harold E. Fouda, Eslam A. Hernandez-Torres, Vivian Torp, Klaus D. Logvinov, Ilana I. Heckman, Michael G. Renew, Johnathan Ross Braz J Anesthesiol Original Investigation BACKGROUND: Reliable devices that quantitatively monitor the level of neuromuscular blockade after neuromuscular blocking agents’ administration are crucial. Electromyography and acceleromyography are two monitoring modalities commonly used in clinical practice. The primary outcome of this study is to compare the onset of neuromuscular blockade, defined as a Train-Of-Four Count (TOFC) equal to 0, as measured by an electromyography-based device (TetraGraph) and an acceleromyography-based device (TOFscan). The secondary outcome was to compare intubating conditions when one of these two devices reached a TOFC equal to 0. METHODS: One hundred adult patients scheduled for elective surgery requiring neuromuscular blockade were enrolled. Prior to induction of anesthesia, TetraGraph electrodes were placed over the forearm of patients’ dominant/non-dominant hand based on randomization and TOFscan electrodes placed on the contralateral forearm. Intraoperative neuromuscular blocking agent dose was standardized to 0.5 mg.kg(−1) of rocuronium. After baseline values were obtained, objective measurements were recorded every 20 seconds and intubation was performed using video laryngoscopy once either device displayed a TOFC = 0. The anesthesia provider was then surveyed about intubating conditions. RESULTS: Baseline TetraGraph train-of-four ratios were higher than those obtained with TOFscan (Median: 1.02 [0.88, 1.20] vs. 1.00 [0.64, 1.01], respectively, p < 0.001). The time to reach a TOFC = 0 was significantly longer when measured with TetraGraph compared to TOFscan (Median: 160 [40, 900] vs. 120 [60, 300] seconds, respectively, p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in intubating conditions when either device was used to determine the timing of endotracheal intubation. CONCLUSIONS: The onset of neuromuscular blockade was longer when measured with TetraGraph than TOFscan, and a train-of-four count of zero in either device was a useful indicator for adequate intubating conditions. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER AND REGISTRY: URL NCT05120999, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05120999. Elsevier 2023-05-01 /pmc/articles/PMC10362458/ /pubmed/37137388 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bjane.2023.04.004 Text en © 2023 Published by Elsevier España, S.L.U. on behalf of Sociedade Brasileira de Anestesiologia. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Original Investigation
Chaves-Cardona, Harold E.
Fouda, Eslam A.
Hernandez-Torres, Vivian
Torp, Klaus D.
Logvinov, Ilana I.
Heckman, Michael G.
Renew, Johnathan Ross
Comparison of onset of neuromuscular blockade with electromyographic and acceleromyographic monitoring: a prospective clinical trial
title Comparison of onset of neuromuscular blockade with electromyographic and acceleromyographic monitoring: a prospective clinical trial
title_full Comparison of onset of neuromuscular blockade with electromyographic and acceleromyographic monitoring: a prospective clinical trial
title_fullStr Comparison of onset of neuromuscular blockade with electromyographic and acceleromyographic monitoring: a prospective clinical trial
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of onset of neuromuscular blockade with electromyographic and acceleromyographic monitoring: a prospective clinical trial
title_short Comparison of onset of neuromuscular blockade with electromyographic and acceleromyographic monitoring: a prospective clinical trial
title_sort comparison of onset of neuromuscular blockade with electromyographic and acceleromyographic monitoring: a prospective clinical trial
topic Original Investigation
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10362458/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37137388
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bjane.2023.04.004
work_keys_str_mv AT chavescardonaharolde comparisonofonsetofneuromuscularblockadewithelectromyographicandacceleromyographicmonitoringaprospectiveclinicaltrial
AT foudaeslama comparisonofonsetofneuromuscularblockadewithelectromyographicandacceleromyographicmonitoringaprospectiveclinicaltrial
AT hernandeztorresvivian comparisonofonsetofneuromuscularblockadewithelectromyographicandacceleromyographicmonitoringaprospectiveclinicaltrial
AT torpklausd comparisonofonsetofneuromuscularblockadewithelectromyographicandacceleromyographicmonitoringaprospectiveclinicaltrial
AT logvinovilanai comparisonofonsetofneuromuscularblockadewithelectromyographicandacceleromyographicmonitoringaprospectiveclinicaltrial
AT heckmanmichaelg comparisonofonsetofneuromuscularblockadewithelectromyographicandacceleromyographicmonitoringaprospectiveclinicaltrial
AT renewjohnathanross comparisonofonsetofneuromuscularblockadewithelectromyographicandacceleromyographicmonitoringaprospectiveclinicaltrial