Comparison of neuromuscular block measured by compressomyography at the upper arm and electromyography at the adductor pollicis muscle in obese and non-obese patients: An observational study.
Electromyography
Neuromuscular monitoring
Neuromuscular nondepolarizing agents
Journal
Journal of clinical anesthesia
ISSN: 1873-4529
Titre abrégé: J Clin Anesth
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8812166
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 2022
06 2022
Historique:
received:
12
08
2021
revised:
06
01
2022
accepted:
28
01
2022
pubmed:
9
2
2022
medline:
18
3
2022
entrez:
8
2
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Quantitative neuromuscular monitoring is traditionally evaluated at the adductor pollicis muscle. By contrast, the TOF-Cuff compressomyograph evaluates neuromuscular block (NMB) at the upper arm. However, compressomyography has not been fully validated against other monitoring entities. This study evaluates the agreement between NMB measured by compressomyography at the upper arm and electromyography at the adductor pollicis muscle during various levels of neuromuscular block in patients with and without obesity. NMB was measured at the upper arm by compressomyography (TOF-Cuff) and by electromyography (GE-NMT) at the adductor pollicis. Prospective, multicenter, observational study. Secondary and tertiary care hospitals' operating theatres. 200 non-obese and 50 obese patients. During onset and offset of deep (post-tetanic-count 1-15 twitches), moderate (Train-of-Four-count 1-3 twitches) and shallow (Train-of-Four-ratio 0.01-1.0) depths of NMB were measured in obese and non-obese patients. The bias and limits of agreement of both devices were calculated using a Bland-Altman analysis for repeated measurements. Data obtained during spontaneous recovery (i.e. without the use of reversal agents) were used in the primary analyses. Data from enrolled patients yielded 942 paired post-tetanic-counts, 1175 paired train-of-four-counts and 1574 paired train-of-four ratios during spontaneous recovery. In non-obese patients, mean bias (95% CI) between the two devices was 3.405 (2.294 to 4.517) during deep NMB; -0.023 (-0.205 to 0.160) during moderate NMB and 0.312 (0.287 to 0.338) during shallow NMB. In obese patients, bias was -0.170 (-2.872 to 2.531); 0.178 (-0.202 to 0.558); 0.384 (0.299 to 0.469) for deep, moderate and shallow NMB respectively. There is variable disagreement between the level of NMB measured at the upper arm by compressomyography and at the adductor pollicis muscle measured by electromyography, throughout the various stages of NMB in obese and non-obese patients. Recovery of NMB on compressomyography preceded recovery on electromyography, which may have consequences for reversal and extubation decisions in clinical practice.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35134618
pii: S0952-8180(22)00029-0
doi: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2022.110673
pii:
doi:
Substances chimiques
Neuromuscular Nondepolarizing Agents
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Observational Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
110673Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.