A panel of clinician scientists with expertise in neuromuscular blockade (NMB) monitoring was convened with a charge to prepare a consensus statement on indications for and proper use of such monitors. The aims of this article are to: (a) provide the rationale and scientific basis for the use of quantitative NMB monitoring; (b) offer a set of recommendations for quantitative NMB monitoring standards; (c) specify educational goals; and (d) propose training recommendations to ensure proper neuromuscular monitoring and management. The panel believes that whenever a neuromuscular blocker is administered, neuromuscular function must be monitored by observing the evoked muscular response to peripheral nerve stimulation. Ideally, this should be done at the hand muscles (not the facial muscles) with a quantitative (objective) monitor. Objective monitoring (documentation of train-of-four ratio ≥0.90) is the only method of assuring that satisfactory recovery of neuromuscular function has taken place. The panel also recommends that subjective evaluation of the responses to train-of-four stimulation (when using a peripheral nerve stimulator) or clinical tests of recovery from NMB (such as the 5-second head lift) should be abandoned in favor of objective monitoring. During an interim period for establishing these recommendations, if only a peripheral nerve stimulator is available, its use should be mandatory in any patient receiving a neuromuscular blocking drug. The panel acknowledges that publishing this statement per se will not result in its spontaneous acceptance, adherence to its recommendations, or change in routine practice. Implementation of objective monitoring will likely require professional societies and anesthesia department leadership to champion its use to change anesthesia practitioner behavior.

Our results suggest a lack of agreement among anesthesia providers about the best way to monitor neuromuscular function. Efforts to improve awareness by developing formal training programs and/or publishing official guidelines on best practices to reduce the incidence of postoperative neuromuscular weakness and patient morbidity are warranted.

Postoperative residual neuromuscular block has been recognized as a potential problem for decades, and it remains so today. Traditional pharmacologic antagonists (anticholinesterases) are ineffective in reversing profound and deep levels of neuromuscular block; at the opposite end of the recovery curve close to full recovery, anticholinesterases may induce paradoxical muscle weakness. The new selective relaxant-binding agent sugammadex can reverse any depth of block from aminosteroid (but not benzylisoquinolinium) relaxants; however, the effective dose to be administered should be chosen based on objective monitoring of the depth of neuromuscular block. To guide appropriate perioperative management, neuromuscular function assessment with a peripheral nerve stimulator is mandatory. Although in many settings, subjective (visual and tactile) evaluation of muscle responses is used, such evaluation has had limited success in preventing the occurrence of residual paralysis. Clinical evaluations of return of muscle strength (head lift and grip strength) or respiratory parameters (tidal volume and vital capacity) are equally insensitive at detecting neuromuscular weakness. Objective measurement (a train-of-four ratio greater than 0.90) is the only method to determine appropriate timing of tracheal extubation and ensure normal muscle function and patient safety.

We conducted a meta-analysis to examine the effect of intraoperative monitoring of neuromuscular function on the incidence of postoperative residual curarisation (PORC). PORC has been considered present when a patient has a train-of-four (TOF) ratio of < 0.7 or < 0.9. We analysed data from 24 trials (3375 patients) that were published between 1979 and 2005. We excluded data on mivacurium from this meta-analysis because only three studies had examined the incidence of PORC associated with its use. Long- and intermediate-acting neuromuscular blocking drugs had been given to 662 and 2713 patients, respectively. Neuromuscular function was monitored in 823 patients (24.4%). A simple peripheral nerve stimulator was used in 543 patients, and an objective monitor was used in 280. The incidence of PORC was found to be significantly lower after the use of intermediate neuromuscular blocking drugs. We could not demonstrate that the use of an intraoperative neuromuscular function monitor decreased the incidence of PORC.

All subjects had significant signs and symptoms of residual block at a TOF ratio of 0.70; none considered themselves remotely "street ready" at this time. The authors believe that satisfactory recovery of neuromuscular function after mivacurium-induced neuromuscular block requires return of the TOF ratio to a value > 0.90 and ideally to unity.

No abstract

No abstract

Acceleromyographic TOF values tend to overestimate the extent of EMG recovery. Acceleromyographic TOF values <0.90 are indicative of incomplete neuromuscular recovery.