ReviewCanadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie2026
Methods to monitor and evaluate neuromuscular blockade use in intensive care unit patients with hypoxemic respiratory failure and acute respiratory distress syndrome: a scoping review.
Review in Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThough neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBAs) are recommended for managing the cases of patients with moderate to severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) in the intensive care unit (ICU), current guidelines do not provide clear consensus regarding effective NMBA monitoring strategies. In this scoping review, we aimed to describe NMBA monitoring strategies and their associated outcomes among adults undergoing invasive mechanical ventilation for hypoxemic respiratory failure (HRF) and ARDS. SOURCE: We conducted a literature search in MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) (Elton B. Stephens Company [EBSCO]), between 2 and 5 July 2021 and updated on 3 October 2023 and 21 August 2025. Two reviewers independently assessed studies for inclusion and extracted study characteristics, design, the NMBA monitoring strategy, and associated outcomes. PRINCIPLE
findingsIn this scoping review, we identified 2,274 records, with 402 undergoing full text review. We included 12 studies (994 patients) for final synthesis. Two monitoring strategies, peripheral nerve stimulation with train-of-four monitoring and clinical assessment, were described. Ventilatory dyssynchrony was the most reported clinical assessment strategy. We found significant variability among monitoring strategies, goals, and NMBA dosing. A protocol guided NMBA monitoring and administration in nine studies. Protocol use was associated with benefits, including reduced NMBA consumption, achieved target depth of paralysis, and shorter recovery time. No significant differences were described between monitoring strategies and patient outcomes including mortality or duration of mechanical ventilation.
conclusionsCurrent evidence suggests the use of a protocol to guide NMBA monitoring and dosing in the ICU may be associated with benefits. Larger and better-powered studies are needed to determine the optimal NMBA monitoring strategy for patients with HRF and ARDS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42174355What 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.