Tailored Routine Sugammadex Reversal is More Cost-Effective Than Neostigmine: A Narrative Review

Review Data

Q: Is the topic relevant to the journal's area of interest? Is it contemporary and interesting for

researchers?

A: Very good

Abstract & Keywords

Q: Are all required components included in the abstract? Are the keywords appropriately chosen?

A: Not applicable.

Goal

Q: Is the goal explicitly stated in the Introduction? Is its formulation clear and unambiguous?

A: Very good

Structure

Q: Is the paper's structure coherent? Is it in coherence with the goal of the paper?

A: Very good

Tools and Methods

Q: Are the methods the author uses adequate and well used?

A: Not applicable.

Discussion & Conclusion

Q: Is it related to the results presented before? Do you consider them as coherent?

A: Good

Comments:

The study provides significant information about Sugammadex showing to confer a faster and more complete reversal of neuromuscular blockade (NMB) in comparison to neostigmine potentially reducing the risk of incomplete NMB reversal, thereby decreasing postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs). It also aptly discusses three recent publications investigating the use of sugammadex and the incidence of PPCs.

Literature

Q: Does the author utilize relevant literature?

A: Very good

Author's knowledge

Q: What is the level of the author’s knowledge? Does the author utilize all recent contributions relevant to the topic?

A: Very good

Length

Q: Is the length of the paper adequate to the significance of the topic? Do you suggest shortening the paper without losing its value?

A: Good

Figures & Tables

Q: Does the author use them suitably? Are legend and notations clear?

A: Not applicable.

Writing style

Q: Is it clear and understandable?

A: Very good

Further comments on the paper

Comments: This article offers a thorough and detailed analysis to support the argument that sugammadex reversal reduces the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs), particularly in a high-risk cohort, and is overall more cost-effective than conventional reversal when balanced against the potential costs of managing PPCs across the whole patient journey.

Q: Would you recommend this manuscript for further publication?

A: Yes - Suitable to be published

If you have any questions and clarifications you can write to the journal.

Thanks,
Science Repository Team