Advertisement

Problems with Reversal in Adults

  • J. Norman
Conference paper

Abstract

Griffith and Johnson’s original description [1] of the use of tubocurarine shows them to have had an anticholinesterase available but not to have used it. Their patients did not need artificial ventilation and appeared to suffer no ill effects. But when I started training in the early 1960’s the doses used were greater, artificial ventilation was almost universal when relaxants were used as were anticholinesterases — and some patients showed the problem of ’neostigmine-resistant curarization’. Beecher and Todd’s study [2] implicated relaxants as a cause of death. Harrison [3] claimed that some twenty percent of deaths associated with anaesthesia were due to the misuse of relaxants.

Keywords

Neuromuscular Blockade Artificial Ventilation Maximum Inspiratory Pressure Residual Block Double Burst Stimulation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Griffith, H.R., Johnson, E. The use of curare in general anaesthesia. Anesthesiology 1942; 3: 418–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Beecher, H. K., Todd, D. P. Study of deaths associated with anesthesia and surgery based on a study of 599,548 anesthesias in 10 institutions 1948–1952 inclusive. Annals of Surgery 1954; 140: 2–35.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Harrison,G.G. Death attributable to anaesthesia; its incidence and the commoner causes. In Lectures in Anesthesiology No 2 (ed. J.S.M. Zorab), p15. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Shorten,G.D. Postoperative residual curarisation: incidence, aetiology and associated morbidity. Anaesthesia and Intensive Care 1993; 21: 782–789.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bevan, D. R., Donati, F., Kopman, A. F. Reversal of neuromuscular blockade. Anesthesiology 1992; 77: 785–805.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Viby-Mogensen, J., Jensen, N. H., Engbaek, J., Ording, H., Skovgaard, L. T., Chraemmer Jorgensen,B. Tactile and visual estimation of the response to train-of-four stimulation. Anesthesiology 1985; 63: 440–443.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Engbaek, J., Ostergaard, D., Viby-Mogensen, J. Double burst stimulation (DBS) : a new pattern of nerve stimulation to identify residual neuromuscular block. British Journal of Anaesthesia 1989; 62: 274–278.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Viby-Mogensen,J., Jorgensen, B. C., Ording, H. Residual curarization in the recovery room. Anesthesiology 1979; 50:539–.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bevan, D. R., Smith, C. E., Donati, F. Postoperative neuromuscular blockade: a comparison between atracurium, vecuronium and pancuronium. Anesthesiology 1988; 32:272–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Japan 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. Norman
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Anaesthetics, Southampton General HospitalUniversity of SouthamptonSouthamptonUK

Personalised recommendations