Brown Sydney E S, Mentz Graciela, Cassidy Ruth, Wade Meridith, Liu Xinyue, Zhong Wenjun, DiBello Julia, Nause-Osthoff Rebecca, Kheterpal Sachin, Colquhoun Douglas A
From the Department of Anesthesiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Division of Epidemiology, Department of Biostatistics and Research Decision Sciences, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. (a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc.), Rahway, New Jersey.
Anesth Analg. 2025 Jan 1;140(1):87-98. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000006831. Epub 2024 Jan 19.
Sugammadex was initially approved for reversal of neuromuscular blockade in adults in the United States in 2015. Limited data suggest sugammadex is widely used in pediatric anesthesia practice however the factors influencing use are not known. We explore patient, surgical, and institutional factors associated with the decision to use sugammadex versus neostigmine or no reversal, and the decision to use 2 mg/kg vs 4 mg/kg dosing.
Using data from the Multicenter Perioperative Outcomes Group (MPOG) database, an EHR-derived registry, we conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study. Eligible cases were performed between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2020, for children 0 to 17 years at US hospitals. Cases involved general anesthesia with endotracheal intubation and administration of rocuronium or vecuronium. Using generalized linear mixed models with institution and anesthesiologist-specific random intercepts, we measured the importance of a variety of patient, clinician, institution, anesthetic, and surgical risk factors in the decision to use sugammadex versus neostigmine, and the decision to use a 2 mg/kg vs 4 mg/kg dose. We then used intraclass correlation statistics to evaluate the proportion of variance contributed by institution and anesthesiologist specifically.
There were 97,654 eligible anesthetics across 30 institutions. Of these 47.1% received sugammadex, 43.1% received neostigmine, and 9.8% received no reversal agent. Variability in the choice to use sugammadex was attributable primarily to institution (40.4%) and attending anesthesiologist (27.1%). Factors associated with sugammadex use (compared to neostigmine) include time from first institutional use of sugammadex (odds ratio [OR], 1.08, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.08-1.09, per month, P < .001), younger patient age groups (0-27 days OR, 2.59 [2.00-3.34], P < .001; 28 days-1 year OR, 2.72 [2.16-3.43], P < .001 vs 12-17 years), increased American Society of Anesthesiologists [ASA] physical status (ASA III: OR, 1.32 [1.23-1.42], P < .001 ASA IV OR, 1.71 [1.46-2.00], P < .001 vs ASA I), neuromuscular disease (OR, 1.14 (1.04-1.26], P = .006), cardiac surgery (OR, 1.76 [1.40-2.22], P < .001), dose of neuromuscular blockade within the hour before reversal (>2 ED95s/kg OR, 4.58 (4.14-5.07], P < .001 vs none), and shorter case duration (case duration <60 minutes OR, 2.06 [1.75-2.43], P < .001 vs >300 minutes).
Variation in sugammadex use was primarily explained by institution and attending anesthesiologist. Patient factors associated with the decision to use sugammadex included younger age, higher doses of neuromuscular blocking agents, and increased medical complexity.
2015年,舒更葡糖钠在美国首次获批用于逆转成人的神经肌肉阻滞。有限的数据表明,舒更葡糖钠在儿科麻醉实践中被广泛使用,但其使用的影响因素尚不清楚。我们探讨了与使用舒更葡糖钠而非新斯的明或不进行逆转的决定,以及使用2mg/kg与4mg/kg剂量的决定相关的患者、手术和机构因素。
利用多中心围手术期结果组(MPOG)数据库(一个电子健康记录衍生的注册库)中的数据,我们进行了一项回顾性横断面研究。符合条件的病例于2016年1月1日至2020年12月31日在美国医院对0至17岁儿童进行。病例包括气管插管全身麻醉以及罗库溴铵或维库溴铵给药。使用具有机构和麻醉医生特定随机截距的广义线性混合模型,我们测量了各种患者、临床医生、机构、麻醉和手术风险因素在使用舒更葡糖钠而非新斯的明的决定,以及使用2mg/kg与4mg/kg剂量的决定中的重要性。然后,我们使用组内相关统计来评估机构和麻醉医生具体贡献的方差比例。
30个机构共有97,654例符合条件的麻醉病例。其中,47.1%接受了舒更葡糖钠,43.1%接受了新斯的明,9.8%未接受逆转剂。使用舒更葡糖钠选择的变异性主要归因于机构(40.4%)和主治麻醉医生(27.1%)。与使用舒更葡糖钠(与新斯的明相比)相关的因素包括自机构首次使用舒更葡糖钠以来的时间(比值比[OR],1.08;95%置信区间[CI]1.08 - 1.09,每月,P <.001)、较年轻的患者年龄组(0 - 27天OR,2.59[2.00 - 3.34],P <.001;28天 - 1岁OR,2.72[2.16 - 3.43],P <.001对比12 - 17岁)、美国麻醉医师协会[ASA]身体状况增加(ASA III:OR,1.32[1.23 - 1.42],P <.001;ASA IV OR,1.71[1.46 - 2.00],P <.001对比ASA I)、神经肌肉疾病(OR,1.14[1.04 - 1.26],P =.006)、心脏手术(OR,1.76[1.40 - 2.22],P <.001)、逆转前一小时内神经肌肉阻滞剂量(>2 ED95s/kg OR,4.58[4.14 - 5.07],P <.001对比无)以及较短的病例持续时间(病例持续时间<60分钟OR,2.06[1.75 - 2.43],P <.001对比>300分钟)。
舒更葡糖钠使用的差异主要由机构和主治麻醉医生解释。与使用舒更葡糖钠的决定相关的患者因素包括较年轻的年龄、较高剂量的神经肌肉阻滞剂以及增加的医疗复杂性。