loading page

Comparison of Bleeding Profiles of Sugammadex and Neostigmine in Orthotopic Liver Transplantation
  • +1
  • Hong Liang,
  • Launia White,
  • Ryan M Chadha,
  • J Ross Renew
Hong Liang
Mayo Clinic Hospital Jacksonville

Corresponding Author:[email protected]

Author Profile
Launia White
Mayo Clinic Florida
Author Profile
Ryan M Chadha
Mayo Clinic Florida
Author Profile
J Ross Renew
Mayo Clinic Hospital Jacksonville
Author Profile

Abstract

In the era of “fast-track’ liver transplantation (LT), neuromuscular blockade (NMB) antagonists such as neostigmine or sugammadex are used to achieve the restoration of neuromuscular function. While sugammadex reverses NMB faster than neostigmine, it has been shown to prolong prothrombin time (PT) and activated thromboplastin time (aPTT). However, this agent’s impact on coagulation during LT is not understood. We compare bleeding risk associated with sugammadex versus neostigmine during liver transplantation. This is a single-center, retrospective review of LT patients who received NMB antagonists intraoperatively between 01/01/2015 to 05/31/2018 at Mayo Clinic in Florida. The primary outcomes were postoperative day (POD) 0-1 bleeding events and POD 0 values of aPTT and INR. Total 241 patients were included, with 135 patients in the neostigmine group (NG) and 106 in the sugammadex group (SG). POD 0-1 postoperative bleeding requiring transfusion occurred in 20% of NG versus 10.4% in SG. POD 0-1 re-operation for bleeding occurred in 1.5% in NG vs. 0% in SG. POD 0 mean INR was 2.0±0.4 in both groups. POD 0 mean aPTT was 45.5±7.9 in NG vs. 49.3±9.0 in SG. Our retrospective study suggests that sugammadex is not associated with an increased risk of bleeding compared to neostigmine use.