Yong Cheol Lee1, Young Ho Jang, Jin Mo Kim, Sang Gyu Lee. 1. Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Keimyung University, School of Medicine, Joong-gu, Daegu 700-712, Korea. yclee@dsmc.or.kr
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVE: To test whether rapid injection of rocuronium reduces withdrawal movement on injection. DESIGN: Randomized, prospective trial. SETTING: Operating room in a university hospital. PATIENTS: 150 ASA physical status I and II patients aged 18 to 60 years, undergoing general anesthesia. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized to three groups. After undergoing anesthesia induction with thiopental sodium, then 5 seconds later receiving a rubber tourniquet applied to the mid-forearm to stop intravenous (IV) flow by gravity, the pretreatment drug was injected. The tourniquet was held for 15 seconds then released, and 1.0 mg/kg of 1% rocuronium was injected IV. Group C patients (n = 50) were pretreated with 0.1 mL/kg of 0.9% NaCl and then injected with rocuronium slowly within 10 seconds. Group L patients (n = 50) were pretreated with 0.1 mL/kg of preservative-free 1% lidocaine and then injected with rocuronium slowly within 10 seconds. Group R patients (n = 50) were pretreated with 0.1 mL/kg of 0.9% NaCl and then rapidly injected with rocuronium within approximately one second (as quickly as possible). MEASUREMENTS: After injection of the patient with the study drug, a single anesthesiologist with no knowledge of the study protocol graded each patient's response as follows: 0 = no response; 1 = mild movement limited to the wrist only; 2 = moderate movement involving the elbow and shoulder; and 3 = severe movement involving more than one extremity. MAIN RESULTS: Group C had the most intense and frequent withdrawal response. The frequency and intensity of withdrawal movement was significantly less in Groups L and R than Group C. No significant difference in withdrawal response between Groups L and R was noted. CONCLUSIONS:Withdrawal response can be significantly reduced for rocuronium injection without lidocaine pretreatment, simply through rapid injection.
RCT Entities:
STUDY OBJECTIVE: To test whether rapid injection of rocuronium reduces withdrawal movement on injection. DESIGN: Randomized, prospective trial. SETTING: Operating room in a university hospital. PATIENTS: 150 ASA physical status I and II patients aged 18 to 60 years, undergoing general anesthesia. INTERVENTIONS:Patients were randomized to three groups. After undergoing anesthesia induction with thiopental sodium, then 5 seconds later receiving a rubber tourniquet applied to the mid-forearm to stop intravenous (IV) flow by gravity, the pretreatment drug was injected. The tourniquet was held for 15 seconds then released, and 1.0 mg/kg of 1% rocuronium was injected IV. Group C patients (n = 50) were pretreated with 0.1 mL/kg of 0.9% NaCl and then injected with rocuronium slowly within 10 seconds. Group L patients (n = 50) were pretreated with 0.1 mL/kg of preservative-free 1% lidocaine and then injected with rocuronium slowly within 10 seconds. Group R patients (n = 50) were pretreated with 0.1 mL/kg of 0.9% NaCl and then rapidly injected with rocuronium within approximately one second (as quickly as possible). MEASUREMENTS: After injection of the patient with the study drug, a single anesthesiologist with no knowledge of the study protocol graded each patient's response as follows: 0 = no response; 1 = mild movement limited to the wrist only; 2 = moderate movement involving the elbow and shoulder; and 3 = severe movement involving more than one extremity. MAIN RESULTS: Group C had the most intense and frequent withdrawal response. The frequency and intensity of withdrawal movement was significantly less in Groups L and R than Group C. No significant difference in withdrawal response between Groups L and R was noted. CONCLUSIONS: Withdrawal response can be significantly reduced for rocuronium injection without lidocaine pretreatment, simply through rapid injection.
Authors: Hyun Jeong Kwak; Ji Young Kim; Yong Beom Kim; Sang Kee Min; Bong Ki Moon; Jong Yeop Kim Journal: J Anesth Date: 2013-03-22 Impact factor: 2.078