MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125752736 · doi:10.1017/s0265021504234123

In off-pump cardiac surgery, neuromuscular monitoring should be mandatory and immediate extubation is feasible

2004· letter· en· W2125752736 on OpenAlexaffabout
J Olivier, Thomas M. Hemmerling

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Anaesthesiology · 2004
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Sedative Agents
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNeuromuscular transmissionRocuroniumNeuromuscular BlockadeAnesthesiaNeuromuscular monitoringNeuromuscular Blocking AgentsCardiac surgeryNeuromuscular diseaseSugammadexSurgeryIntubationInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

EDITOR: We read with great interest the article by Cammu et al.[1] investigating the effect of neuromuscular monitoring on the feasibility of immediate extubation after off-pump cardiac surgery. They examined whether the use of neuromuscular transmission monitoring results in differences in the incidence of postoperative residual curarization, the endotracheal extubation rate and outcome after continuous infusion of rocuronium in patients undergoing off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery. They performed a study of two groups of patients undergoing off-pump cardiac surgery, one group of patients with neuromuscular monitoring, one without neuromuscular monitoring. They state that they found no additional benefit of using neuromuscular transmission monitoring, and conclude that it is not wise to perform immediate postoperative extubation in off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery. We would like to raise a number of points. We are concerned about the application of a neuromuscular blocking drug without the concomitant use of any neuromuscular monitoring device. A recent editorial [2] made it clear that it is time to routinely use quantitative neuromuscular monitoring whenever a neuromuscular blocking drug is used. The authors did not use a quantitative or a qualitative method to monitor neuromuscular blockade and we believe that this represents an uncommon practice. Furthermore, the authors argue that continuous infusions of neuromuscular blocking drugs are commonly used during coronary artery bypass grafting. There is no explanation advanced as to why a profound neuromuscular block is necessary for cardiac surgery. In our opinion, profound neuromuscular block in cardiac surgery stems from a time when cardiac anaesthesia was based more on relaxation and analgesia than actual anaesthesia. However, in recent years, concerns about intraoperative awareness and a general change of practice towards the more liberal use of volatile anaesthetics, such as sevoflurane, have greatly diminished the use of neuromuscular blocking drugs. We routinely use neuromuscular monitoring to control the intermittent application of rocuronium during cardiac surgery and we try to maintain a train of four ratio of 0.25-0.5 during surgery. Sufficiently deep anaesthesia seems to be the main strategy in order to avoid not only patient movement but also intraoperative awareness. Finally, the authors suggest that 'immediate postoperative extubation has been made realistic due to strong analgesics'. We cannot support this hypothesis. They have discounted all of the recent advances in early and immediate extubation after different types of cardiac surgery which have been made possible by using regional techniques, especially high thoracic epidurals [3-5]. In their study, the authors did not present postoperative pain scores but stated that significant postoperative pain was the main problem which lead to failure of immediate extubation. This is not surprising when one considers their intraoperative analgesic regimen where patients received remifentanil infusions during surgery and, as pre-emptive analgesia, 15 mg pirinitramide (piritramide). Due to the ultra-short action of remifentanil, we would contend that 15 mg of pirinitramide would not provide sufficient analgesia to allow the immediate extubation of any patient after any form of major surgery. Pre-emptive analgesia using opioids such as morphine during solely remifentanil-based analgesia is associated with significant pain immediately after major surgery and can lead to postoperative respiratory depression in the acute or intermediate postoperative period [6]. We (and others [4]) have successfully extubated patients immediately after cardiac surgery using conventional, fentanyl-based analgesia, with average pain scores of 4 [5]. However, thoracic epidural analgesia is superior to conventional opioid-based analgesia for pain control and provides significantly lower pain scores. We believe that thoracic epidural analgesia provides the best chance of success for immediate extubation with a practically pain-free, comfortable patient. The conclusion that routine immediate postoperative extubation in off-pump cardiac surgery is not wise seems biased and shows that the author's strategy of analgesia is not adequate. The fact that 8 out of 16 of their patients could not be extubated because of an inadequate analgesic regimen should not lead the reader to think that immediate extubation is impossible or dangerous after cardiac surgery. Routine immediate extubation after off-pump cardiac surgery is possible as long as normothermia is maintained and sufficient analgesia is provided (preferably by thoracic epidural analgesia). Neuromuscular monitoring should be applied whenever neuromuscular blocking drugs are used and profound neuromuscular block is not necessary for cardiac surgery when a sufficient level of anaesthesia is provided. J. F. Olivier T. M. Hemmerling Department of Anesthesiology; Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CHUM); Université de Montréal; Montréal, Québec, Canada

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.402
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.061
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.223 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of AnaesthesiologySame topicAnesthesia and Sedative AgentsFrench-language works237,207