The risk of neuromuscular blockade is certainly minimized by sugammadex in combination with monitoring. However, the effect of sugammadex-aided recovery on patients’ satisfaction is unclear. This study compared the Quality of Recovery (QoR)-15 score, which is a patient-reported outcome, in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Eighty patients were randomly assigned to the neostigmine or sugammadex groups. At the end of surgery, neostigmine or sugammadex was administered, and tracheal extubation was performed after confirmation of a train of four ratio ≥ 0.9. The QoR-15 questionnaire was administered at 1 day before surgery and on post-operative days (POD) 1 and 2. The primary outcome was the QoR-15 score on POD 1. The secondary outcomes were the QoR-15 score on POD 2, modified Aldrete score, length of post-anesthetic care unit stay, post-operative pain, administration of anti-emetics, urinary retention, and length of hospital stay. No significant differences were found in QoR-15 scores on POD 1 (94.4 vs. 95.5, p = 0.87) or 2 (116.3 vs. 122, p = 0.33). Secondary outcomes were also comparable, with the exception of urinary retention (15.8% neostigmine vs. 2.6% sugammadex, p = 0.04). This study demonstrated that the quality of recovery was comparable between the neostigmine and sugammadex groups when reversal and tracheal extubation were performed in accordance with the current guidelines.

Background: Few studies have evaluated the use of automated artificial intelligence (AI)-based pain recognition in postoperative settings or the correlation with pain intensity. In this study, various machine learning (ML)-based models using facial expressions, the analgesia nociception index (ANI), and vital signs were developed to predict postoperative pain intensity, and their performances for predicting severe postoperative pain were compared.Methods: In total, 155 facial expressions from patients who underwent gastrectomy were recorded postoperatively; one blinded anesthesiologist simultaneously recorded the ANI score, vital signs, and patient self-assessed pain intensity based on the 11-point numerical rating scale (NRS). The ML models’ area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROCs) were calculated and compared using DeLong’s test.Results: ML models were constructed using facial expressions, ANI, vital signs, and different combinations of the three datasets. The ML model constructed using facial expressions best predicted an NRS ≥ 7 (AUROC 0.93) followed by the ML model combining facial expressions and vital signs (AUROC 0.84) in the test-set. ML models constructed using combined physiological signals (vital signs, ANI) performed better than models based on individual parameters for predicting NRS ≥ 7, although the AUROCs were inferior to those of the ML model based on facial expressions (all P < 0.050). Among these parameters, absolute and relative ANI had the worst AUROCs (0.69 and 0.68, respectively) for predicting NRS ≥ 7.Conclusions: The ML model constructed using facial expressions best predicted severe postoperative pain (NRS ≥ 7) and outperformed models constructed from physiological signals.

Regional nerve blocks (NBs) mitigate the occurrence of postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD) and postoperative delirium (POD) in adult patients undergoing thoracic surgery. This study aimed to determine the exact effect of NBs on POCD and POD. Electronic databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus, and Web of Science, were searched for studies. The primary outcome was the incidence of POD or POCD. The secondary outcome was pain scores assessed 24 and 48 h postoperatively. We calculated the log odds ratio (LOR) and standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The LOR was converted to an odds ratio (OR). In the analysis of 1010 patients from seven randomized controlled trials, POD and POCD rates were 14.1% and 16.7%, respectively, in the NB group, and higher, at 27.3% and 35.2%, in the control group. NBs reduced the incidence of POD (OR, 0.44; 95%CI 0.30 to 0.64; p < 0.001; I² = 0.00%) and POCD (OR, 0.43; 95%CI 0.24 to 0.76; p < 0.001; I² = 0.00%). NBs reduced pain scores at 24 h (SMD, −2.60; 95%CI −3.90 to −1.30, p < 0.001; I² = 97.68%) and 48 h (SMD, −1.80; 95%CI −3.18 to −0.41, p = 0.01; I² = 98.14%) postoperatively. NBs mitigated the occurrence of POD and POCD in adult patients after thoracic surgery.

The use of sugammadex can reduce post-operative residual neuromuscular blockade, which is known to increase the risk of post-operative respiratory events. However, its effect on post-operative pulmonary complications is not obvious. This study was performed to evaluate the effects of sugammadex on post-operative pulmonary complications in patients undergoing laparoscopic gastrectomy between 2013 and 2017. We performed propensity score matching to correct for selection bias. Post-operative pulmonary complications (i.e., pneumonia, respiratory failure, pleural effusion, atelectasis, pneumothorax, and aspiration pneumonitis) were evaluated from the radiological and laboratory findings. We also evaluated admission to the intensive care unit after surgery, re-admission or an emergency room visit within 30 days after discharge, length of hospital stay, re-operation, and mortality within 90 days post-operatively as secondary outcomes. In the initial cohort of 3802 patients, 541 patients were excluded, and 1232 patients were analyzed after propensity score matching. In the matched cohort, pleural effusion was significantly reduced in the sugammadex group compared to the neostigmine group (neostigmine 23.4% vs. sugammadex 18%, p = 0.02). Other pulmonary complications and secondary outcomes were not significantly different between the groups. In comparison to neostigmine, the use of sugammadex was associated with a lower incidence of post-operative pleural effusion in laparoscopic gastrectomy.

Background and Objectives: This meta-analysis compares the safety and efficacy of remimazolam and dexmedetomidine for sedation during regional anesthesia, focusing on respiratory and hemodynamic outcomes. Materials and Methods: A systematic search of CENTRAL, Embase, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science up to November 2024 identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing remimazolam with dexmedetomidine. Outcomes included respiratory depression (primary outcome), bradycardia, hypotension, hypertension, respiratory and heart rates, mean arterial pressure, sedation onset time, emergence time, and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). Effect sizes were calculated as relative risks (RRs) or mean differences (MDs) using random-effects models. Results: Five RCTs involving 439 participants were included. Remimazolam did not significantly increase respiratory depression risk compared to dexmedetomidine (RR: 1.36, 95% CI [0.39, 4.71], p = 0.6305, I² = 44%). Bradycardia incidence was lower with remimazolam (RR: 0.15, 95% CI [0.06, 0.39], p = 0.0001, I² = 0%). Remimazolam showed faster sedation onset (MD: −6.04 min, 95% CI [−6.99, −5.09], p = 0.0000, I² = 68%). Both drugs demonstrated similar occurrences of hypotension and hypertension, respiratory rates, mean arterial pressures, emergence times, and incidences of PONV. Conclusions: Remimazolam offers comparable safety and efficacy to dexmedetomidine, with advantages such as lower bradycardia risk and faster sedation onset. These findings support remimazolam as a viable sedative option during regional anesthesia, although further large-scale studies are warranted to confirm these results and optimize sedation practices.

Park I, et al. Yonsei Med J. 2025 Mar;66(3):160-171. https://doi.org/10.3349/ymj.2024.0020