Kogler 2012.

Methods	Study design: prospective, randomized study Sample size calculation: no information available
Participants	Number of randomized participants: 31 Inclusion criteria: adult; ASA IV; scheduled for procedures in interventional bronchoscopy Exclusion criteria: no information available
Interventions	Anaesthesia: induced with midazolam, propofol, and sufentanil; maintained with increments of propofol NMBA: single intubating dose: rocuronium 0.6 mg/kg; maintenance dose: rocuronium 0.15 mg/kg Comparison: sugammadex 2.0 mg/kg (n = 16) vs neostigmine 70 µg/kg (n = 15) Administration time of sugammadex or neostigmine: PTC 1 to 2
Outcomes	Primary efficacy parameter: time to recovery of TOFR to 0.9 Other parameters: time from beginning of anaesthesia to time of patient discharge to the PACU and blood gas analysis at time of discharge, adverse events
Notes	Publication type: meeting abstract Country: Croatia Conversions: none Handling of adverse events: No discrepancy exists between AEs presented in the original article and those reported in this review Authors’ conclusions: Sugammadex provided significantly faster recovery time from rocuronium‐induced profound neuromuscular block in comparison with neostigmine, and shorter duration from beginning of anaesthesia to patient discharge to PACU with lower values of PaCO2 Contact: third trial author Maja Karaman Ilic contacted: mkilic@inet.hr on 13.10.2015; no reply received
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	"Randomized"; no further information
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Unable to assess owing to insufficient information
Blinding of participants (performance bias)	Unclear risk	Unable to assess owing to insufficient information
Blinding of personnel (performance bias)	Unclear risk	Unable to assess owing to insufficient information
Blinding of primary outcome assessment (detection bias)	Unclear risk	Unable to assess owing to insufficient information
Blinding of safety assessment (detection bias)	Unclear risk	Unable to assess owing to insufficient information
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Unable to assess owing to insufficient information
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	Study protocol not available, but published meeting abstract clearly includes all expected outcomes
Funding bias	Unclear risk	Unable to assess owing to insufficient information
Other bias	Unclear risk	Unable to assess owing to insufficient information