ReviewDer Anaesthesist2014
[Rocuronium and sugammadex in emergency medicine: requirements of a muscle relaxant for rapid sequence induction].
Review in Der Anaesthesist, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sugammadex in Emergency Situations.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Article
- [Preclinical emergency anesthesia : A current state analysis from 2015-2017].Der Anaesthesist · 2019Article
- [Different levels of experience with anesthetic agents of German emergency physicians : Results of an online survey].Der Anaesthesist · 2018Article
- [Update on muscle relaxation : What comes after succinylcholine, rocuronium and sugammadex?]Der Anaesthesist · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
unlabelledThe required characteristics of neuromuscular blockers for rapid sequence induction (RSI) are clearly defined: nearly immediate effectiveness and short duration of effect. These demands are not only necessary for ideal conditions of quick endotracheal intubation without mask-bag intermediate ventilation but are also essential to enable a quick return to sufficient spontaneous breathing in case of a cannot intubate cannot ventilate situation. Until recently only succinylcholine had these characteristics; however, a considerable number of dangerous side effects and contraindications had to be accepted. In 1996, rocuronium was introduced, which was capable of immediately establishing good intubation conditions similar to succinylcholine. However, the median duration of effect is 45-60 min and it therefore contains a risk if the patient cannot be ventilated and oxygenated. Therefore, rocuronium is considered a good alternative but not a complete substitute for succinylcholine. The introduction of sugammadex in 2008 for quick reversal of rocuronium changed matters. Comparative studies from the past 4 years dealing with rocuronium/sugammadex versus uccinylcholine in RSI showed that rocuronium and sugammadex combined enabled a significantly faster return to sufficient spontaneous ventilation in emergency situations and also proved that the use of rocuronium significantly reduced the degree of desaturation during the interval between injection and ventilation postintubation.
conclusionrocuronium used in hospital is a very good substitute for succinylcholine as a neuromuscular blocker during RSI as long as sugammadex is at hand for reversal. It remains to be considered that in a situation with severe problems of the airway and breathing, which are the main preclinical indications for intubation, a forward strategy for ventilation of the patient is the only acceptable way in most cases and the return to spontaneous breathing is not an alternative. Therefore, the value of sugammadex and also of succinylcholine is limited for these situations. Additionally, economic factors such as storage conditions for rocuronium and the cost of sugammadex must also be considered.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24595442What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.