Response to the Letter regarding “Sugammadex vs neostigmine in post-anesthesia recovery: A systematic review and meta-analysis”

Abstract

This response addresses feedback on our systematic review and meta-analysis comparing sugammadex with neostigmine for neuromuscular block reversal. We acknowledge high heterogeneity for time-based outcomes, likely due to differences in clinical settings and anesthetic/surgical protocols, but pooled effects consistently favored sugammadex for faster and more complete reversal. We agree hypnotic depth and other perioperative factors may modify emergence and airway safety, yet these variables were inconsistently reported and could not be analyzed quantitatively. We also clarify that time outcomes were synthesized using standardized mean differences to account for different reporting units, and any presentation inconsistencies will be corrected. Overall, our findings support pharmacologic superiority of sugammadex with reductions in selected complications, while emphasizing that broader recovery quality may not uniformly improve and should be interpreted in clinical context.