How robust are the STRONGER and STIL-STRONGER studies?

Manfred Blobner, Jennifer M. Hunter, Kurt Ulm

Publikation: Beitrag in FachzeitschriftLeitartikel

4 Zitate (Scopus)

Abstract

In 2020, the Sugammadex vs Neostigmine for Reversal of Neuromuscular Blockade and Postoperative Pulmonary Complications (STRONGER) study provided evidence for the first time that use of sugammadex is associated with fewer postoperative pulmonary complications than use of neostigmine. In a recent publication in the British Journal of Anaesthesia, a secondary analysis of the same data, the Association Between Neuromuscular Blockade Reversal Agent Choice and Postoperative Pulmonary Complications (STIL-STRONGER) study, has produced similar evidence of the advantages of sugammadex over neostigmine in high-risk and older patients undergoing prolonged, elective surgery. Here we consider the implications of the detailed statistical analysis used in these two studies and how its limitations could possibly have enhanced the statistical differences between the two drugs with respect to postoperative pulmonary complications.

OriginalspracheEnglisch
Seiten (von - bis)e41-e44
FachzeitschriftBritish Journal of Anaesthesia
Jahrgang130
Ausgabenummer1
DOIs
PublikationsstatusVeröffentlicht - Jan. 2023
Extern publiziertJa

Fingerprint

Untersuchen Sie die Forschungsthemen von „How robust are the STRONGER and STIL-STRONGER studies?“. Zusammen bilden sie einen einzigartigen Fingerprint.

Dieses zitieren