Mawadah Samad, Macey Sutherland, Donald Ganier, David Broussard, Joseph Koveleskie, Vaughn E Nossaman, Bobby D Nossaman
{"title":"微创胃袖状手术后使用苏麦卡的围手术期效率:优越性试验","authors":"Mawadah Samad, Macey Sutherland, Donald Ganier, David Broussard, Joseph Koveleskie, Vaughn E Nossaman, Bobby D Nossaman","doi":"10.1177/17504589241267859","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Studies have proposed that the routine use of sugammadex could provide perioperative time savings and a reduction in the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting. The purpose of this study was to test the effectiveness of sugammadex on perioperative times and on the incidences of adverse events when compared with the active control, neostigmine, for minimally invasive gastric sleeve surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Following institutional review board approval, patient characteristics, type of primary neuromuscular blocking reversal agents, operating room discharge times, post-anaesthesia care unit recovery times, and incidences of and treatment for postoperative nausea and vomiting and orotracheal reintubation were the measures of interest. Superiority testing determined the between-group means differences of the reversal agents on the two perioperative time periods of interest.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Superiority testing demonstrated no improvement of the two perioperative times with sugammadex. There was no clinical difference in the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting or in the number of antiemetic doses received in the post-anaesthesia care unit between the two groups. Finally, the two orotracheal reintubations in the post-anaesthesia care unit were in the sugammadex administered group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These results with sugammadex provide no perioperative time savings or reduce the incidence and treatment for postoperative nausea and vomiting in the post-anaesthesia care unit when compared with neostigmine.</p>","PeriodicalId":35481,"journal":{"name":"Journal of perioperative practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Perioperative efficiency of sugammadex following minimally invasive gastric sleeve surgery: A superiority trial.\",\"authors\":\"Mawadah Samad, Macey Sutherland, Donald Ganier, David Broussard, Joseph Koveleskie, Vaughn E Nossaman, Bobby D Nossaman\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/17504589241267859\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Studies have proposed that the routine use of sugammadex could provide perioperative time savings and a reduction in the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting. The purpose of this study was to test the effectiveness of sugammadex on perioperative times and on the incidences of adverse events when compared with the active control, neostigmine, for minimally invasive gastric sleeve surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Following institutional review board approval, patient characteristics, type of primary neuromuscular blocking reversal agents, operating room discharge times, post-anaesthesia care unit recovery times, and incidences of and treatment for postoperative nausea and vomiting and orotracheal reintubation were the measures of interest. Superiority testing determined the between-group means differences of the reversal agents on the two perioperative time periods of interest.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Superiority testing demonstrated no improvement of the two perioperative times with sugammadex. There was no clinical difference in the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting or in the number of antiemetic doses received in the post-anaesthesia care unit between the two groups. Finally, the two orotracheal reintubations in the post-anaesthesia care unit were in the sugammadex administered group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These results with sugammadex provide no perioperative time savings or reduce the incidence and treatment for postoperative nausea and vomiting in the post-anaesthesia care unit when compared with neostigmine.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":35481,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of perioperative practice\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of perioperative practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/17504589241267859\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of perioperative practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17504589241267859","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Perioperative efficiency of sugammadex following minimally invasive gastric sleeve surgery: A superiority trial.
Background: Studies have proposed that the routine use of sugammadex could provide perioperative time savings and a reduction in the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting. The purpose of this study was to test the effectiveness of sugammadex on perioperative times and on the incidences of adverse events when compared with the active control, neostigmine, for minimally invasive gastric sleeve surgery.
Methods: Following institutional review board approval, patient characteristics, type of primary neuromuscular blocking reversal agents, operating room discharge times, post-anaesthesia care unit recovery times, and incidences of and treatment for postoperative nausea and vomiting and orotracheal reintubation were the measures of interest. Superiority testing determined the between-group means differences of the reversal agents on the two perioperative time periods of interest.
Results: Superiority testing demonstrated no improvement of the two perioperative times with sugammadex. There was no clinical difference in the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting or in the number of antiemetic doses received in the post-anaesthesia care unit between the two groups. Finally, the two orotracheal reintubations in the post-anaesthesia care unit were in the sugammadex administered group.
Conclusion: These results with sugammadex provide no perioperative time savings or reduce the incidence and treatment for postoperative nausea and vomiting in the post-anaesthesia care unit when compared with neostigmine.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Perioperative Practice (JPP) is the official journal of the Association for Perioperative Practice (AfPP). It is an international, peer reviewed journal with a multidisciplinary ethos across all aspects of perioperative care. The overall aim of the journal is to improve patient safety through informing and developing practice. It is an informative professional journal which provides current evidence-based practice, clinical, management and educational developments for practitioners working in the perioperative environment. The journal promotes perioperative practice by publishing clinical research-based articles, literature reviews, topical discussions, advice on clinical issues, current news items and product information.