Skip Navigation LinksHome > July 2006 - Volume 105 - Issue 1 > Dose Inflation When Using Precurarization
Anesthesiology:
Correspondence

Dose Inflation When Using Precurarization

Donati, François Ph.D., M.D., F.R.C.P.C.

Free Access
Article Outline
Collapse Box

Author Information

Back to Top | Article Outline

To the Editor:—

I read with great interest the meta-analysis by Schreiber et al. 1 about the prevention of succinylcholine-induced fasciculation and myalgia. After reviewing carefully an abundant literature, the authors conclude that nondepolarizing neuromuscular blocking agents given before succinylcholine are effective in reducing fasciculations and myalgias. The meta-analysis also contains an analysis of the side effects that were reported in the studies, and the authors point out that the incidence of these side effects is not negligible. In particular, difficulty in breathing or swallowing is considered as potentially serious.
The incidence and magnitude of these neuromuscular side effects are most likely related to the dose given, and the meta-analysis by Schreiber et al.1 provides evidence of this dose relation for pancuronium. The same is probably valid for all nondepolarizing agents. The authors recommend that “… the smallest dose of each agent that has shown efficacy in these randomized trials should be given. These doses are unlikely to be above 10% of the respective ED95.”1 I agree. Most studies reporting adverse events involved doses that were clearly above 10% of the ED95, and this applies especially to recent studies, using newer drugs. Of the six studies reporting difficulty in breathing or swallowing reported in Schreiber’s table 2, two involved multiple doses of pancuronium.2,3 In the other four, the dose of rocuronium ranged from 0.06 to 0.1 mg/kg (0.2–0.33 × ED95),4–6 whereas the doses of cisatracurium (0.01 mg/kg),7 vecuronium (0.01 mg/kg),5 atracurium (0.05 mg/kg),5 and mivacurium (0.02 mg/kg)5 all represented approximately 0.2 × ED95. The occurrence of breathing or swallowing difficulties is therefore not surprising.
Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Image Tools
The initial studies on precurarization involved d-tubocurarine, and the dose was 3 mg for an adult. This represented 0.043 mg/kg for the 70-kg adult, or less than 0.1 × ED95. The ED95 of d-tubocurarine is 0.45–0.5 mg/kg. When other neuromuscular blocking agents were introduced, the potency ratio between these drugs and d-tubocurarine was not respected. The precurarization doses used in the studies quoted by Schreiber et al.1 were expressed as a fraction of their respective ED95s and plotted against the year of their publication (fig. 1). The d-tubocurarine dose remained relatively constant throughout the last two decades of the 20th century, whereas the equivalent dose of other agents increased progressively. On average, the equivalent dose doubled between the late 1970s and the early 2000s (fig. 1).
Assuming that the studies were designed to reflect clinical practice, it follows that there has been a dangerous tendency to increase the precurarizing doses in the past 20–30 yr. Clinicians most likely administered the newer drugs in doses corresponding to the published values. Some of them certainly observed side effects or heard of complications arising from such a practice. As a result, precurarization has been abandoned by many practitioners. However, the numbers to treat to avoid fasciculations (1.2–2.5) and myalgia (3–5)1 are low, thus justifying the use of nondepolarizing blocking drugs. In comparison, even the most effective antiemetics have higher numbers to treat, and we feel justified to use them as prophylaxis. The concluding statement of Schreiber et al.1 about nondepolarizing agents, which states that “[these drugs] should be used cautiously because the risk of potentially serious side effects is not negligible,” should be more specific. I would suggest that precurarization with a nondepolarizing blocking agent is both safe and effective, provided that the dose does not exceed 10% of the ED95. d-Tubocurarine, 3 mg, is equivalent to 2 mg rocuronium, 1.5 mg atracurium, 0.5 mg mivacurium, 0.3 mg vecuronium, or 0.4 mg pancuronium.
François Donati, Ph.D., M.D., F.R.C.P.C.,
Hôpital Maisonneuve-Rosemont and University of Montreal Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. francois.donati@umontreal.ca
Back to Top | Article Outline

References

1. Schreiber J-U, Lysakowski C, Fuchs-Buder T, Tramèr MR: Prevention of succinylcholine-induced fasciculation and myalgia: A meta-analysis of randomized trials. Anesthesiology 2005; 103:877–84

2. Suma V, Manani G, Angel A, Meroni M, Bruchi M, Giron GP: Pancuronium bromide precurarisation: II. An evaluation of clinical aspects in patients of female sex. Acta Anaesthesiol Belg 1979; 30:127–37

3. Manani G, Dal Vecchio A, Civran E, Suma V, Cirillo FM, Giron GP: La précurarisation par pancuronium chez les sujets de sexe masculine. Évaluation de certains effets cliniques. Ann Anesthesiol Fr 1979; 20:31–6

4. Mencke T, Schreiber JU, Becker C, Bolte M, Fuchs-Buder M: Pretreatment before succinylcholine for outpatient anesthesia? Anesth Analg 2002; 94:573–6

5. Martin R, Carrier J, Pirlet M, Claprood Y, Tetrault JP: Rocuronium is the best non-depolarizing relaxant to prevent succinylcholine fasciculations and myalgia. Can J Anaesth 1998; 45:521–5

6. Tsui BC, Reid S, Gupta S, Kearney R, Mayson T, Finucane B: A rapid precurarization technique using rocuronium. Can J Anaesth 1998; 45:397–401

7. Mencke T, Becker C, Schreiber J, Bolte M, Fuchs-Buder M: Präkurarisierung von Succinylcholin mit Cisatracurium: Der Einfluss des Präkurarisierungsintervalls. Anaesthesist 2002; 51:721–5

Cited By:

This article has been cited 2 time(s).

Anaesthesist
Priming technique with cisatracurium. Onset time at the laryngeal muscles
Schmidt, J; Albrecht, S; Petterich, N; Fechner, J; Klein, P; Irouschek, A
Anaesthesist, 56(): 992-1000.
10.1007/s00101-007-1226-5
CrossRef
Anesthesia and Analgesia
Rapid Sequence Induction and Intubation: Current Controversy
El-Orbany, M; Connolly, LA
Anesthesia and Analgesia, 110(5): 1318-1325.
10.1213/ANE.0b013e3181d5ae47
CrossRef
Back to Top | Article Outline

© 2006 American Society of Anesthesiologists, Inc.

Publication of an advertisement in Anesthesiology Online does not constitute endorsement by the American Society of Anesthesiologists, Inc. or Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc. of the product or service being advertised.
Login

Article Tools

Images

Share