Trial reportJournal of clinical monitoring and computing2025
Spontaneous recovery from rocuronium measured by mechanomyography during 100- or 200-Hz tetanic stimulations compared to normalized train-of-four with acceleromyography.
Trial report in Journal of clinical monitoring and computing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05474638 (Comparison of Mechanomyographic 100 Versus 200 Hz 5 Second Tetanic Fade Ratios During Neuromuscular Block Recovery), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Comparison of Mechanomyographic 100 Versus 200 Hz 5 Second Tetanic Fade Ratios During Neuromuscular Block Recovery
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A single-centre, randomised comparison of the performance and safety of a novel mechanomyography sensor with electromyography.British journal of anaesthesia · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Neuromuscular block recovery was evaluated using high-frequency tetanic ulnar nerve simulations compared to normalized train-of-four (NTOF) in anesthetized patients. Under intravenous general anesthesia, we compared rocuronium-induced neuromuscular recovery using 5 s 100- and 200-Hz tetanic stimulations via isometric mechanomyography to acceleromyographic NTOF in 20 consenting patients. The primary outcome was the comparison by Student's t-tests of 100- and 200-Hz tetanic fade ratios (residual force at the end of the contraction / maximal force reached during the 5 s) before rocuronium administration and at different recovery levels. The secondary outcome was the quantification of any significant fade occurring with 100- and 200-Hz stimulations after reaching the acceleromyographic NTOF ratio of 0.9 during subsequent stages of spontaneous recovery until their fade ratios exceeded 0.9. During early (TOF count ≥ 1) and intermediate (NTOF ratio ≥ 0.5) stages of recovery, both 100- and 200-Hz tetanic fade ratios were similarly low. However, during late recovery when NTOF ratio ≥ 0.9, 200-Hz stimulation induced a significantly deeper muscular fade than 100-Hz (tetanic fade ratio 0.20 ± 0.23 vs. 0.64 ± 0.29, P < 0.001). The delays between the recovery of NTOF ratio 0.9 and 100- or 200-Hz tetanic fade ratio 0.9 were 7.7 ± 7.1 and 43.6 ± 14.6 min, respectively. In anesthetized humans, mechanomyographic 200-Hz tetanic stimulation detects lighter levels of residual paralysis than NTOF and 100-Hz tetanic stimulation during a valuable additional period. Registered in the ClinicalTrials.gov Registry NCT05474638 on July 15th 2022.
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.