Anesth Pain Med.  2021 Apr;16(2):133-137. 10.17085/apm.21014.

The latest trend in neuromuscular monitoring: return of the electromyography

• Lee W

• KMID: 2515538
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.17085/apm.21014

Abstract

To reduce the risk of residual neuromuscular blockade, neuromuscular monitoring must be performed. Acceleromyography (AMG)-based neuromuscular monitoring was regarded as “clinical gold standard” and widely applied. However, issues related to patient’s posture and overestimation of train-of-four ratio associated with AMG-based neuromuscular monitoring have increased. Recently, electromyography (EMG)-based neuromuscular monitoring is receiving renewed attention, since it overcomes AMG’s weaknesses. However, both AMG-based and EMG-based systems are useful when certain considerations are followed. Ultimately, to assure the patient’s good outcomes, the choice of monitoring system is not as important as the monitoring itself, which should be always implemented in such patients.

Keyword

Delayed emergence from anesthesia; Electromyography; Neuromuscular blocking agents; Neuromuscular monitoring

Reference

1. Barash P, Bieterman K, Hersey D. Game changers: the 20 most important anesthesia articles ever published. Anesth Analg. 2015; 120:663–70.

2. Griffith HR, Johnson GE. The use of curare in general anesthesia. Anesthesiology. 1942; 3:418–20.

3. Beecher HK, Todd DP. A study of the deaths associated with anesthesia and surgery: based on a study of 599, 548 anesthesias in ten institutions 1948-1952, inclusive. Ann Surg. 1954; 140:2–35.

4. Grosse-Sundrup M, Henneman JP, Sandberg WS, Bateman BT, Uribe JV, Nguyen NT, et al. Intermediate acting non-depolarizing neuromuscular blocking agents and risk of postoperative respiratory complications: prospective propensity score matched cohort study. BMJ. 2012; 345:e6329.

5. Kirmeier E, Eriksson LI, Lewald H, Jonsson Fagerlund M, Hoeft A, Hollmann M, et al. POPULAR Contributors. Post-anaesthesia pulmonary complications after use of muscle relaxants (POPULAR): a multicentre, prospective observational study. Lancet Respir Med. 2019; 7:129–40.

6. Saager L, Maiese EM, Bash LD, Meyer TA, Minkowitz H, Groudine S, et al. Incidence, risk factors, and consequences of residual neuromuscular block in the United States: the prospective, observational, multicenter RECITE-US study. J Clin Anesth. 2019; 55:33–41.

7. Christie TH, Churchill-Davidson HC. The St. Thomas's Hospital nerve stimulator in the diagnosis of prolonged apnoea. Lancet. 1958; 1:776.

8. Jensen E, Viby-Mogensen J, Bang U. The accelograph: a new neuromuscular transmission monitor. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 1988; 32:49–52.

9. Viby-Mogensen J, Jensen E, Werner M, Nielsen HK. Measurement of acceleration: a new method of monitoring neuromuscular function. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 1988; 32:45–8.

10. Fuchs-Buder T, Claudius C, Skovgaard LT, Eriksson LI, Mirakhur RK, Viby-Mogensen J; 8th International Neuromuscular Meeting. Good clinical research practice in pharmacodynamic studies of neuromuscular blocking agents II: the Stockholm revision. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2007; 51:789–808.

11. Pieters A, De Wolff M, Vanlinthout L. A comparison of mechanomyography and acceleromyography for the assessment of rocuronium induced neuromuscular block. Acta Anaesthesiol Belg. 2002; 53:85.

12. Kirkegaard-Nielsen H, Helbo-Hansen HS, Lindholm P, Pedersen HS, Severinsen IK, Schmidt MB. New equipment for neuromuscular transmission monitoring: a comparison of the TOF-Guard with the Myograph 2000. J Clin Monit Comput. 1998; 14:19–27.

13. Söderström CM, Eskildsen KZ, Gätke MR, Staehr-Rye AK. Objective neuromuscular monitoring of neuromuscular blockade in Denmark: an online-based survey of current practice. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2017; 61:619–26.

14. Carter JA, Arnold R, Yate PM, Flynn PJ. Assessment of the Datex Relaxograph during anaesthesia and atracurium-induced neuromuscular blockade. Br J Anaesth. 1986; 58:1447–52.

15. Katz RL. Comparison of electrical and mechanical recording of spontaneous and evoked muscle activity. The clinical value of continuous recording as an aid to the rational use of muscle relaxants during anesthesia. Anesthesiology. 1965; 26:204–11.

16. Engbaek J. Monitoring of neuromuscular transmission by electromyography during anaesthesia. A comparison with mechanomyography in cat and man. Dan Med Bull. 1996; 43:301–16.

17. Kopman AF. The dose-effect relationship of metocurine: the integrated electromyogram of the first dorsal interosseous muscle and the mechanomyogram of the adductor pollicis compared. Anesthesiology. 1988; 68:604–7.

18. Naguib M, Brull SJ, Kopman AF, Hunter JM, Fülesdi B, Arkes HR, et al. Consensus statement on perioperative use of neuromuscular monitoring. Anesth Analg. 2018; 127:71–80.

19. Suzuki T, Fukano N, Kitajima O, Saeki S, Ogawa S. Normalization of acceleromyographic train-of-four ratio by baseline value for detecting residual neuromuscular block. Br J Anaesth. 2006; 96:44–7.

20. Kopman AF. Normalization of the acceleromyographic train-of-four fade ratio. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2005; 49:1575–6.

21. Liang SS, Stewart PA, Phillips S. An ipsilateral comparison of acceleromyography and electromyography during recovery from nondepolarizing neuromuscular block under general anesthesia in humans. Anesth Analg. 2013; 117:373–9.

22. Claudius C, Skovgaard LT, Viby-Mogensen J. Is the performance of acceleromyography improved with preload and normalization? A comparison with mechanomyography. Anesthesiology. 2009; 110:1261–70.

23. Murphy GS, De Boer HD, Eriksson LI, Miller RD. Reversal (antagonism) of neuromuscular blockade. Miller's anesthesia. 8th ed. In : Miller RD, editor. Philadelphia: Elsevier;2015. p. 995–1027.e5.

24. Murphy GS, Szokol JW, Avram MJ, Greenberg SB, Shear TD, Deshur M, et al. Comparison of the TOFscan and the TOF-Watch SX during recovery of neuromuscular function. Anesthesiology. 2018; 129:880–8.

25. Smith DC, Booth JV. Influence of muscle temperature and forearm position on evoked electromyography in the hand. Br J Anaesth. 1994; 72:407–10.

26. Nemes R, Diószeghy B, Pongrácz A, Tassonyi E, Fülesdi B. Performance assessment of a new electromyography-based neuromuscular monitor and subjective discomfort in unmedicated volunteers. J Anesth Clin Res. 2018; 9:848.

27. Bowdle A, Bussey L, Michaelsen K, Jelacic S, Nair B, Togashi K, et al. A comparison of a prototype electromyograph vs. a mechanomyograph and an acceleromyograph for assessment of neuromuscular blockade. Anaesthesia. 2020; 75:187–95.

28. Bowdle A, Bussey L, Michaelsen K, Jelacic S, Nair B, Togashi K, et al. Counting train-of-four twitch response: comparison of palpation to mechanomyography, acceleromyography, and electromyography. Br J Anaesth. 2020; 124:712–7.

29. Bussey L, Jelacic S, Togashi K, Hulvershorn J, Bowdle A. Train-of-four monitoring with the twitchview monitor electctromyograph compared to the GE NMT electromyograph and manual palpation. J Clin Monit Comput. 2020; doi: 10.1007/s10877-020-00615-7. [Epub ahead of print].

30. Nemes R, Nagy G, Murphy GS, Logvinov II, Fülesdi B, Renew JR. Awake volunteer pain scores during neuromuscular monitoring. Anesth Analg. 2020; 130:941–8.

31. Nemes R, Renew JR. Clinical practice guideline for the management of neuromuscular blockade: what are the recommendations in the USA and other countries? Curr Anesthesiol Rep. 2020; 10:90–8.

32. Seo HJ, Lee YK, Lee SS, Kim KS, Yang HS. A survey of postoperative residual neuromuscular block and neuromuscular monitoring. Anesth Pain Med. 2010; 5:70–4.

33. Kim JS, Han JW, Lee JH, Choi JM, Kim HJ, Sung TY, et al. Current use of neuromuscular blocking agents and antagonists in Korea: a 2018 survey. Anesth Pain Med. 2019; 14:441–8.