COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF EFFICIENCY OF ACCELEROMYOGRAPHY AND KINEMYOGRAPHY TO MONITOR NEUROMUSCULAR TRANSMISSION
https://doi.org/10.21292/2078-5658-2015-12-2-40-46
Abstract
The purpose of the study is to compare two techniques of neuromuscular transmission (acceleromyography and kinemyography) during multicomponent anesthesia during abdominal laparoscopic surgery. The average value of the difference between methods during the block start makes 9.6% (95% CI 7.2–12.1), lower agreement limit makes 24.1%, upper agreement level makes +43.3%. The average value of the difference between methods regarding restoration of neuromuscular transmission makes 3.1% (95% CI 3.1-7.5), lower agreement limit makes 24.1%, and upper limit makes 24.0%. The both above techniques are accurate, confident, simple and can be used for evaluation of neuromuscular transmission.
About the Authors
A. L. Lipnitsky
Mogilev Regional Hospital, Mogilev
Belarus
Belarus
A. V. Marochkov
Mogilev Regional Hospital, Mogilev
Belarus
Belarus
References
1. Kanus I.I., Grachev S.S. Comparison of action parameters of arduan, arcuron and esmeron when used for abdominal surgery. Novosti Khirurgii. 2010, vol. 18, no. 6, pp. 82¬89. (In Russ.)
2. Lipnitsky A.L., Marochkov A.V. Comparison of action of cisatracurium and atracurium as components of endotracheal anesthesia by laparoscopic surgery. Novosti Khirurgii. 2014, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 83¬88. (In Russ.)
3. Magomedov M.A., Zabolotskykh I.B. Mioplegia. [Myoplegia] Moscow, Prakticheskaya Meditsina Publ., 2010, 224 p.
4. Marochkov A.V., Lipnitsky A.L., Ryabinina A.I. et al. Use of rocuronium (esmeron) in obese patients during multicomponent endotracheal anesthesia by sevoflurane. Med. Novosti. 2012, no. 7, pp. 80¬83. (In Russ.)
5. Bland J.M., Altman D.G. Statistical method for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986, vol. 327, pp. 307¬310.
6. Claudius C., Viby¬Mogensen J. Acceleromyography for use in scientific and clinical practice: a systematic review of the evidence. Anesthesiology. 2008, vol. 108, no. 6, pp. 1117¬1140.
7. Claudius C., Viby¬Mogensen J., Skovgaard L.T. Is the performance of acceleromyography improved with preload and normalization? A comparison with mechanomyography. Anesthesiology. 2009, vol. 110, no. 6. pp. 1261¬1270.
8. Dahaba A.A., von Klobucar F., Rehak P.H. et al. The neuromuscular transmission module versus the relaxometer mechanomyograph for neuromuscular block monitoring. Anesth. Analg. 2002, vol. 94, pp. 591¬596.
9. Eikermann M., Groeben H., Hüsing J. et al. Predictive value of mechanomyography and accelerometry for pulmonary function in partially paralyzed volunteers. Acta Anaesthesiol. Scand. 2004, vol. 48, no. 3, p. 365¬370.
10. Fuchs¬Buder T., Claudius C., Skovgaard L.T. et al. 8th International Neuro-muscular Meeting. Good clinical research practice in pharmacodynamic studies of neuromuscular blocking agents II: the Stockholm revision. Acta. Anaesthesiol. Scand. 2007, vol. 51, pp. 789¬808.
11. Harper N.J., Martlew R., Strang T. et al. Monitoring neuromuscular block by acceleromyography: comparison of the Mini¬Accelograph with the Myograph 2000. Br. J. Anaesth. 1994, vol. 72, pp. 411¬414.
12. Hemmerling T.M., Le N. Brief review: Neuromuscular monitoring: an update for the clinician. Can. J. Anaesth. 2007, vol. 54, no. 1, pp. 58¬72.
13. Kirkegaard¬Nielsen H., Helbo¬Hansen H.S., Lindholm P. et al. New equipment for neuromuscular transmission monitoring: a comparison of the TOF Guard with the Myograph 2000. J. Clin. Monit. Comput. 1998, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 19¬27.
14. Kopman A.F., Klewicka M.M., Neuman G.G. The relationship between acceleromyographic train¬of¬four fade and single twitch depression. Anesthesiology. 2002, vol. 96, no. 3, pp. 583¬587.
15. Loan P.B., Paxton L.D., Mirakhur R.K. et al. The TOF¬Guard neuromuscular transmission monitor. A comparison with the Myograph 2000. Anaesthesia. 1995, –Vol. 50, pp. 699¬702.
16. Merle J.C., Jurczyk M., Honneur G. et al. Onset of neuromuscular block is the same if the ipsilateral or contralateral limb to the injection site is used for monitoring. Br. J. Anaesth. 1995, –Vol. 74, no. 3, pp. 333¬334.
17. Motamed C., Kirov K., Combes X. et al. Comparison between the Datex-Ohmeda M¬NMT module and a force¬displacement transducer for monitoring neuromuscular blockade. Eur. J. Anaesthesiol. 2003, vol. 20, pp. 467¬469.
18. Stewart P.A., Freelander N., Liang S. et al. Comparison of electromyography and kinemyography during recovery from non¬depolarising neuromuscular blockade. Anaesth. Intens. Care. 2014, vol. 42, no. 3, pp. 378¬384.
19. Viby¬Mogensen J., Jensen E., Werner M. et al. Measurement of acceleration: a new method of monitoring neuromuscular function. Acta Anaesthesiol. Scand. 1988, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 45¬48.
Review
For citations:
Lipnitsky A.L., Marochkov A.V. COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF EFFICIENCY OF ACCELEROMYOGRAPHY AND KINEMYOGRAPHY TO MONITOR NEUROMUSCULAR TRANSMISSION. Messenger of ANESTHESIOLOGY AND RESUSCITATION. 2015;12(2):40-46. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21292/2078-5658-2015-12-2-40-46
Email this article 