Quantitative Neuromuscular Monitoring

CA-2 · draft

Not reviewed. This deck cannot be opened, downloaded or sent until you approve it. Read every point and its source first — they were drafted from search results, not from clinical judgement.

Every point beside its source

Point Where quantitative monitoring and sugammadex are readily available, residual block in recovery fell to 2.2%, against published incidences ranging from 3.5% to 53.3% since 2000. drafted by llm kept
Abstract, in full

Concerns regarding residual neuromuscular block (RNMB) have persisted since the introduction of neuromuscular blocking agents, with reported incidences in the 21st century up to 50%. Advances in neuromuscular transmission (NMT) monitoring and the introduction of sugammadex have addressed this issue, but the impact of these developments remains unclear. This prospective observational study evaluated RNMB in 500 surgical patients in a large Dutch teaching hospital with readily available quantitative NMT monitoring and reversal agents. The anaesthetic technique and intraoperative NMT monitoring were independently chosen by the attending anaesthesiologist. Acceleromyography was performed upon arrival in the PACU for patients who received nondepolarising neuromuscular blocking agents. RNMB was defined as a train-of-four ratio (TOFR) <0.9. A systematic review was conducted to analyse trends in RNMB in contemporary practice. Out of 500 patients, 11 (2.2%) had a TOFR <0.9. Intraoperative NMT monitoring was performed in 77.6% of patients, and sugammadex was administered to 38% of patients. No patient received neostigmine. The only difference was an automatically recorded TOFR &#x2265;0.9 at the end of surgery in 61.1% in the non-RNMB group compared with 18.2% in the RNMB group (P=0.009). Our systematic review identified incidences ranging from 3.5% to 53.3% since 2000, with a decreasing trend in Europe and North America. The incidence of residual neuromuscular block in the PACU was 2.2%. This suggests significant improvement in the prevention of residual neuromuscular block and stresses the importance of rigorous neuromuscular transmission monitoring and adequate use of reversal agents.

Residual Neuromuscular Block in the Postanaesthesia Care Unit: A Single-Centre Prospective Observational Study and Systematic Review · PMID 39443187
Point Randomising to acceleromyography rather than qualitative train-of-four cut residual blockade in recovery from 30% to 4.5%, and no acceleromyography patient desaturated below 90% or obstructed during transport. drafted by llm kept
Abstract, in full

Incomplete recovery from neuromuscular blockade in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) may contribute to adverse postoperative respiratory events. This study determined the incidence and degree of residual neuromuscular blockade in patients randomized to conventional qualitative train-of-four (TOF) monitoring or quantitative acceleromyographic monitoring. The incidence of adverse respiratory events in the PACU was also evaluated. One hundred eighty-five patients were randomized to intraoperative acceleromyographic monitoring (acceleromyography group) or qualitative TOF monitoring (TOF group). Anesthetic management was standardized. TOF patients were extubated when standard criteria were met and no fade was observed during TOF stimulation. Acceleromyography patients had a TOF ratio of greater than 0.80 as an additional extubation criterion. Upon arrival in the PACU, TOF ratios of both groups were measured with acceleromyography. Adverse respiratory events during transport to the PACU and during the first 30 min of PACU admission were also recorded. A lower frequency of residual neuromuscular blockade in the PACU (TOF ratio < or = 0.9) was observed in the acceleromyography group (4.5%) compared with the conventional TOF group (30.0%; P < 0.0001). During transport to the PACU, fewer acceleromyography patients developed arterial oxygen saturation values, measured by pulse oximetry, of less than 90% (0%) or airway obstruction (0%) compared with TOF patients (21.1% and 11.1%, respectively; P < 0.002). The incidence, severity, and duration of hypoxemic events during the first 30 min of PACU admission were less in the acceleromyography group (all P < 0.0001). Incomplete neuromuscular recovery can be minimized with acceleromyographic monitoring. The risk of adverse respiratory events during early recovery from anesthesia can be reduced by intraoperative acceleromyography use.

Intraoperative Acceleromyographic Monitoring Reduces the Risk of Residual Neuromuscular Blockade and Adverse Respiratory Events in the Postanesthesia Care Unit · PMID 18719436
Point Despite qualitative monitoring and neostigmine, 63.5% of patients still had a train-of-four ratio under 0.9 at extubation — clinical judgement plus a nerve stimulator does not detect residual block. drafted by llm kept
Abstract, in full

Postoperative residual neuromuscular blockade (NMB), defined as a train-of-four (TOF) ratio of <0.9, is an established risk factor for critical postoperative respiratory events and increased morbidity. At present, little is known about the occurrence of residual NMB in Canada. The RECITE (Residual Curarization and its Incidence at Tracheal Extubation) study was a prospective observational study at 8 hospitals in Canada investigating the incidence and severity of residual NMB. Adult patients undergoing open or laparoscopic abdominal surgery expected to last <4 hours, ASA physical status I-III, and scheduled for general anesthesia with at least 1 dose of a nondepolarizing neuromuscular blocking agent for endotracheal intubation or maintenance of neuromuscular relaxation were enrolled in the study. Neuromuscular function was assessed using acceleromyography with the TOF-Watch SX. All reported TOF ratios were normalized to the baseline values. The attending anesthesiologist and all other observers were blinded to the TOF ratio (T4/T1) results. The primary and secondary objectives were to determine the incidence and severity of residual NMB (TOF ratio <0.9) just before tracheal extubation and at arrival at the postanesthesia care unit (PACU). Three hundred and two participants were enrolled. Data were available for 241 patients at tracheal extubation and for 207 patients at PACU arrival. Rocuronium was the NMB agent used in 99% of cases. Neostigmine was used for reversal of NMB in 73.9% and 72.0% of patients with TE and PACU data, respectively. The incidence of residual NMB was 63.5% (95% confidence interval, 57.4%-69.6%) at tracheal extubation and 56.5% (95% confidence interval, 49.8%-63.3%) at arrival at the PACU. In an exploratory analysis, no statistically significant differences were observed in the incidence of residual NMB according to gender, age, body mass index, ASA physical status, type of surgery, or comorbidities (all P > 0.13). Residual paralysis is common at tracheal extubation and PACU arrival, despite qualitative neuromuscular monitoring and the use of neostigmine. More effective detection and management of NMB is needed to reduce the risks associated with residual NMB.

The RECITE Study: A Canadian Prospective, Multicenter Study of the Incidence and Severity of Residual Neuromuscular Blockade · PMID 25902322
Point Absence of fade on a peripheral nerve stimulator does not exclude residual block — train-of-four ratios as low as 0.4 to 0.6 can be present when no fade is visible. drafted by llm kept
Abstract, in full

Neuromuscular monitoring devices were introduced into clinical practice in the 1970s. Qualitative neuromuscular monitors, or peripheral nerve stimulators, provide an electrical stimulus to a motor nerve and the response of corresponding muscle subjectively evaluated. A standard peripheral nerve stimulator provides several patterns of nerve stimulation, including train-of-four (TOF), double-burst, tetanic, and post-tetanic count. Qualitative (and quantitative) monitors are needed to determine onset of neuromuscular blockade, maintain the required depth of muscle relaxation during the surgical procedure, and assess an appropriate dose of reversal agent. However, absence of fade measured with a peripheral nerve stimulator does not exclude residual neuromuscular block; TOF ratios as low as 0.4-0.6 may be present when fade is no longer observed. In addition, the risk of incomplete neuromuscular recovery may be influenced by monitoring site. The adductor pollicis is more sensitive to the effects of neuromuscular blocking agents (compared to the muscles surrounding the eye), and monitoring at this site may more accurately reflect recovery of pharyngeal muscles (the last muscles to recover from the effects of neuromuscular blocking agents, in which dysfunction may persist even at a TOF ratio of 1.0). Quantitative monitors are devices that measure and quantify the degree of muscle weakness and display the results numerically. Several different technologies have been developed, including mechanomyography, electromyography, acceleromyography, kineograph, and phonomyography. Lower doses of anticholinesterases may be used to effectively reverse neuromuscular blockade at TOF ratios of 0.4-0.6; quantitative monitoring is required to determine that this level of neuromuscular recovery has occurred. As clinical tests of muscle strength, peripheral nerve stimulators are unable to determine whether full recovery of neuromuscular function is present at the end of the surgical procedure. The use of quantitative monitors is essential in excluding clinically important muscle weakness (TOF ratios <0.9 to 1.0) at the time of tracheal extubation.

Neuromuscular Monitoring in the Perioperative Period · PMID 28795964
Point Whenever a neuromuscular blocker is given, monitor at the hand with a quantitative device: documenting a train-of-four ratio of at least 0.90 is the only way to confirm satisfactory recovery, and the 5-second head lift should be abandoned. drafted by llm kept
Abstract, in full

A panel of clinician scientists with expertise in neuromuscular blockade (NMB) monitoring was convened with a charge to prepare a consensus statement on indications for and proper use of such monitors. The aims of this article are to: (a) provide the rationale and scientific basis for the use of quantitative NMB monitoring; (b) offer a set of recommendations for quantitative NMB monitoring standards; (c) specify educational goals; and (d) propose training recommendations to ensure proper neuromuscular monitoring and management. The panel believes that whenever a neuromuscular blocker is administered, neuromuscular function must be monitored by observing the evoked muscular response to peripheral nerve stimulation. Ideally, this should be done at the hand muscles (not the facial muscles) with a quantitative (objective) monitor. Objective monitoring (documentation of train-of-four ratio &#x2265;0.90) is the only method of assuring that satisfactory recovery of neuromuscular function has taken place. The panel also recommends that subjective evaluation of the responses to train-of-four stimulation (when using a peripheral nerve stimulator) or clinical tests of recovery from NMB (such as the 5-second head lift) should be abandoned in favor of objective monitoring. During an interim period for establishing these recommendations, if only a peripheral nerve stimulator is available, its use should be mandatory in any patient receiving a neuromuscular blocking drug. The panel acknowledges that publishing this statement per se will not result in its spontaneous acceptance, adherence to its recommendations, or change in routine practice. Implementation of objective monitoring will likely require professional societies and anesthesia department leadership to champion its use to change anesthesia practitioner behavior.

Consensus Statement on Perioperative Use of Neuromuscular Monitoring · PMID 29200077
Point Acceleromyography reduced residual block from 50% to 14.5% and left patients with fewer symptoms of weakness, even though visible signs of weakness were rare in both groups. drafted by llm kept
Abstract, in full

The subjective experience of residual neuromuscular blockade after emergence from anesthesia has not been examined systematically during postanesthesia care unit (PACU) stays. The authors hypothesized that acceleromyography monitoring would diminish unpleasant symptoms of residual paresis during recovery from anesthesia by reducing the percentage of patients with train-of-four ratios less than 0.9. One hundred fifty-five patients were randomized to receive intraoperative acceleromyography monitoring (acceleromyography group) or conventional qualitative train-of-four monitoring (control group). Neuromuscular management was standardized, and extubation was performed when defined criteria were achieved. Immediately upon a patient's arrival to the PACU, the patient's train-of-four ratios were measured using acceleromyography, and a standardized examination was used to assess 16 symptoms and 11 signs of residual paresis. This examination was repeated 20, 40, and 60 min after PACU admission. The incidence of residual blockade (train-of-four ratios less than 0.9) was reduced in the acceleromyography group (14.5% vs. 50.0% control group, with the 99% confidence interval for this 35.5% difference being 16.4-52.6%, P < 0.0001). Generalized linear models revealed the acceleromyography group had less overall weakness (graded on a 0-10 scale) and fewer symptoms of muscle weakness across all time points (P < 0.0001 for both analyses), but the number of signs of muscle weakness was small from the time of arrival in the PACU and did not differ between the groups at any time. Acceleromyography monitoring reduces the incidence of residual blockade and associated unpleasant symptoms of muscle weakness in the PACU and improves the overall quality of recovery.

Intraoperative Acceleromyography Monitoring Reduces Symptoms of Muscle Weakness and Improves Quality of Recovery in the Early Postoperative Period · PMID 21946094
Point Use quantitative monitoring (train-of-four ratio) to guide reversal decisions, aiming for a train-of-four ratio ≥0.9 before extubation in patients not undergoing cardiac surgery. drafted by llm dropped · not confirmed against the abstract: The abstract discusses guidelines for managing neuromuscular monitoring and antagonism but does not specify the use of quantitative monitoring (train-of-four ratio), specific reversal targets (≥0.9), or exclude cardiac surgery patients.
Abstract, in full

These practice guidelines provide evidence-based recommendations on the management of neuromuscular monitoring and antagonism of neuromuscular blocking agents during and after general anesthesia. The guidance focuses primarily on the type and site of monitoring and the process of antagonizing neuromuscular blockade to reduce residual neuromuscular blockade.

2023 American Society of Anesthesiologists Practice Guidelines for Monitoring and Antagonism of Neuromuscular Blockade: A Report by the American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Neuromuscular Blockade · PMID 36520073

Approving is you asserting each sentence on the left says what the text on the right says. Where a conclusion could not be identified the whole abstract is shown.

Before induction

Where quantitative monitoring and sugammadex are readily available, residual block in recovery fell to 2.2%, against published incidences ranging from 3.5% to 53.3% since 2000.
Randomising to acceleromyography rather than qualitative train-of-four cut residual blockade in recovery from 30% to 4.5%, and no acceleromyography patient desaturated below 90% or obstructed during transport.
Despite qualitative monitoring and neostigmine, 63.5% of patients still had a train-of-four ratio under 0.9 at extubation — clinical judgement plus a nerve stimulator does not detect residual block.
Absence of fade on a peripheral nerve stimulator does not exclude residual block — train-of-four ratios as low as 0.4 to 0.6 can be present when no fade is visible.
Whenever a neuromuscular blocker is given, monitor at the hand with a quantitative device: documenting a train-of-four ratio of at least 0.90 is the only way to confirm satisfactory recovery, and the 5-second head lift should be abandoned.
Acceleromyography reduced residual block from 50% to 14.5% and left patients with fewer symptoms of weakness, even though visible signs of weakness were rare in both groups.

Questions in the room

How does your plan change if the patient is not optimised?
What is the physiology behind what we just did?
Talk me through the trade-off you made there.
What would make you abandon this plan and do something else?

Oral boards stem

A CA-1 has judged reversal adequate on a peripheral nerve stimulator by eye and wants to extubate. The quantitative monitor is in the drawer and would take a minute to set up.

Sources

Residual Neuromuscular Block in the Postanaesthesia Care Unit: A Single-Centre Prospective Observational Study and Systematic Review, British journal of anaesthesia 2025 PMID 39443187
Intraoperative Acceleromyographic Monitoring Reduces the Risk of Residual Neuromuscular Blockade and Adverse Respiratory Events in the Postanesthesia Care Unit, Anesthesiology 2008 PMID 18719436
The RECITE Study: A Canadian Prospective, Multicenter Study of the Incidence and Severity of Residual Neuromuscular Blockade, Anesthesia and analgesia 2015 PMID 25902322
Neuromuscular Monitoring in the Perioperative Period, Anesthesia and analgesia 2018 PMID 28795964
Consensus Statement on Perioperative Use of Neuromuscular Monitoring, Anesthesia and analgesia 2018 PMID 29200077
Intraoperative Acceleromyography Monitoring Reduces Symptoms of Muscle Weakness and Improves Quality of Recovery in the Early Postoperative Period, Anesthesiology 2011 PMID 21946094
Preview the web page Preview the PDF Preview the PPTX
Back

Approving says you read this deck, looked at its figures, and checked the board questions — including that every wrong option is actually wrong. Nothing else has checked those.