| Literature DB >> 35601046 |
Nishant Kumar1, Deepa Rani2, Aruna Jain1.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Train of four (TOF) stimulation has been recommended to be used with neuromuscular blocking agents. The incidence of excellent intubating conditions with rocuronium, when used with TOF, is lacking. This study aimed to estimate the proportion of patients having excellent intubating conditions with rocuronium 0.6 mg/kg using TOF at adductor pollicis longus at T1 and T0, time to achieve T1 or T0 and incidence of sore throat, immediate and 24 hours post-extubation.Entities:
Keywords: Neuromuscular monitoring; rocuronium; sore throat; train of four
Year: 2022 PMID: 35601046 PMCID: PMC9116629 DOI: 10.4103/ija.ija_561_21
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Indian J Anaesth ISSN: 0019-5049
Patient characteristics
| Groups | Group T0 ( | Group T1 ( |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 37.54±12.34 | 35.78±11.41 | 0.242 |
| Gender | |||
| Female | 87 (70.16%) | 88 (69.8%) | 0.533 |
| Male | 37 (29.8%) | 38 (30.1%) | |
| ASA | |||
| I | 83 (66.9%) | 89 (70.6%) | 0.310 |
| II | 41 (33.06%) | 37 (29.36%) |
T0: Intubation at TOF count 0; T1: Intubation at TOF count 1; ASA: American Society of Anesthesiologists. Data are expressed as number(frequency) or as mean±standard deviation
Time taken for intubation and intubating conditions
| Group T0 ( | Group T1 ( | Total |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Time taken for intubation Mean±SD | ||||
| Seconds | 142.98±27.04 | 122.38±30.76 | 132.60±30.71 | <0.01* |
| Intubating conditions | ||||
| Excellent | 109 (87.9%) | 101 (80.1%) | 210 (84%) | 0.216 |
| Good | 14 (11.2%) | 22 (17.4%) | 36 (14.4%) | |
| Poor | 1 (0.8%) | 3 (2.38%) | 4 (1.6%) | |
| n | 124 | 126 | 250 |
T0: Intubation at TOF count 0; T1: Intubation at TOF count 1,* significant P value; SD: Standard deviation; n: Number of patients. Data are expressed as number(frequency) or as mean±standard deviation
Factors affecting intubating conditions
| Factors | Excellent | Not Excellent |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | ||||
| Female | 147 (84%) | 28 (16%) | 1.000 | |
| Male | 63 (84%) | 12 (16%) | ||
| Group | ||||
| T0 | 109 (87.9%) | 15 (12.1%) | 0.095 | |
| T1 | 101 (80.2%) | 25 (19.8%) | ||
| IV induction agents | ||||
| Propofol | 158 (86.8%) | 24 (13.2%) | 0.054 | |
| Thiopentone | 52 (76.5%) | 16 (23.5%) | ||
| Nitrous oxide | ||||
| Yes | 145 (85.8%) | 24 (14.2%) | 0.262 | |
| No | 65 (80.2%) | 16 (19.8%) | ||
| Inhalation | ||||
| Sevoflurane | 148 (87.1%) | 22 (12.9%) | 0.130 | |
| Isoflurane | 28 (73.7%) | 10 (26.3%) | ||
| None | 34 (80.9%) | 8 (19.1%) | ||
|
| ||||
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| ||||
| Midazolam dose | Excellent | 210 | 0.534 | 0.490 |
| Not excellent | 40 | |||
| Fentanyl dose | Excellent | 210 | 0.562 | 0.222 |
| Not excellent | 40 | |||
| Onset Time | Excellent | 210 | 0.540 | 0.416 |
| Not excellent | 40 | |||
IV: Intravenous; ROC: Receiver operating characteristic; n: Number of patients
Cormack-Lehane grading and number of attempts of intubation
| Group T0 ( | Group T1 ( |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cormack- Lehane grade | ||||
| 1 | 83 (66.9%) | 87 (69%) | 170 (68%) | 0.768 |
| 2 | 40 (32.2%) | 37 (29.3%) | 77 (30.8%) | |
| 3 | 1 (0.8%) | 2 (1.5%) | 3 (1.2%) | |
| Number of attempts of intubation | ||||
| One | 118 (95.1%) | 117 (92.8%) | 235 (94%) | 0.596 |
| Two | 6 (4.8%) | 9 (7.2%) | 15 (6%) | |
| | 124 | 126 | 250 |
T0: Intubation at TOF count 0; T1: Intubation at TOF count 1; n: Number of patients
Immediate and late sore throat
| Sore throat | Group T0 ( | Group T1 ( |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Immediate | ||||
| Yes | 8 (6.5%) | 21 (16.6%) | 29 (11.6%) | 0.02* |
| No | 116 (93.5%) | 105 (83.3%) | 221 (88.4%) | |
| Late | ||||
| Yes | 0 (0.00%) | 7 (5.6%) | 7 (2.8%) | 0.01* |
| No | 124 (100%) | 119 (94.4%) | 243 (97.2%) | |
|
| 124 | 126 | 250 |
T0: Intubation at TOF count 0; T1: Intubation at TOF count 1,* significant P value; n: Number of patients. Data are expressed as number(frequency)
Figure 1Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of onset time versus intubating conditions. CI: Confidence interval; LR: Likelihood ratio; PV: Predictive value