ANAESTHESIOLOGY - GENERAL ANAESTHESIA / ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Comparison of kinemyography and electromyography during onset of and recovery from non-depolarising neuromuscular blockade: prospective observational study
More details
Hide details
1
Charles University, Faculty of Medicine in Hradec Králové, Czech Republic
2
Department of Anaesthesiology, Perioperative Medicine and Intensive Care, J.E. Purkinje University, Masaryk Hospital in Usti nad Labem, Czech Republic
3
Department of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care, Bulovka University Hospital, Praha, Czech Republic
Submission date: 2026-03-23
Final revision date: 2026-07-05
Acceptance date: 2026-07-27
Publication date: 2026-08-17
Corresponding author
Michal Kalina
Department of Anaesthesiology, Perioperative Medicine and Intensive Care, J.E. Purkinje University, Masaryk Hospital in Usti nad Labem, Socialni Pece 3316/12A, 401 13 Usti nad Labem, Czech Republic
Anaesthesiol Intensive Ther 2026;58(1):172-178
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Background:
Quantitative neuromuscular monitoring is essential for the safe management of neuromuscular blockade. Although electromyography (EMG) is increasingly regarded as a reference technique, kinemyography (KMG) remains widely used in clinical practice; however, clinically relevant differences between these modalities during onset and recovery of neuromuscular blockade are not fully understood.
Methods:
In this prospective observational study, adult patients undergoing general anaesthesia with non-depolarising neuromuscular blocking agents were simultaneously monitored using EMG and KMG applied to opposite hands, and onset and recovery times of neuromuscular block were compared between modalities; additionally, a novel EMG-derived parameter (T1%) was explored as a marker of recovery.
Results:
In the 137 analysed patients, EMG and KMG differed during onset and recovery, with greater and only statistically significant disagreement during onset (EMG 158 ± 74 s vs. KMG 118 ± 68 s, P < 0.001; recovery: EMG 27 ± 22 min vs. KMG 24 ± 21 min, P = 0.242). T1% tended to be higher with sugammadex than with spontaneous recovery (P = 0.074).
Conclusions:
KMG and EMG are not interchangeable for perioperative neuromuscular monitoring; the observed disagreement suggests that KMG may overestimate neuromuscular block, whereas EMG-based monitoring may provide a safer approach. The EMG-derived parameter T1% appears promising but requires further validation before routine clinical use.
REFERENCES (14)
1.
Koo CH. From revival to routine: electromyography-based neuromuscular monitoring in contemporary anesthesia practice. Anesth Pain Med (Seoul) 2025; 20: 222-229. DOI: 10.17085/apm.25267.
2.
Kirmeier E, Eriksson LI, Lewald H, Fagerlund MJ, Hoeft A, Hollmann M, et al. Post-anaesthesia pulmonary complications after use of muscle relaxants (POPULAR): a multicentre, prospective observational study. Lancet Respir Med 2019; 7: 129-140. DOI: 10.1016/S2213-2600(18)30294-7.
3.
Carvalho H, Verdonck M, Cools W, Geerts L, Forget P, Poelaert J. Forty years of neuromuscular monitoring and postoperative residual curarisation: a meta-analysis and evaluation of confidence in network meta-analysis. Br J Anaesth 2020; 125: 466-482. DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bja.....
4.
Naguib M, Brull SJ, Johnson KB. Conceptual and technical insights into the basis of neuromuscular monitoring. Anaesthesia 2017; 72 (Suppl 1): 16-37. DOI: 10.1111/anae.13738.
5.
Fuchs-Buder T, Romero CS, Lewald H, Lamperti M, Afshari A, Hristovska AM, et al. Peri-operative management of neuromuscular blockade: a guideline from the European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2023; 40: 82-94. DOI: 10.1097/EJA.0000000000001769.
6.
Ueda N, Muteki T, Tsuda H, Masuda Y, Ohishi K, Tobata H. Determining the optimal time for endotracheal intubation during onset of neuromuscular blockade. Eur J Anaesthesiol 1993; 10: 3-8.
7.
Trager G, Michaud G, Deschamps S, Hemmerling TM. Comparison of phonomyography, kinemyography and mechanomyography for neuromuscular monitoring. Can J Anesth 2006; 53: 130-135. DOI: 10.1007/BF03021816.
8.
Stewart PA, Freelander N, Liang S, Heller G, Phillips S. Comparison of electromyography and kinemyography during recovery from non-depolarising neuromuscular blockade. Anaesth Intensive Care 2014; 42: 378-384. DOI: 10.1177/0310057X1404200316.
9.
Khandkar C, Liang S, Phillips S, Lee CY, Stewart PA. Comparison of kinemyography and electromyography during spontaneous recovery from non-depolarising neuromuscular blockade. Anaesth Intensive Care 2016; 44: 745-751. DOI: 10.1177/0310057X1604400618.
10.
Gaffar EA, Fattah SA, Atef HM, Omera MA, Abdel-Aziz MA. Kinemyography (KMG) versus Electromyography (EMG) neuromuscular monitoring in pediatric patients receiving cisatracurium during general anesthesia. Egypt J Anaesth 2013; 29: 247-253. DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egja....
11.
Thilen SR, Weigel WA, Todd MM, Dutton RP, Lien CA, Grant SA, et al. 2023 American Society of Anesthesiologists practice guidelines for monitoring and antagonism of neuromuscular blockade: a report by the American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Neuromuscular Blockade. Anesthesiology 2023; 138: 13-41. DOI: 10.1097/ALN.0000000000004379.
12.
Rodney G, Raju P, Brull SJ. Neuromuscular block management: evidence-based principles and practice. BJA Educ 2024; 24: 13-22. DOI: 10.1016/j.bjae.2023.10.005.
13.
Cammu G. Residual neuromuscular blockade and postoperative pulmonary complications: what does the recent evidence demonstrate? Curr Anesthesiol Rep 2020; 10: 131-136. DOI: 10.1007/s40140-020-00388-4.
14.
Liu HM, Yu H, Zuo YD, Liang P. Postoperative pulmonary complications after sugammadex reversal of neuromuscular blockade: a systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis. BMC Anesthesiol 2023; 23: 130. DOI: 10.1186/s12871-023-02094-0.