A Randomized Comparative Assessment of Intubating Conditions and Hemodynamic Effects after Administration of Rocuronium and Succinylcholine for Endotracheal Intubation in Adult Patients for Elective Surgeries
Creators
- 1. Senior Resident, Department of Anesthesia, Bhagwan Mahavir Institute of Medical Sciences, Pawapuri, Nalanda, Bihar, India
- 2. Associate Professor, Department of Anesthesia, Bhagwan Mahavir Institute of Medical Sciences, Pawapuri, Nalanda, Bihar, India
Description
Aim: To compare rocuronium 0.9mg/kg and succinylcholine 2 mg/kg for tracheal intubation at 60 seconds after the administration of muscle relaxants in patients undergoing elective surgeries. Methodology: A randomized controlled study conducted on Department of Anesthesia, Bhagwan Mahavir institute of Medical Sciences, Pawapuri, Nalanda, Bihar, India for one year. 50 adult patients American society of anesthesiologist grade I and II patients. All patients underwent pre-anesthetic evaluation and relevant investigations one day prior to surgery. All patients underwent pre-anesthetic evaluation prior to surgery and written informed consent was obtained. Oral Pantoprazole 40 mg, Alprazolam 0.25mg were given. Patients were randomly assigned to 2 equal groups R and S (n=25) according to computer generated list. Group S received Succinylcholine 2 mg/kg intravenous. Group R received Rocuronium 0.9 mg/kg intravenous. The pulse rate and blood pressure were recorded before and after induction, after injection of muscle relaxant and at 1-, 2-, 3- and 5-min following intubation. Results: In the present study, based on intubating conditions in Rocuronium group, 16% showed score 7, 44% scored 8 and 40% scored 9. Whereas in Succinylcholine group, score 7 was noted in 16%, score 8 in 52% and score 9 in 32%. There was no statistically significant association observed with relation to intubating conditions between the study groups. A higher SBP was recorded in Succinylcholine group compared to Rocuronium group at Post induction, Post muscle relaxant use, 1 Min, 2 Min, and 5 min. At Post induction, Post muscle relaxant use, 1 min this difference was observed to be statistically significant. A higher DBP was recorded in Succinylcholine group compared to Rocuronium group at Post induction, Post muscle relaxant use, at post muscle relaxant use, this difference was observed to be statistically significant. Conclusion: There was no significant change in hemodynamic variables after the administration of Succinylcholine and Rocuronium. There were significant changes in the heart rate and mean arterial pressure with the use of Rocuronium following one minute after the intubation which became preinduction value after 5 minutes. Hence, rocuronium bromide (0.8 mg/kg) can be used as an alternative to Succinylcholine (1.5 mg/kg) in selected situations.
Abstract (English)
Aim: To compare rocuronium 0.9mg/kg and succinylcholine 2 mg/kg for tracheal intubation at 60 seconds after the administration of muscle relaxants in patients undergoing elective surgeries. Methodology: A randomized controlled study conducted on Department of Anesthesia, Bhagwan Mahavir institute of Medical Sciences, Pawapuri, Nalanda, Bihar, India for one year. 50 adult patients American society of anesthesiologist grade I and II patients. All patients underwent pre-anesthetic evaluation and relevant investigations one day prior to surgery. All patients underwent pre-anesthetic evaluation prior to surgery and written informed consent was obtained. Oral Pantoprazole 40 mg, Alprazolam 0.25mg were given. Patients were randomly assigned to 2 equal groups R and S (n=25) according to computer generated list. Group S received Succinylcholine 2 mg/kg intravenous. Group R received Rocuronium 0.9 mg/kg intravenous. The pulse rate and blood pressure were recorded before and after induction, after injection of muscle relaxant and at 1-, 2-, 3- and 5-min following intubation. Results: In the present study, based on intubating conditions in Rocuronium group, 16% showed score 7, 44% scored 8 and 40% scored 9. Whereas in Succinylcholine group, score 7 was noted in 16%, score 8 in 52% and score 9 in 32%. There was no statistically significant association observed with relation to intubating conditions between the study groups. A higher SBP was recorded in Succinylcholine group compared to Rocuronium group at Post induction, Post muscle relaxant use, 1 Min, 2 Min, and 5 min. At Post induction, Post muscle relaxant use, 1 min this difference was observed to be statistically significant. A higher DBP was recorded in Succinylcholine group compared to Rocuronium group at Post induction, Post muscle relaxant use, at post muscle relaxant use, this difference was observed to be statistically significant. Conclusion: There was no significant change in hemodynamic variables after the administration of Succinylcholine and Rocuronium. There were significant changes in the heart rate and mean arterial pressure with the use of Rocuronium following one minute after the intubation which became preinduction value after 5 minutes. Hence, rocuronium bromide (0.8 mg/kg) can be used as an alternative to Succinylcholine (1.5 mg/kg) in selected situations.
Files
IJPCR,Vol15,Issue1,Article123.pdf
Files
(338.4 kB)
| Name | Size | Download all |
|---|---|---|
|
md5:fb7ec9b79ff2beb96e2ffae2dab9c458
|
338.4 kB | Preview Download |
Additional details
Dates
- Accepted
-
2023-01-10
Software
- Repository URL
- https://impactfactor.org/PDF/IJPCR/15/IJPCR,Vol15,Issue1,Article123.pdf
- Development Status
- Active
References
- 1. Michael D Minton et al. Increase in intracranial pressure from Succinylcholine: prevention by prior non-depolarizing blockade. Anesthesi - ology 1986; 65: 165-169. 2. Nigrovic V et al. Succinylcholine induced increase in plasma catecholamine levels in human. Anesth Analg 1983; 62. 627-632. 3. Miller RD et al. Succinylcholine induced hyperkalemia in patients with renal failure. Anesthesiology 1972; 36: 138-141. 4. Pandey K, Badola RP et al. Time course of intra ocular hypertension produced by Suxamethonium. Br J Anaesth 1972; 44: 191-196. 5. Sinclair R CF, Luxton MC. Rapid sequence induction. Continuing education in Anesthesia critical care & pain, 2005; 5(2): 45 – 48. 6. Burkhart C, Schobinger E, Zemp A, Girard T. Variability in the duration ofaction of Succinylcholine. European Journal of Anesthesiology, 2005; 22 (1): 454. 7. Maddineni VR, McCoy EP, Mirakur RK, McBride RJ. Onset and duration of action and hemodynamic effects of Rocuronium bromide under balanced and volatile anesthesia. Acta Anesthesi olog Belg., 1994; 45(2): 41 – 47. 8. Wierda JM KH et al. Pharmacokinetics and pharmacokinetic/ dynamic relationship of rocuronium bromide in humans. Eur J Anaesth 1994; 11: 66- 74. 9. Hunter JM. Rocuronium - The newest aminosteriod neuromuscular blocking drug. Br J Anaesth 1996; 76: 481-483. 10. Magorian T, Flannery KB, Miller RD. Comparison of rocuronium, succinylcholine, and vecuroniumfor rapid-sequence induction of anesthesia of adult patients. Anesthesiology.1993 ;79:913–8. 11. Huizinga AC, Vandenbrom RH, Wierda JM, Hommes FD, Hennis PJ. Intubating conditions and onset of neuromuscular block of rocuronium (ORG 9426); A comparison with suxamethonium. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 1992;36:463–8. 12. Tryba M, Zorn A, Thole H, Zenz M. Rapid sequence orotracheal intubation with rocuronium: A randomized double blind comparison with suxamethonium-preliminary communication. Eur J Anesthesiol.199 4;9:44–8. 13. McCourt KC, Selmela L, Mirakhur RK, Carroll M, Makinen MT, Kansanaho M, et al. Comparison of rocuronium and suxamethonium for use during rapid sequence induction of anaesthesia. Anaesthesia. 1998;53:867 –71. 14. Meistelman C, Plaud B, Donati F. Rocuronium (ORG 9426) neuromuscular blockade at the adductor muscles of the larynx and adductor pollicis in humans. Can J Anaesth. 1992;39:665–9. 15. Wright PM, Caldwell JE, Miller RD. Onset and duration of Rocuroniumand Succinylcholine at the adductor pollicis and laryngeal adductor muscles in anesthetized humans. Anesthesiology . 1994;81:1110–1. 16. Chambers D, Paulden M, Paton F, Heirs M, Duffy S, Craig D, et al. Sugammadex for the reversal of muscle relaxation in general anaesthesia: A systemic review and economic assessment. Health Technol Assess. 2010;14:49. 17. Donati F, Bevan DR. Neuromuscular blocking agents. In: Barash PG, Cullen BF, Stoelting RK, Cahalan MK, Christine Stock M, editors. Clinical Anesthesia. 6th ed. New Delhi: Wolters Kluwer (India); 2009. pp. 98– 530. 18. Cooper R, Mirakhur RK, Clarke SJ, Boules Z. Comparison of intubating conditions after administration of ORG 9426 (Rocuronium) and Suxamethonium. Br J Anaesth. 1992;6 9:269-273. 19. Cooper RA, Mirakhur RK, Maddineni VR. Neuromuscular effects of rocuronium bromide during fentanyl and halothane anaesthesia, Anaesthesia .1993;48:103-105. 20. de Miranda LC, Barrucand L, Costa J, Vercosa N. A comparative study between one and two effective doses (ED 95) of rocuronium for tracheal intubation. Rev Bras Anestesiol.2008 ;58:202–9. 21. Toni Magorian, Flannery KB, Ronald D Miller. Comparison of rocuronium, succinylcholine and vecuronium for rapid sequence induction of anaesthesia in adult patients; Anaesthesiology. 1993;79:913-918. 22. Shareef SM, Sudharani G. Comparitive study of succinylcholine, rocuronium and vecuronium for intubation and hemodynamic changes during general anaesthesia. IOSR Journal of Dental and Medical Sciences. 2016;15(10):14- 1923. Eikermann M, Hunkemoller I, Peine L, Armbruster W, Stegen B, Husing J, et al. Optimal rocuronium dose for intubation during inhalational induction with sevoflurane in children. Br J Anaesth. 2002;89:277– 81. 24. Lam A. Study to compare the onset and offset time (clinical duration) and intubating condition obtained with rocuronium bromide 0.6 mg/kg and succinylcholine 1.0 mg/kg after induction with propofol and fentanyl. J Clin Anaesth. 2009;12:449–53. 25. Sierra D. R., Miranda L. Y., Morales A E. C., Jiménez González, A., & Caballero A. D. Susceptibility of Enterococcus Faecalis to the Antibacterial Effect of Various Metabolites of the Mammea Americana Seed. Journal of Medical Research and Health Sciences. 2022; 5(1): 1658–1662.