Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2xdlg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-07T11:45:43.307Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Intubation conditions after rocuronium or succinylcholine for rapid sequence induction with alfentanil and propofol in the emergency patient

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 September 2005

P. B. Larsen ,
E. G. Hansen ,
L. S. Jacobsen ,
J. Wiis ,
P. Holst ,
H. Rottensten ,
R. Siddiqui ,
H. Wittrup ,
A. M. Sørensen  and
S. Persson
...Show all authors
P. B. Larsen
Affiliation:
University of Copenhagen, Department of Anaesthesiology, Herlev Hospital, Herlev, Denmark
E. G. Hansen
Affiliation:
University of Copenhagen, Department of Anaesthesiology, Herlev Hospital, Herlev, Denmark
L. S. Jacobsen
Affiliation:
University of Copenhagen, Department of Anaesthesiology, Glostrup Hospital, Glostrup, Denmark
J. Wiis
Affiliation:
University of Copenhagen, Department of Anaesthesiology, Herlev Hospital, Herlev, Denmark
P. Holst
Affiliation:
University of Copenhagen, Department of Anaesthesiology, Glostrup Hospital, Glostrup, Denmark
H. Rottensten
Affiliation:
University of Copenhagen, Department of Anaesthesiology, Herlev Hospital, Herlev, Denmark
R. Siddiqui
Affiliation:
University of Copenhagen, Department of Anaesthesiology, Glostrup Hospital, Glostrup, Denmark
H. Wittrup
Affiliation:
University of Copenhagen, Department of Anaesthesiology, Herlev Hospital, Herlev, Denmark
A. M. Sørensen
Affiliation:
University of Copenhagen, Department of Anaesthesiology, Herlev Hospital, Herlev, Denmark
S. Persson
Affiliation:
University of Copenhagen, Department of Anaesthesiology, Glostrup Hospital, Glostrup, Denmark
J. Engbæk
Affiliation:
University of Copenhagen, Department of Anaesthesiology, Herlev Hospital, Herlev, Denmark
Get access

Extract

Summary

Background and objective: Previous studies mainly conducted on elective patients recommend doses of 0.9–1.2 mg kg−1 rocuronium to obtain comparable intubation conditions with succinylcholine 1.0 mg kg−1 after 60 s during a rapid-sequence induction. We decided to compare the overall intubating conditions of standard doses of rocuronium 0.6 mg kg−1 and succinylcholine 1.0 mg kg−1 during a strict rapid-sequence induction regimen including propofol and alfentanil. Methods: Male and female patients (ASA I–III) older than 17 yr scheduled for emergency abdominal or gynaecological surgery and with increased risk of pulmonary aspiration of gastric content were randomized to a rapid-sequence induction with succinylcholine 1.0 mg kg−1 or rocuronium 0.6 mg kg−1. Patients with a predicted difficult airway were excluded. A senior anaesthesiologist ‘blinded’ for the randomization performed the intubation 60 s after injection of the neuromuscular blocker. Intubating conditions were evaluated according to an established guideline. Tracheal intubation not completed within 30 s was recorded as failed. Results: 222 patients were randomized. Three patients had their operation cancelled and 10 did not fulfil the inclusion criteria. Clinically acceptable intubation conditions were present in 93.5% and 96.1% of patients in the succinylcholine group (n = 107) and the rocuronium group (n = 102), respectively (P = 0.59). Conclusions: During a rapid-sequence induction with alfentanil and propofol, both rocuronium 0.6 mg kg−1 and succinylcholine 1.0 mg kg−1 provide clinically acceptable intubation conditions in 60 s in patients scheduled for emergency surgery. Under the conditions of this rapid-sequence induction regimen rocuronium may be a substitute for succinylcholine.

Keywords

ANAESTHESIA GENERALINTUBATION INTRATRACHEAL, rapid-sequence inductionNEUROMUSCULAR BLOCKING AGENTS, succinylcholine, rocuronium
Type
Original Article
Information
European Journal of Anaesthesiology , Volume 22 , Issue 10 , October 2005 , pp. 748 - 753
Copyright
© 2005 European Society of Anaesthesiology

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Sparr HJ, Luger T, Heidegger T, Putensen-Himmer G. Comparison of intubation conditions after rocuronium and suxamethonium following ‘rapid sequence induction’ with thiopentone in elective cases. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 1996; 40: 425–430.Google Scholar
Andrews JI, Kumar N, van den Brom RHG, Olkkola KT, Roest GJ, Wright PMC. A large simple randomised trial of rocuronium versus succinylcholine in rapid-sequence induction of anaesthesia along with propofol. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 1999; 43: 4–8.Google Scholar
Kirkegaard-Nielsen H, Caldwell JE, Berry PD. Rapid tracheal intubation with rocuronium: a probability approach to determining dose. Anesthesiology 1999; 91: 131–136.Google Scholar
Heier T, Caldwell JE. Rapid tracheal intubation with large-dose rocuronium: a probabilility-based approach. Anesth Analg 2000; 90: 175–179.Google Scholar
McKeating K, Bali IM, Dundee JW. The effects of thiopentone and propofol on upper airway integrity. Anaesthesia 1988; 43: 638–640.Google Scholar
Dobson AP, McCluskey A, Meakin G, Baker D. Effective time to satisfactory intubation conditions after administration of rocuronium in adult: comparison of propofol and thiopentone for rapid sequence induction of anaesthesia. Anaesthesia 1999; 54: 172–176.Google Scholar
Sparr HJ, Giesinger S, Ulmer H, Hollenstein-Zacke M, Luger TJ. Influence of induction techniqe on intubating conditions after rocuronium in adults: comparison with rapid-sequence induction using thiopentone and suxamethonium. Br J Anaesth 1996; 77: 339–342.Google Scholar
Weiss JH, Gratz I, Goldberg ME, Afshar M, Insinga F, Larijani G. Double-blind comparison of two doses of rocuronium and succinylcholine for rapid-sequence intubation. J Clin Anesth 1997; 9: 379–382.Google Scholar
Nelson JM, Morell RC, Butterworth JF. Rocuronium versus succinylcholine for rapid-sequence induction using a variation of the timing principle. J Clin Anesth 1997; 9: 317–320.Google Scholar
McCourt KC, Salmela L, Mirakhur RK et al. Comparison of rocuronium and suxamethonium for use during rapid sequence induction of anaesthesia. Anaesthesia 1998; 53: 867–871.Google Scholar
Chiu CL, Jaais F, Wang CY. Effect of rocuronium compared with succinylcholine on intraocular pressure during rapid sequence induction of anaesthesia. Br J Anaesth 1999; 82: 757–760.Google Scholar
Perry J, Lee J, Wells G. Rocuronium versus succinylcholine for rapid sequence induction intubation. In: Cochrane Review. The Cochrane Library, Issue 2, 2003.
Jacobsen J, Jensen E, Waldau T, Poulsen TD. Preoperative evaluation of intubation conditions in patients scheduled for elective surgery. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 1996; 40: 421–424.Google Scholar
Viby-Mogensen J, Engbæk J, Eriksson LI et al. Good clinical research practice (GCRP) in pharmacodynamic studies of neuromuscular blocking agents. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 1996; 40: 59–74.Google Scholar
Gal TJ. Airway management. In: Miller RD, ed. Miller's Anesthesia, 6th edn. Philadelphia: Elsevier Churchill Livingstone, 2005.
Lerman J. Study design in clinical research: sample size estimation and power analysis. Can J Anesth 1996; 43: 184–191.Google Scholar
Scheller MS, Zornow MH, Saidman LJ. Tracheal intubation without the use of muscle relaxants: a technique using propofol and varying doses of alfentanil. Anesth Analg 1992; 75: 788–793.Google Scholar
Wright PMC, Caldwell JE, Miller RD. Onset and duration of rocuronium and succinylcholine at the adductor pollicis and laryngeal adductor muscles in anesthetized humans. Anesthesiology 1994; 81: 1110–1115.Google Scholar
Cooper R, Mirakhur RK, Clarke RSJ, Boules Z. Comparison of intubating conditions after administration of ORG 9426 (rocuronium) and suxamethonium. Br J Anaesth 1992; 69: 269–273.Google Scholar
Pühringer FK, Khuenl-Brady KS, Koller J, Mitterschiffthaler G. Evaluation of the endotracheal intubating conditions of rocuronium (ORG 9426) and succinylcholine in outpatient surgery. Anesth Analg 1992; 75: 37–40.Google Scholar
Magorian T, Flannery KB, Miller RD. Comparison of rocuronium, succinylcholine, and vecuronium for rapid-sequence induction of anesthesia in adults patients. Anesthesiology 1993; 79: 913–918.Google Scholar
Meistelman C, Plaud B, Donati F. Rocuronium (Org 9426) neuromuscular blockade at the adductor muscles of the larynx and adductor pollicis in humans. Can J Anaesth 1992; 39: 665–669.Google Scholar
Dhonneur G, Kirov K, Slavov V, Duvaldestin P. Effects of an intubating dose of succinylcholine and rocuronium on the larynx and diaphragm: an electromyographic study in humans. Anesthesiology 1999; 90: 951–955.Google Scholar
Cooley S, Mobley KA, Bone ME, Fell D. Haemodynamic changes after induction of anaesthesia and tracheal intubation following propofol or thiopentone in patients of ASA grade I and III. Br J Anaesth 1989; 63: 423–428.Google Scholar
Brossy MJ, James MFM, Janicki PK. Haemodynamic and catecholamine changes after induction of anaesthesia with either thiopentone or propofol with suxamethonium. Br J Anaesth 1994; 72: 596–598.Google Scholar
Scheinin B, Scheinin M, Vuorinen J, Lindgren L. Alfentanil obtunds the cardiovascular and sympathoadrenal responses to suxamethonium-facilitated laryngoscopy and intubation. Br J Anaesth 1989; 62: 385–392.Google Scholar
Miller DR, Martineau RJ, O'Brien H et al. Effects of alfentanil on the hemodynamic and catecholeamine response to tracheal intubation. Anesth Analg 1993; 76: 1040–1046.Google Scholar
Maguire AM, Kumar N, Parker JL, Rowbotham DJ, Thompson JP. Comparison of effects of remifentanil and alfentanil on cardiovascular response to tracheal intubation in hypertensive patients. Br J Anaesth 2001; 86: 90–93.Google Scholar
Habib AS, Parker JL, Maguire AM, Rowbotham DJ, Thompson JP. Effects of remifentanil and alfentanil on the cardiovascular responses to induction of anaesthesia and tracheal intubation in the elderly. Br J Anaesth 2002; 88: 430–433.Google Scholar