Rocuronium versus succinylcholine for rapid sequence induction intubation
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Patients often require a rapid sequence induction (RSI) endotracheal intubation technique during emergencies or electively to protect against aspiration, increased intracranial pressure, or to facilitate intubation. Traditionally succinylcholine has been the most commonly used muscle relaxant for this purpose because of its fast onset and short duration; unfortunately, it can have serious side effects. Rocuronium has been suggested as an alternative to succinylcholine for intubation. This is an update of our Cochrane review published first in 2003 and then updated in 2008 and now in 2015. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether rocuronium creates intubating conditions comparable to those of succinylcholine during RSI intubation. SEARCH METHODS: In our initial review we searched all databases until March 2000, followed by an update to June 2007. This latest update included searching the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2015, Issue 2), MEDLINE (1966 to February Week 2 2015), and EMBASE (1988 to February 14 2015 ) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or controlled clinical trials (CCTs) relating to the use of rocuronium and succinylcholine. We included foreign language journals and handsearched the references of identified studies for additional citations. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included any RCT or CCT that reported intubating conditions in comparing the use of rocuronium and succinylcholine for RSI or modified RSI in any age group or clinical setting. The dose of rocuronium was at least 0.6 mg/kg and succinylcholine was at least 1 mg/kg. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors (EN and DT) independently extracted data and assessed methodological quality for the 'Risk of bias' tables. We combined the outcomes in Review Manager 5 using a risk ratio (RR) with a random-effects model. MAIN RESULTS: The previous update (2008) had identified 53 potential studies and included 37 combined for meta-analysis. In this latest update we identified a further 13 studies and included 11, summarizing the results of 50 trials including 4151 participants. Overall, succinylcholine was superior to rocuronium for achieving excellent intubating conditions: RR 0.86 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81 to 0.92; n = 4151) and clinically acceptable intubation conditions (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.95 to 0.99; n = 3992, 48 trials). A high incidence of detection bias amongst the trials coupled with significant heterogeneity provides moderate-quality evidence for these conclusions, which are unchanged from the previous update. Succinylcholine was more likely to produce excellent intubating conditions when using thiopental as the induction agent: RR 0.81 (95% CI: 0.73 to 0.88; n = 2302, 28 trials). In the previous update, we had concluded that propofol was the superior induction agent with succinylcholine. There were no reported incidences of severe adverse outcomes. We found no statistical difference in intubation conditions when succinylcholine was compared to 1.2 mg/kg rocuronium; however, succinylcholine was clinically superior as it has a shorter duration of action. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Succinylcholine created superior intubation conditions to rocuronium in achieving excellent and clinically acceptable intubating conditions.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Administering too small a dose (<1.0 mg/kg) of rocuronium, particularly in low-flow states, will result in inadequate intubating conditions and a larger dose is recommended (1.2-1.6 mg/kg).
“administering too small a dose (<1.0 mg/kg) of rocuronium, particularly in low-flow states, will result in inadequate intubating conditions and a larger dose is recommended (1.2-1.6 mg/kg).101,102”
From Airway Management in Trauma (2018) · cites this paper as [101]
The Subgroup analysis reports fewer excellent conditions with 0.6–0.7 mg/kg rocuronium than with succinylcholine, but it does not establish that every dose below 1.0 mg/kg produces inadequate conditions. It finds no conclusive evidence that increasing rocuronium doses improves conditions, and the Authors’ conclusions recommend 1 mg/kg when rocuronium is needed—not 1.2–1.6 mg/kg. The cited passages do not address low-flow states. (LLM, conf=0.88)
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredBoth succinylcholine and rocuronium may be safely used and can provide good intubating conditions.
“both succinylcholine and rocuronium may be safely used and can provide good intubating conditions.101”
From Airway Management in Trauma (2018) · cites this paper as [101]
The Authors’ Conclusions say succinylcholine reliably creates excellent intubating conditions and rocuronium 1 mg/kg can create acceptable conditions as a second-line option. But the Overall completeness and applicability of evidence section explicitly says the review cannot draw conclusions about safety, so it does not support the claim that both may be safely used. (LLM, conf=0.92)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Kovacs, G., & Sowers, N. (2018) · Emergency Medicine Clinics of North America · doi:10.1016/j.emc.2017.08.006 · Cited by 115 · see citing works
- Authors
- Tran, D. T., Newton, E. K., Mount, V. A., Lee, J. S., Wells, G. A., & Perry, J. J.
- Affiliations
- University of Ottawa (CA)
- Ottawa Heart Institute (CA)
- Queen's University (CA)
- Sunnybrook Health Science Centre (CA)
- Ottawa Hospital (CA)
- Venue
- Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2015-10-29
- Volume
- 2015
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- CD002788-CD002788
- ISSN
- 1361-6137 (ISSN-L)
- 1465-1858
- PMC
- PMC7104695
- OpenAlex
- W1916648308
- Cited by
- 391
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 15 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 36 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 22 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 27 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 28
- FWCI
- 5.32
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Anesthesia and Sedative Agents
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Airway Management and Intubation Techniques
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Respiratory Support and Mechanisms
- Keywords
- rocuronium, succinylcholine, rapid sequence induction, endotracheal intubation, muscle relaxants, intubating conditions, airway management, aspiration prevention, neuromuscular blockade duration
- MeSH terms
- Rocuronium, Androstanols, Neuromuscular Nondepolarizing Agents, Humans, Intubation, Intratracheal, Neuromuscular Depolarizing Agents, Succinylcholine, Propofol, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review