Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41123780›Full record

ArticleAnnals of intensive care2025

Neuromuscular blockade and their monitoring in the intensive care unit: a multicenter observational prospective study.

Bertrand Hermann, Guillaume Decormeille, Tiphanie Gobé, Nathanaël Mangeard, Adel Maamar, Saria Sayadi, Bénédicte Pernod, Nadine Robquin, Jean-Pierre Ponthus, Sophie Le Potier and 29 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of intensive care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04028362 (Neuromuscular Blockade in the Intentive Care Unit, an Observational Study.), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT04028362 completednot on this map

Neuromuscular Blockade in the Intentive Care Unit, an Observational Study.

TypeobservationalSponsorFrench Society for Intensive CareRan2019 to 2020Enrolled282ConditionsCritical Care, Mechanical Ventilation, Neuromuscular BlockadeArmsNeuromuscular Blocking Agents
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

39 authors.

Bertrand HermannService de Médecine intensive-Réanimation, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), 20 rue Leblanc, 75015, Paris, France. bertrand.hermann@aphp.fr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9071-3415
Guillaume DecormeilleService de Réanimation Médicale, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Toulouse, Toulouse, France.
Tiphanie GobéService de Réanimation Médicale, CHU Pontchaillou, Rennes, France.
Nathanaël MangeardService de Réanimation Médicale, CHU Pontchaillou, Rennes, France.
Adel MaamarService de Réanimation Médicale, CHU Pontchaillou, Rennes, France.
Saria SayadiService de Médecine intensive-Réanimation, Hôpital Ambroise Paré, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Paris, France.
Bénédicte PernodService de Médecine intensive-Réanimation, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), 20 rue Leblanc, 75015, Paris, France.
Nadine RobquinService de Médecine intensive-Réanimation, Hôpital Lucie et Raymond Aubrac, Villeneuve-Saint-Georges, France.
Jean-Pierre PonthusService de Médecine intensive-Réanimation, Hôpital Lucie et Raymond Aubrac, Villeneuve-Saint-Georges, France.
Sophie Le PotierService de Réanimation Polyvalente, CH de Lorient, Lorient, France.
Pierre BoujuService de Réanimation Polyvalente, CH de Lorient, Lorient, France.
Angélique BalabanianService de Réanimation Médico-Chirurgicale, Hôpital René Dubos, Pontoise, France.
Antoine FrouinService de Réanimation Polyvalente, CH d'Avignon, Avignon, France.
Sébastien Moschietto *Service de Réanimation Polyvalente, CH d'Avignon, Avignon, France.
Gwenaelle JacqService de Médecine intensive-Réanimation, CH André Mignot, Le Chesnay, France.
Emeline VillemontDivision of Anesthesia, Critical Care, Pain and Emergency Medicine, Nîmes University Hospital, University of Montpellier, Nîmes, France.
Clémence HoubéService de Réanimation Polyvalente Adulte, Hôpital Necker, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Paris, France.
Anaïs QueyreauService de Réanimation Polyvalente Adulte, Hôpital Necker, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Paris, France.
Célina MorandService de Médecine intensive-Réanimation, CHU Poitiers, France.
Florence BoissierService de Médecine intensive-Réanimation, CHU Poitiers, France.
Jean-Baptiste LascarrouService de Médecine intensive-Réanimation, CHU Nantes, France.
Sabine ValeraService de Médecine intensive-Réanimation, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Marseille, Marseille, France.
Sami HraiechService de Médecine intensive-Réanimation, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Marseille, Marseille, France.
Laure ClouetService de Médecine intensive-Réanimation, CHU Besançon, France.
Gaël PitonService de Médecine intensive-Réanimation, CHU Besançon, France.
Cindérella NoëlUnité de Soins Intensifs, Hôpital Civil Marie Curie, Lodelinsart, Belgique.
Anne JoostenUnité de Soins Intensifs, Hôpital Civil Marie Curie, Lodelinsart, Belgique.
Cécilia Tabra OsorioService de Médecine intensive-Réanimation, Centre hospitalier Intercommunal de Créteil, Créteil, France.
Adrien ConstanService de Médecine intensive-Réanimation, Centre hospitalier Intercommunal de Créteil, Créteil, France.
Jérôme CecchiniService de Médecine intensive-Réanimation, Centre hospitalier Intercommunal de Créteil, Créteil, France.
Gwennaelle MercierService de Soins Intensifs, Hôpital Erasme, HUB, Bruxelles, Belgique.
Arnaud BruyneelHealth Economics, Hospital Management and Nursing Research Department, School of Public Health, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Bruxelles, Belgium.
Chloé VillamauxService de Réanimation Polyvalente, CH Mayotte, Mamoudzou, France.
François PoussetService de Réanimation Polyvalente, CH Mayotte, Mamoudzou, France.
Nicholas HemingService de Médecine intensive-Réanimation, Hôpital Raymond Poincaré, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Garches, France.
Laurent PoirouxService de Médecine intensive-Réanimation, CHU d'Angers, Angers, France.
Jean-François LlitjosLaboratoire BioMérieux, Craponne, France.
Saber Davide BarbarDivision of Anesthesia, Critical Care, Pain and Emergency Medicine, Nîmes University Hospital, University of Montpellier, Nîmes, France.
SRLF Trial Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNeuromuscular blocking agents may improve outcomes in specific conditions, including the early phase of acute respiratory distress syndrome. However, neuromuscular blocking agents are associated with side effects and uncertainty persists regarding their optimal dosing and efficacy. Our objective was to describe the use of neuromuscular blocking agents in a real-world setting.

methodsWe conducted a multicenter, prospective observational study, including adult patients who underwent invasive mechanical ventilation and received a continuous infusion of neuromuscular blocking agents. Patients were recruited across 19 intensive care units in France and Belgium.

resultsFrom November 16, 2019, to February 19, 2020, a total of 2248 patients were hospitalized and mechanically ventilated in 19 participating ICUs. Of these, 270 (12%) patients received at least one dose of neuromuscular blocking agents, and 232 (10.3%) received a continuous infusion. The main indications for neuromuscular blocking agents use were acute respiratory distress syndrome (61%), prevention of shivering during therapeutic hypothermia (16%) and patient-ventilator asynchrony (12%). Infusion was initiated in median at 0 [0-2] days after ICU admission, with a median duration of 38 [22-71] hours. Cisatracurium was the preferred agent (74%). Neuromuscular blocking agents monitoring by train-of-four was employed in 48% of patients. Intensive care unit-acquired weakness was diagnosed in 25% of patients, pressure ulcers in 14% and ventilator-associated pneumonia in 26%. The median lengths of mechanical ventilation and ICU stay were 9 [4-16] and 13 [6-22] days, and ICU mortality was 41%. In multivariable analyses, a duration of neuromuscular blocking agents infusion exceeding 48 hours was associated with a lower cumulative incidence of weaning success (SHR 0.83 [0.76, 0.91], p < 0.001) and higher incidences of ventilator-associated pneumonia, while neuromuscular blocking agents monitoring was associated with both increased intensive care unit-acquired weakness (OR 2.90 [1.2, 7.01], p = 0.018) and reduced ICU mortality (HR 0.55 [95%CI 0.32, 0.95], p = 0.032).

conclusionIn our study, the prevalence of continuous neuromuscular blocking agents infusion among mechanically ventilated patients in the intensive care unit was 10.3%. While acute respiratory distress syndrome was the main indication, over one-third of patients received neuromuscular blocking agents for other reasons. A duration of neuromuscular blocking agents infusion exceeding 48 hours was associated with longer mechanical ventilation and increased complications. The role of neuromuscular blocking agents monitoring remains unclear. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04028362 Registered on 18 July 2019, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04028362 . The study was conducted by the French Intensive Care Society/Société de Réanimation de Langue Française Trial Group.

Indexed as

Acute respiratory distress syndromeCritical careMechanical ventilationNeuromuscular blockade

Identifiers

PMID41123780
PMCPMC12546236

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.