Cargando…

Sugammadex for reversal of neuromuscular blockade: a retrospective analysis of clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness in a single center

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study is to evaluate the clinical and economic impact of introducing a rocuronium–neostigmine–sugammadex strategy into a cisatracurium–neostigmine regimen for neuromuscular block (NMB) management. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of clinical outcomes and cost-...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Carron, Michele, Baratto, Fabio, Zarantonello, Francesco, Ori, Carlo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove Medical Press 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4762464/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26937203
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CEOR.S100921
_version_ 1782417116141453312
author Carron, Michele
Baratto, Fabio
Zarantonello, Francesco
Ori, Carlo
author_facet Carron, Michele
Baratto, Fabio
Zarantonello, Francesco
Ori, Carlo
author_sort Carron, Michele
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study is to evaluate the clinical and economic impact of introducing a rocuronium–neostigmine–sugammadex strategy into a cisatracurium–neostigmine regimen for neuromuscular block (NMB) management. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness in five operating rooms at University Hospital of Padova. A clinical outcome evaluation after sugammadex administration as first-choice reversal drug in selected patients (rocuronium–sugammadex) and as rescue therapy after neostigmine reversal (rocuronium–neostigmine–sugammadex) compared to control was performed. A cost-analysis of NMB management accompanying the introduction of a rocuronium–neostigmine–sugammadex strategy into a cisatracurium–neostigmine regimen was carried out. To such purpose, two periods were compared: 2011–2012, without sugammadex available; 2013–2014, with sugammadex available. A subsequent analysis was performed to evaluate if sugammadex replacing neostigmine as first choice reversal drug is cost-effective. RESULTS: The introduction of a rocuronium–neostigmine–sugammadex strategy into a cisatracurium–neostigmine regimen reduced the average cost of NMB management by 36%, from €20.8/case to €13.3/case. Patients receiving sugammadex as a first-choice reversal drug (3%) exhibited significantly better train-of-four ratios at extubation (P<0.001) and were discharged to the surgical ward (P<0.001) more rapidly than controls. The cost-saving of sugammadex as first-choice reversal drug has been estimated to be €2.9/case. Patients receiving sugammadex as rescue therapy after neostigmine reversal (3.2%) showed no difference in time to discharge to the surgical ward (P=0.44) compared to controls. No unplanned intensive care unit (ICU) admissions with rocuronium–neostigmine–sugammadex strategy were observed. The potential economic benefit in avoiding postoperative residual curarization (PORC)-related ICU admission in the 2013–2014 period was estimated at an average value of €13,548 (€9,316–€23,845). CONCLUSION: Sugammadex eliminated PORC and associated morbidities. In our center, sugammadex reduced the costs of NMB management and promoted rapid turnover of patients in operating rooms, with total cost-effectiveness that counteracts the disadvantages of its high cost.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4762464
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Dove Medical Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-47624642016-03-02 Sugammadex for reversal of neuromuscular blockade: a retrospective analysis of clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness in a single center Carron, Michele Baratto, Fabio Zarantonello, Francesco Ori, Carlo Clinicoecon Outcomes Res Original Research OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study is to evaluate the clinical and economic impact of introducing a rocuronium–neostigmine–sugammadex strategy into a cisatracurium–neostigmine regimen for neuromuscular block (NMB) management. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness in five operating rooms at University Hospital of Padova. A clinical outcome evaluation after sugammadex administration as first-choice reversal drug in selected patients (rocuronium–sugammadex) and as rescue therapy after neostigmine reversal (rocuronium–neostigmine–sugammadex) compared to control was performed. A cost-analysis of NMB management accompanying the introduction of a rocuronium–neostigmine–sugammadex strategy into a cisatracurium–neostigmine regimen was carried out. To such purpose, two periods were compared: 2011–2012, without sugammadex available; 2013–2014, with sugammadex available. A subsequent analysis was performed to evaluate if sugammadex replacing neostigmine as first choice reversal drug is cost-effective. RESULTS: The introduction of a rocuronium–neostigmine–sugammadex strategy into a cisatracurium–neostigmine regimen reduced the average cost of NMB management by 36%, from €20.8/case to €13.3/case. Patients receiving sugammadex as a first-choice reversal drug (3%) exhibited significantly better train-of-four ratios at extubation (P<0.001) and were discharged to the surgical ward (P<0.001) more rapidly than controls. The cost-saving of sugammadex as first-choice reversal drug has been estimated to be €2.9/case. Patients receiving sugammadex as rescue therapy after neostigmine reversal (3.2%) showed no difference in time to discharge to the surgical ward (P=0.44) compared to controls. No unplanned intensive care unit (ICU) admissions with rocuronium–neostigmine–sugammadex strategy were observed. The potential economic benefit in avoiding postoperative residual curarization (PORC)-related ICU admission in the 2013–2014 period was estimated at an average value of €13,548 (€9,316–€23,845). CONCLUSION: Sugammadex eliminated PORC and associated morbidities. In our center, sugammadex reduced the costs of NMB management and promoted rapid turnover of patients in operating rooms, with total cost-effectiveness that counteracts the disadvantages of its high cost. Dove Medical Press 2016-02-18 /pmc/articles/PMC4762464/ /pubmed/26937203 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CEOR.S100921 Text en © 2016 Carron et al. This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed.
spellingShingle Original Research
Carron, Michele
Baratto, Fabio
Zarantonello, Francesco
Ori, Carlo
Sugammadex for reversal of neuromuscular blockade: a retrospective analysis of clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness in a single center
title Sugammadex for reversal of neuromuscular blockade: a retrospective analysis of clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness in a single center
title_full Sugammadex for reversal of neuromuscular blockade: a retrospective analysis of clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness in a single center
title_fullStr Sugammadex for reversal of neuromuscular blockade: a retrospective analysis of clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness in a single center
title_full_unstemmed Sugammadex for reversal of neuromuscular blockade: a retrospective analysis of clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness in a single center
title_short Sugammadex for reversal of neuromuscular blockade: a retrospective analysis of clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness in a single center
title_sort sugammadex for reversal of neuromuscular blockade: a retrospective analysis of clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness in a single center
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4762464/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26937203
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CEOR.S100921
work_keys_str_mv AT carronmichele sugammadexforreversalofneuromuscularblockadearetrospectiveanalysisofclinicaloutcomesandcosteffectivenessinasinglecenter
AT barattofabio sugammadexforreversalofneuromuscularblockadearetrospectiveanalysisofclinicaloutcomesandcosteffectivenessinasinglecenter
AT zarantonellofrancesco sugammadexforreversalofneuromuscularblockadearetrospectiveanalysisofclinicaloutcomesandcosteffectivenessinasinglecenter
AT oricarlo sugammadexforreversalofneuromuscularblockadearetrospectiveanalysisofclinicaloutcomesandcosteffectivenessinasinglecenter