| ||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
From the Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Management; University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas.
Address correspondence and reprint requests to Paul F. White, MD, PhD, Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Management, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, 5323 Harry Hines Blvd., Dallas, TX 75390-9068. Address e-mail to paul.white{at}utsouthwestern.edu.
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
cyclodextrin that selectively encapsulates steroid-based nondepolarizing muscle relaxants (e.g., rocuronium). Recent studies (13) have demonstrated that sugammadex (>2 mg/kg IV) can rapidly reverse profound ("deep") neuromuscular blockade after rocuronium when administered during general anesthesia. There have been no reports describing the use of sugammadex for emergency reversal of residual blockade in patients receiving a standard reversal drug combination of neostigmine and glycopyrrolate. Although sugammadex has been extensively investigated for reversing rocuronium, there are no published reports describing its use in reversing other steroid-based nondepolarizing muscle relaxants (e.g., vecuronium). | CASE REPORT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
At the end of the 1-h operation, a train-of-four stimulus elicited two small twitches. Neuromuscular blockade was reversed with neostigmine (5 mg IV) and glycopyrrolate (1 mg IV). Desflurane and nitrous oxide were discontinued and the oxygen flow rate was increased to 6 L/min. Five minutes after administering the reversal drugs, the patient was reported to have "four twitches" in response to the train-of-four stimulation. Although he resumed spontaneous ventilation in the operating room, his tidal volumes were small and he was transported to the postanesthesia care unit with the tracheal tube in place. Upon arrival in the postanesthesia care unit, the patient was awake and clearly agitated, and his respiratory efforts were labored. He was unable to sustain a hand grip (0/5), stick out his tongue, or lift his head off the gurney. Although his oxygen saturation was 100%, he became increasingly agitated and tachypneic (with a respiratory rate >40 breaths/min).
Under provisions of our local IRB at University of TX Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas for emergency use of an investigational drug on a one-time only basis, we administered sugammadex, 350 mg (approximately 4 mg/kg) by a rapid IV bolus injection. Within 60 s, the patients tidal volume markedly increased, and his respiratory rate declined to <20 breaths/min. Within 2 min, he was able to sustain a 5-s head lift and his grip strength improved to 5/5. The patients trachea was immediately extubated and on direct question, he reported no acute respiratory distress or residual muscle weakness.
The patient manifested no acute hemodynamic changes after the IV bolus administration of sugammadex. Although he subsequently developed mild shivering (which was treated with meperidine, 12.5 mg IV) and incisional discomfort (treated with fentanyl 25 µg IV), he recovered promptly. He was discharged home from the day-surgery unit after a 2-h observation period. On direct questioning in the day-surgery unit before discharge to home, he stated that he remembered being awake with the breathing tube in place and feeling extremely anxious, weak, and short of breath. He said that after removal of the breathing tube he felt no further respiratory distress or muscle weakness. A 24-h follow-up telephone call to the patient revealed that he experienced no side effects at home after discharge from the hospital.
| DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Editors Note: The Editorial Board of Anesthesia & Analgesia may request IRB documentation to validate compliance with IRB regulations and ethical treatment of patients and research subjects. This patient received an investigational drug without prior IRB approval and written informed consent. At our request, the authors provided the relevant documents filed with their IRB. These documents indicate full compliance with the requirements for one-time use of investigational products to treat potentially life-threatening emergencies as established by the University of TX Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas.
| Footnotes |
|---|
| REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
E. J. Rosman Pseudo-Emergent Use of an Investigational Drug Anesth. Analg., September 1, 2007; 105(3): 876 - 876. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. M. Jones and T. P. Turkstra Urgent Usage of Sugammadex to Treat Residual Neuromuscular Blockade in the PACU Anesth. Analg., September 1, 2007; 105(3): 877 - 877. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. F. White, G. Hill, and A. Lenz Where's the Fire? Anesth. Analg., September 1, 2007; 105(3): 878 - 878. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. L. Shafer Pseudo-Emergent Use of an Investigational Drug Anesth. Analg., September 1, 2007; 105(3): 876 - 876. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Ziser Was It a True Emergency? Anesth. Analg., September 1, 2007; 105(3): 876 - 877. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. Wax Where's the Fire? Anesth. Analg., September 1, 2007; 105(3): 877 - 878. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. D. Miller Sugammadex: An Opportunity to Change the Practice of Anesthesiology? Anesth. Analg., March 1, 2007; 104(3): 477 - 478. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. W. Schultheis and B. A. Rappaport The Food and Drug Administration Perspective: Use of an Investigational Drug in a Medical Emergency Anesth. Analg., March 1, 2007; 104(3): 479 - 480. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|