Rocuronium Bromide Intravenous Solution Maruishi® is more suitable than ESLAX Intravenous® during rapid-sequence induction of anesthesia

被引:6
作者
Tachikawa, Masato [1 ]
Asai, Takashi [1 ]
Okuda, Yasuhisa [1 ]
机构
[1] Dokkyo Med Univ, Dept Anesthesiol, Saitama Med Ctr, 2-1-50 Minamikoshigaya, Koshigaya, Saitama 3438555, Japan
关键词
Rocuronium; Pain on injection; Withdrawal movement; INJECTION; PAIN; PREVENTION; REMIFENTANIL; VENTILATION; LIDOCAINE; PROPOFOL;
D O I
10.1007/s00540-019-02673-x
中图分类号
R614 [麻醉学];
学科分类号
100217 ;
摘要
Purpose Rocuronium Bromide Intravenous Solution (R) (Maruishi Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd, Osaka, Japan) is a newly developed generic drug and we have noticed that compared with conventional rocuronium formulations [e.g. Esmeron (Eslax), MSD Co. Ltd., Tokyo, Japan], rocuronium Maruishi appeared to cause less pain or withdrawal movement. The aim of this study was to assess the hypothesis that the injection of rocuronium Maruishi causes less body movement than rocuronium MSD does, during rapid-sequence induction of anesthesia. Methods Sixty patients were allocated randomly to one of two groups. In one group, rocuronium MSD was used and in the other group, rocuronium Maruishi was used. After induction of general anesthesia, a test drug (containing rocuronium) 0.9 mg/kg was injected. Patient's withdrawal movement was graded with the scale. Primary outcome measure was the incidence of moderate or severe movement after the injection of rocuronium. Secondary outcome measure was the degree of movement between the groups. Results Moderate or severe withdrawal movement was observed after the injection of rocuronium MSD in 11 of 30 patients (37%) and after the injection of rocuronium Maruishi in 3 of 30 patients (10%). There was a significant difference in the incidence between the groups (P = 0.013, 95% CI for difference 26-28%). The degree of movement was also significantly greater for rocuronium MSD than for rocuronium Maruishi (P = 0.015). Conclusion Compared with rocuronium MSD, rocuronium Maruishi is more suitable than conventional rocuronium formulations, for rapid-sequence induction of anesthesia.
引用
收藏
页码:600 / 603
页数:4
相关论文
共 20 条
  • [1] Preventing the withdrawal response associated with rocuronium injection: A comparison of fentanyl with lidocaine
    Ahmad, N
    Choy, CY
    Ab Aris, E
    Balan, S
    [J]. ANESTHESIA AND ANALGESIA, 2005, 100 (04) : 987 - 990
  • [2] Masseter spasm during induction of anaesthesia using propofol and fentanyl
    Asai, T
    Eguchi, Y
    Shingu, K
    [J]. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIOLOGY, 1998, 15 (05) : 614 - 615
  • [3] Airway management in patients undergoing emergency Cesarean section
    Asai, Takashi
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ANESTHESIA, 2015, 29 (06) : 927 - 933
  • [4] Difficult or impossible ventilation after sufentanil-induced anesthesia is caused primarily by vocal cord closure
    Bennett, JA
    Abrams, JT
    VanRiper, DF
    Horrow, JC
    [J]. ANESTHESIOLOGY, 1997, 87 (05) : 1070 - 1074
  • [5] Comparison of four strategies to reduce the pain associated with intravenous administration of rocuronium
    Chiarella, AB
    Jolly, DT
    Huston, CM
    Clanachan, AS
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 2003, 90 (03) : 377 - 379
  • [6] Ciftci T, 2015, EUR REV MED PHARMACO, V19, P4427
  • [7] A multicenter evaluation of total intravenous anesthesia with remifentanil and propofol for elective inpatient surgery
    Hogue, CW
    Bowdle, TA
    OLeary, C
    Duncalf, D
    Miguel, R
    Pitts, M
    Streisand, J
    Kirvassilis, G
    Jamerson, B
    McNeal, S
    Batenhorst, R
    [J]. ANESTHESIA AND ANALGESIA, 1996, 83 (02) : 279 - 285
  • [8] Keisuke J, 2018, J ANESTH, V32, P806
  • [9] Pharmacological agents for preventing morbidity associated with the haemodynamic response to tracheal intubation
    Khan, Fauzia A.
    Ullah, Hameed
    [J]. COCHRANE DATABASE OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, 2013, (07):
  • [10] PAIN ON IV INJECTION OF SOME ANESTHETIC AGENTS IS EVOKED BY THE UNPHYSIOLOGICAL OSMOLALITY OR PH OF THEIR FORMULATIONS
    KLEMENT, W
    ARNDT, JO
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 1991, 66 (02) : 189 - 195