Correspondence  |   July 2017
In Reply
Author Notes
  • NorthShore University HealthSystem, University of Chicago Pritzker School of Medicine, Evanston, Illinois (G.S.M.). dgmurphy2@yahoo.com
  • (Accepted for publication April 13, 2017.)
    (Accepted for publication April 13, 2017.)×
Article Information
Correspondence
Correspondence   |   July 2017
In Reply
Anesthesiology 7 2017, Vol.127, 198. doi:10.1097/ALN.0000000000001699
Anesthesiology 7 2017, Vol.127, 198. doi:10.1097/ALN.0000000000001699
After a careful rereading of the letter from Drs. Meyer and Eikermann, we remain confused as to their objection to our editorial.1  Their concern seems to be semantic in nature. In particular, they seem uneasy with the term routine. We think that they have ignored the basic message that we were attempting to make.
As stated in our editorial, neostigmine administration is not required once it has been determined that the train-of-four (TOF) ratio at the adductor pollicis has returned to a value of 0.90 or greater. This information can only be ascertained by using a quantitative neuromuscular monitor. Unfortunately, we suspect that the great majority of anesthesia practitioners still do not have access to these devices. What then is a clinician who only possesses a conventional peripheral nerve stimulator to do at the end of surgery when tactile or visual fade on TOF stimulation can no longer be detected?
First Page Preview
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview ×
View Large