Trial reportJAMA surgery2019
Effect of Cricoid Pressure Compared With a Sham Procedure in the Rapid Sequence Induction of Anesthesia: The IRIS Randomized Clinical Trial.
Trial report in JAMA surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to 3 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 42 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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.
Sellick Maneuver Evaluation in Rapid Sequence Induction of General Anesthesia Non Inferiority Trial
The Clarus Video System (Trachway) and Direct Laryngoscope for Endotracheal Intubation With Cricoid Pressure in Simulated Rapid Sequence Induction Intubation: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial
Ultrasound Assessment On Real Time Effectiveness Of Cricoid Pressure In Paediatric Population Under General Anaesthesia
Who cites it
42 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 149 citations in OpenAlex.
- Safer prehospital anaesthesia: updated guidelines from the Association of Anaesthetists.Anaesthesia · 2026Guideline
- Review article: Effectiveness and risks of cricoid pressure during rapid sequence induction for endotracheal intubation in the emergency department: A systematic review.Emergency medicine Australasia : EMA · 2022Pooled it
- Effect of paratracheal pressure on the glottic view during direct laryngoscopy: a randomized, double blind, non-inferiority trial.Anaesthesiology intensive therapy · 2025Trial
- Trial
- Trial
- Anxiolytic effects of chewing gum during preoperative fasting and patient-centered outcome in female patients undergoing elective gynecologic surgery: randomized controlled study.Scientific reports · 2022Trial
- The Clarus Video System (Trachway) and direct laryngoscope for endotracheal intubation with cricoid pressure in simulated rapid sequence induction intubation: a prospective randomized controlled trial.BMC anesthesiology · 2019Trial
- Korean consensus-based recommendations for preanesthetic gastric ultrasound and anesthetic considerations for GLP-1 receptor agonist-based therapy: a consensus statement from Clinical Practice Guideline Committee of the Korean Society of Anesthesiologists.Korean journal of anesthesiology · 2026Review
- Preoperative fasting guidelines: A narrative review.European journal of anaesthesiology and intensive care · 2026Review
- Key strategies in trauma anesthesia for severe hemorrhage: a narrative review.Korean journal of anesthesiology · 2026Review
- Airway management in the obstetric patient: management strategyRevista colombiana de obstetricia y ginecologia · 2026Review
- All India Difficult Airway Association 2025 guidelines for the management of unanticipated difficult airway in obstetrics under general anaesthesia.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2025Article
- Airway management in critically ill patients.BJA education · 2025Review
- Difficult Airway Management in the Intensive Care Unit: A Narrative Review of Algorithms and Strategies.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Practices of Rapid Sequence Induction for Prevention of Aspiration-An International Declarative Survey.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Post-esophagectomy patients presenting for general anesthesia induction: a survey of practice among US anesthesiologists (PESO-GAIN-S).Journal of anesthesia · 2025Article
- Review
- Sellick's manoeuvre - An old song with new lyrics.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2024Article
- Effectiveness of the Sellick maneuver for painless gastroscopy in patients with esophageal hiatal hernia: A randomized, self‑control trial.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2023Article
- Approach to the Physiologically Challenging Endotracheal Intubation in the Intensive Care Unit.Respiratory care · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Erratum issuedError in Byline.2019
Authors and funding
15 authors at 10 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: The use of cricoid pressure (Sellick maneuver) during rapid sequence induction (RSI) of anesthesia remains controversial in the absence of a large randomized trial. Objective: To test the hypothesis that the incidence of pulmonary aspiration is not increased when cricoid pressure is not performed. Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized, double-blind, noninferiority trial conducted in 10 academic centers. Patients undergoing anesthesia with RSI were enrolled from February 2014 until February 2017 and followed up for 28 days or until hospital discharge (last follow-up, February 8, 2017). Interventions: Patients were assigned to a cricoid pressure (Sellick group) or a sham procedure group. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary end point was the incidence of pulmonary aspiration (at the glottis level during laryngoscopy or by tracheal aspiration after intubation). It was hypothesized that the sham procedure would not be inferior to the cricoid pressure. The secondary end points were related to pulmonary aspiration, difficult tracheal intubation, and traumatic complications owing to the tracheal intubation or cricoid pressure. Results: Of 3472 patients randomized, mean (SD) age was 51 (19) years and 1777 (51%) were men. The primary end point, pulmonary aspiration, occurred in 10 patients (0.6%) in the Sellick group and in 9 patients (0.5%) in the sham group. The upper limit of the 1-sided 95% CI of relative risk was 2.00, exceeding 1.50, failing to demonstrate noninferiority (P = .14). The risk difference was -0.06% (2-sided 95% CI, -0.57 to 0.42) in the intent-to-treat population and -0.06% (2-sided 95% CI, -0.56 to 0.43) in the per protocol population. Secondary end points were not significantly different among the 2 groups (pneumonia, length of stay, and mortality), although the comparison of the Cormack and Lehane grade (Grades 3 and 4, 10% vs 5%; P <.001) and the longer intubation time (Intubation time >30 seconds, 47% vs 40%; P <.001) suggest an increased difficulty of tracheal intubation in the Sellick group. Conclusions and Relevance: This large randomized clinical trial performed in patients undergoing anesthesia with RSI failed to demonstrate the noninferiority of the sham procedure in preventing pulmonary aspiration. Further studies are required in pregnant women and outside the operating room. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02080754.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.