Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36594947›Full record

Trial reportJAMA2023

Effect of Remifentanil vs Neuromuscular Blockers During Rapid Sequence Intubation on Successful Intubation Without Major Complications Among Patients at Risk of Aspiration: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Nicolas Grillot, Gilles Lebuffe, Olivier Huet, Sigismond Lasocki, Xavier Pichon, Mathieu Oudot, Nathalie Bruneau, Jean-Stéphane David, Pierre Bouzat, Alexandra Jobert and 6 more

Erratum issued 2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · bronzeAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in JAMA, 2023. 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 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
15.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT03960801 phase3completednot on this map

Assessment of Remifentanil for Rapid Sequence Induction and Intubation in Full Stomach Patient Compared to Muscle Relaxant. A Non-inferiority Simple Blind Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorNantes University HospitalRan2019 to 2021Enrolled1,150ConditionsIntra-tracheal IntubationArmsRemifentanil group, neuromuscular blockade group
NCT07588165 recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Nociception Assessment During Rapid Sequence Induction: A Prospective Observational Study of Practices and Complications - The NARSI Study

TypeobservationalSponsorCentre Hospitalier Princesse GraceRan2026 to 2028Enrolled150ConditionsRapide Sequence Induction, Tracheal Intubation, Nociception, General AnesthesiaArmsNo Intervention: Observational Cohort
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 45 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Clinical Use of Endotracheal Intubation Without Neuromuscular Blockade: The Current Stage of Knowledge.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2026
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Opioid analgesics for sedation-based gastrointestinal endoscopy.World journal of gastrointestinal pharmacology and therapeutics · 2025
    Review
  15. A Review of Non-Cardiac Complications of General Anesthesia: The Current State of Knowledge.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2025
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. The knowns and unknowns of glucagon-like peptide 1 agonists and perioperative care.Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie · 2024
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors at 13 institutions in 2 countries.

Nicolas GrillotNantes Université, CHU Nantes, Service d'Anesthésie Réanimation Chirurgicale, INSERM CIC 0004 Immunologie et Infectiologie, Nantes, France.
Gilles LebuffeUniversité Lille, CHU Lille, ULR 7354-GRITA Groupe de Recherche sur les Formes Injectables et les Technologies Associées, Pôle Anesthésie Réanimation, Lille, France.
Olivier HuetDépartement d'Anesthésie Réanimation et Médecine Péri-opératoire, CHRU Brest, Université de Bretagne occidentale, Brest, France.
Sigismond LasockiDepartment of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, University Hospital of Angers, Angers, France.
Xavier PichonDepartment of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, University Hospital of Toulouse, University Toulouse III-Paul-Sabatier, Toulouse, France.
Mathieu OudotDepartment of Anesthesiology, Centre Hospitalier Departemental, La Roche sur Yon, France.
Nathalie BruneauUniversité Lille, CHU Lille, Hopital Salengro, Pôle Anesthésie Réanimation, Lille, France.
Jean-Stéphane DavidService d'Anesthésie Réanimation, Groupe Hospitalier Sud, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Research on Healthcare Performance (RESHAPE), INSERM U1290, University Claude Bernard Lyon 1, Lyon, France.
Pierre BouzatUniversité Grenoble Alpes, Inserm, U1216, CHU Grenoble Alpes, Grenoble Institut Neurosciences, Grenoble, France.
Alexandra JobertNantes Université, CHU Nantes, DRCI, Departement Promotion, Nantes, France.
Martine Tching-SinNantes Université, CHU Nantes, Service de Pharmacie, Hôtel Dieu, Nantes, France.
Fanny FeuilletNantes Université, Univerisité Tours, CHU Nantes, CHU Tours, INSERM, Methods in Patient-Centered Outcomes and Health Research, SPHERE, Nantes, France.
Raphael CinottiNantes Université, CHU Nantes, Service d'Anesthésie Réanimation Chirurgicale, INSERM CIC 0004 Immunologie et Infectiologie, Nantes, France.
Karim AsehnouneNantes Université, CHU Nantes, Service d'Anesthésie Réanimation Chirurgicale, INSERM CIC 0004 Immunologie et Infectiologie, Nantes, France.
Antoine RoquillyNantes Université, CHU Nantes, Service d'Anesthésie Réanimation Chirurgicale, INSERM CIC 0004 Immunologie et Infectiologie, Nantes, France.
Atlanrea Study GroupSociété Française d’Anesthésie Réanimation (SFAR) Research Network
Société Française d'Allergologie · FRResearch Network (United States) · USInserm · FRCentre d'Investigation Clinique de Nantes · FRNantes Université · FRCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Lille · FRCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Poitiers · FRCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Tours · FRGroupe de Recherche sur les formes Injectables et les Technologies AssociéesRoche (France) · FRUniversité Claude Bernard Lyon 1 · FRUniversité d'Angers · FRUniversité de Bretagne Occidentale · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: It is uncertain whether a rapid-onset opioid is noninferior to a rapid-onset neuromuscular blocker during rapid sequence intubation when used in conjunction with a hypnotic agent. Objective: To determine whether remifentanil is noninferior to rapid-onset neuromuscular blockers for rapid sequence intubation. Design, Setting, and Participants: Multicenter, randomized, open-label, noninferiority trial among 1150 adults at risk of aspiration (fasting for <6 hours, bowel occlusion, recent trauma, or severe gastroesophageal reflux) who underwent tracheal intubation in the operating room at 15 hospitals in France from October 2019 to April 2021. Follow-up was completed on May 15, 2021. Interventions: Patients were randomized to receive neuromuscular blockers (1 mg/kg of succinylcholine or rocuronium; n = 575) or remifentanil (3 to 4 μg/kg; n = 575) immediately after injection of a hypnotic. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was assessed in all randomized patients (as-randomized population) and in all eligible patients who received assigned treatment (per-protocol population). The primary outcome was successful tracheal intubation on the first attempt without major complications, defined as lung aspiration of digestive content, oxygen desaturation, major hemodynamic instability, sustained arrhythmia, cardiac arrest, and severe anaphylactic reaction. The prespecified noninferiority margin was 7.0%. Results: Among 1150 randomized patients (mean age, 50.7 [SD, 17.4] years; 573 [50%] women), 1130 (98.3%) completed the trial. In the as-randomized population, tracheal intubation on the first attempt without major complications occurred in 374 of 575 patients (66.1%) in the remifentanil group and 408 of 575 (71.6%) in the neuromuscular blocker group (between-group difference adjusted for randomization strata and center, -6.1%; 95% CI, -11.6% to -0.5%; P = .37 for noninferiority), demonstrating inferiority. In the per-protocol population, 374 of 565 patients (66.2%) in the remifentanil group and 403 of 565 (71.3%) in the neuromuscular blocker group had successful intubation without major complications (adjusted difference, -5.7%; 2-sided 95% CI, -11.3% to -0.1%; P = .32 for noninferiority). An adverse event of hemodynamic instability was recorded in 19 of 575 patients (3.3%) with remifentanil and 3 of 575 (0.5%) with neuromuscular blockers (adjusted difference, 2.8%; 95% CI, 1.2%-4.4%). Conclusions and Relevance: Among adults at risk of aspiration during rapid sequence intubation in the operating room, remifentanil, compared with neuromuscular blockers, did not meet the criterion for noninferiority with regard to successful intubation on first attempt without major complications. Although remifentanil was statistically inferior to neuromuscular blockers, the wide confidence interval around the effect estimate remains compatible with noninferiority and limits conclusions about the clinical relevance of the difference. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03960801.

Indexed as

Analgesics, OpioidIntubation, IntratrachealNeuromuscular Blocking AgentsRapid Sequence Induction and IntubationRemifentanilRespiratory AspirationAdultAgedFemaleHumansHypnotics and SedativesMaleMiddle AgedAnalgesics, OpioidHypnotics and SedativesNeuromuscular Blocking AgentsRemifentanil

Identifiers

PMID36594947
PMCPMC9856823
OpenAlexW4313514056

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.