Does the choice of intravenous induction drug affect intubation conditions after a fast-onset neuromuscular blocker?

Tracheal intubating conditions and apnoea time after small-dose succinylcholine are not modified by the choice of induction agent

BACKGROUND

In a randomized, double-blind clinical trial, we studied the effect of different i.v. induction drugs on tracheal intubation conditions and apnoea time after small-dose (0.6 mg kg(-1)) succinylcholine used to facilitate orotracheal intubation at an urban, university-affiliated community medical centre.

METHODS

One hundred and seventy-five ASA I and II adult patients scheduled to undergo surgical procedures requiring general anaesthesia and tracheal intubation were allocated to one of five groups according to i.v. anaesthetic induction drug used. General anaesthesia was induced by i.v. administration of lidocaine 30 mg and propofol 2.5 mg kg(-1) (Group 1), thiopental 5 mg kg(-1) (Group 2), lidocaine 30 mg and thiopental 5 mg kg(-1) (Group 3), etomidate 0.3 mg kg(-1) (Group 4), or lidocaine 30 mg and etomidate 0.3 mg kg(-1) (Group 5). After loss of consciousness, succinylcholine 0.6 mg kg(-1) was given i.v. followed by direct laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation after 60 s. Measurements included intubation conditions recorded during laryngoscopy 60 s after succinylcholine administration, and apnoea time.

RESULTS

Overall, clinically acceptable intubation conditions were met in 168 out of the 175 patients studied (96%). They were met in 35/35 patients in Group 1, 33/35 patients in Group 2, 34/35 patients in Group 3, 33/35 patients in Group 4, and 33/35 patients in Group 5. Mean (SD) apnoea time was 4.0 (0.4), 4.2 (0.3), 4.2 (0.6), 4.1 (0.2) and 4.1 (0.2) min respectively in Groups 1-5. There were no differences in the intubation conditions or apnoea times between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of succinylcholine 0.6 mg kg(-1) produced the same favourable intubation conditions and a short apnoea time regardless of the induction drug used.

Controversies in rapid sequence intubation in children

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Rapid sequence intubation is the method of choice for intubation of the emergency department patient. The purpose of the present review is to address several controversies pertaining to emergency department rapid sequence intubation of children.

RECENT FINDINGS

The topics covered in this review include the determination of the appropriate clinician to perform emergency department intubation, the use of atropine and lidocaine as premedications, the choice of sedative agents depending upon the clinical scenario, and the choice of neuromuscular blockade agent. Concerning these topics: The literature supports that emergency department physicians, with appropriate training, successfully perform intubation in most patients. Limited data exist to determine the appropriate use of atropine and lidocaine for rapid sequence intubation. Etomidate has clearly become a preferred sedative for rapid sequence intubation with a low risk of cardiovascular side effects. Thiopental and propofol may more readily provide adequate sedation as compared with etomidate but both have the potential to reduce blood pressure. Succinylcholine arguably remains the preferred neuromuscular blockade agent for rapid sequence intubation in most children. The side effects of succinylcholine occur in relatively predictable circumstances. Rocuronium is a commonly used nondepolarizing paralytic agent but its prolonged duration of action must be weighed against the risk of side effects associated with succinylcholine.

SUMMARY

Though more research is needed, the available data allow for the development of protocols that will result in a rational, scenario-based approach to rapid sequence intubation in children.