Cited by 52Respiratory Support and MechanismsAnesthesia and Sedative AgentsIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders

Neuromuscular blocking agents in acute respiratory distress syndrome: updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials

Open access
Tarazan, Nehal, Alshehri, Moayad, Sharif, Sameer, Al Duhailib, Zainab, Møller, Morten Hylander, Belley-Cote, Emilie, Alshahrani, Mohammed, Centofanti, John +5 more·2020·Intensive Care Medicine Experimental

Abstract

Purpose: Existing clinical practice guidelines support the use of neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBA) in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS); however, a recent large randomized clinical trial (RCT) has questioned this practice. Therefore, we updated a previous systematic review to determine the efficacy and safety of NMBAs in ARDS. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE (October 2012 to July 2019), the Cochrane (Central) database, and clinical trial registries (ClinicalTrials.gov, ISRCTN Register, and WHO ICTRP) for RCTs comparing the effects of NMBA as a continuous infusion versus placebo or no NMBA infusion (but allowing intermittent NMBA boluses) on patient-important outcomes for adults with ARDS. Two independent reviewers assessed the methodologic quality of the primary studies and abstracted data. Results: Seven RCTs, including four new RCTs, met eligibility criteria for this review. These trials enrolled 1598 patients with moderate to severe ARDS at centers in the USA, France, and China. All trials assessed short-term continuous infusions of cisatracurium or vecuronium. The pooled estimate for mortality outcomes showed significant statistical heterogeneity, which was only explained by a subgroup analysis by depth of sedation in the control arm. A continuous NMBA infusion did not improve mortality when compared to a light sedation strategy with no NMBA infusion (relative risk [RR] 0.99; 95% CI 0.86–1.15; moderate certainty; P = 0.93). On the other hand, continuous NMBA infusion reduced mortality when compared to deep sedation with as needed NMBA boluses (RR 0.71; 95% CI 0.57–0.89; low certainty; P = 0.003). Continuous NMBA infusion reduced the rate of barotrauma (RR 0.55; 95% CI 0.35–0.85, moderate certainty; P = 0.008) across eligible trials, but the effect on ventilator-free days, duration of mechanical ventilation, and ICU-acquired weakness was uncertain. Conclusions: Inconsistency in study methods and findings precluded the pooling of all trials for mortality. In a pre-planned sensitivity analysis, the impact of NMBA infusion on mortality depends on the strategy used in the control arm, showing reduced mortality when compared to deep sedation, but no effect on mortality when compared to lighter sedation. In both situations, a continuous NMBA infusion may reduce the risk of barotrauma, but the effects on other patient-important outcomes remain unclear. Future research, including an individual patient data meta-analysis, could help clarify some of the observed findings in this updated systematic review.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s40635-020-00348-6

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Overall, continuous NMBA infusion reduced the risk of barotrauma (RR 0.55; 95% CI 0.35-0.85), but the effect on ventilator-free days, duration of mechanical ventilation, and ICU-acquired weakness was unclear.

    “Overall, continuous NMBA infusion reduced the risk of barotrauma (RR 0.55; 95% CI 0.35–0.85), but the effect on ventilator-free days, duration of mechanical ventilation, and ICU-acquired weakness was unclear [472, 473].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tarazan, N., Alshehri, M., Sharif, S., Al Duhailib, Z., Møller, M. H., Belley-Cote, E., Alshahrani, M., Centofanti, J., McIntyre, L., Baw, B., Meade, M., Alhazzani, W., & for the GUIDE Group
Affiliations
  • McMaster University (CA)
  • King Saud University (SA)
  • Copenhagen University Hospital (DK)
  • Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University (SA)
  • University of Ottawa (CA)
Corresponding author
Alhazzani, Waleed
Venue
Intensive Care Medicine Experimental
Published
2020-10-23
Volume
8
Issue
1
Pages
61-61
ISSN
2197-425X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3094365806
Cited by
52
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 16
FWCI
1.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Intensive Care Medicine Experimental (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • uO Research (University of Ottawa) (submittedVersion, public-domain)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Respiratory Support and Mechanisms
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Anesthesia and Sedative Agents
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine › Intensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
Keywords
neuromuscular blocking agents, acute respiratory distress syndrome, cisatracurium, vecuronium, continuous infusion, sedation depth, mortality, barotrauma, mechanical ventilation, ICU-acquired weakness, ventilator-free days, sedation strategies, treatment efficacy and safety

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