The use of neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBA) has grown due to the development of laparoscopic and minimally invasive procedures. Respiratory insufficiency, an elevated risk of aspiration, postoperative pulmonary complications, and subsequent reintubation are among the risks linked to the residual block. The normal clinical practice calls for the pharmacologic "reversal" of these agents with either sugammadex or neostigmine prior to extubation. The administration of neostigmine is linked to a number of potential complications. In response, anaesthesiologists have begun to prescribe sugammadex more frequently for treating residual block and reversing blockade with NMBA. This review article compares and assesses neostigmine and sugammadex thoroughly in order to determine the extent to which they work as agents to reverse neuromuscular blockade. The review's findings highlight sugammadex's considerable advantages - Sugammadex's ability to quickly and reliably achieve desired train-of-four (TOF) ratios - over neostigmine in reversing neuromuscular blockade in a variety of surgical settings. In contrast, neostigmine's limitations regarding efficacy and rate of reversal were consistently noted in all of the reviewed studies, despite the fact that it is still widely used due to its lower cost and extensive clinical experience. Sugammadex is a superior option for reversing neuromuscular blockade, but incorporating it into standard clinical practice necessitates carefully weighing its potential benefits and drawbacks. Sugammadex provides notable benefits over neostigmine in terms of speed, predictability, and safety.
Keywords: anaesthesia; neostigmine; neuromuscular blocking agents; sugammadex; train-of-four ratios.
Copyright © 2024, Maqusood et al.