Remifentanil Versus Sufentanil for Intubation Condition Without Myorelaxant

NCT ID: NCT01910285

Last Updated: 2016-05-09

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

PHASE4

Total Enrollment

70 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2013-06-30

Study Completion Date

2015-09-30

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

The main objective is the comparison of intubation conditions after anesthetic induction bolus of propofol-sufentanil when compared to injection of propofol-remifentanil in patients undergoing surgery for tooth extraction.

Intubation without myorelaxant with propofol and sufentanil is classic but less efficient than induction with curare on achieving perfect intubation conditions. The use of a protocol without curare is sometimes justified for short gestures or when you want to avoid allergia. Remifentanil often provides excellent intubation conditions without myorelaxant. However, remifentanil was never compared to sufentanil in terms of intubating conditions without muscle relaxant.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Anaesthetic Induction

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

DOUBLE

Participants Investigators

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Remifentanyl- sufentanil placebo

3 mg/kg of propofol combined with 3 µg/kg of remifentanil

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Remifentanyl - sufentanil placebo

Intervention Type DRUG

Induction of general anesthesia with 3 mg/kg of propofol combined with 3 µg/kg of remifentanil and 10 ml of isotonic sodium chloride for the double blind. The trachea is then intubated after waiting the time of action of each product.

Sufentanil - remifentanyl placebo

3 mg/kg of propofol combined with 0.3 mg/kg of sufentanil

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Sufentanil - remifentanyl placebo

Intervention Type DRUG

Induction of general anesthesia with 3 mg/kg of propofol combined with 0.3 mg/kg of sufentanil and 25 ml of isotonic sodium chloride for the double blind. The trachea is then intubated after waiting the time of action of each product.

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Remifentanyl - sufentanil placebo

Induction of general anesthesia with 3 mg/kg of propofol combined with 3 µg/kg of remifentanil and 10 ml of isotonic sodium chloride for the double blind. The trachea is then intubated after waiting the time of action of each product.

Intervention Type DRUG

Sufentanil - remifentanyl placebo

Induction of general anesthesia with 3 mg/kg of propofol combined with 0.3 mg/kg of sufentanil and 25 ml of isotonic sodium chloride for the double blind. The trachea is then intubated after waiting the time of action of each product.

Intervention Type DRUG

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* patients 18 to 60 years
* American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) 1 or 2
* scheduled for surgical tooth extraction under general anesthesia with intubation
* signed consent form

Exclusion Criteria

* criterion of difficult ventilation or intubation
* chronic alcoholism or opiate use
* beta-blockers or calcium channel blockers treatment
* allergy to paracetamol or ketoprofen
* patient under protection of justice
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Maximum Eligible Age

60 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

University Hospital, Toulouse

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Responsibility Role SPONSOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Christine ROCHE-TISSOT, MD

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

University Hospital of Toulouse

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

University Hospital of Purpan

Toulouse, Midi-Pyrénées, France

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

France

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

Indications de la curarisation en anesthésie : conférence de consensus (texte court). Ann Fr Anesth Reanim 1999;19:34-7.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Laxenaire MC, Auroy Y, Clergue F, Pequignot F, Jougla E, Lienhart A. [Organization and techniques of anesthesia]. Ann Fr Anesth Reanim. 1998;17(11):1317-23. doi: 10.1016/s0750-7658(99)80044-6. No abstract available. French.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 9972359 (View on PubMed)

Laxenaire MC. [Epidemiology of anesthetic anaphylactoid reactions. Fourth multicenter survey (July 1994-December 1996)]. Ann Fr Anesth Reanim. 1999 Aug;18(7):796-809. doi: 10.1016/s0750-7658(00)88460-9. French.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 10486634 (View on PubMed)

Combes X, Andriamifidy L, Dufresne E, Suen P, Sauvat S, Scherrer E, Feiss P, Marty J, Duvaldestin P. Comparison of two induction regimens using or not using muscle relaxant: impact on postoperative upper airway discomfort. Br J Anaesth. 2007 Aug;99(2):276-81. doi: 10.1093/bja/aem147. Epub 2007 Jun 15.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 17573390 (View on PubMed)

Adamus M, Koutna J, Gabrhelik T, Zapletalova J. [Tracheal intubation without muscle relaxant--the impact of different sufentanil doses on the quality of intubating conditions: a prospective study]. Cas Lek Cesk. 2008;147(2):96-101. Czech.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 18383960 (View on PubMed)

Hanna SF, Ahmad F, Pappas AL, Mikat-Stevens M, Jellish WS, Kleinman B, Avramov MN. The effect of propofol/remifentanil rapid-induction technique without muscle relaxants on intraocular pressure. J Clin Anesth. 2010 Sep;22(6):437-42. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2009.12.004.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 20868965 (View on PubMed)

Alexander R, Olufolabi AJ, Booth J, El-Moalem HE, Glass PS. Dosing study of remifentanil and propofol for tracheal intubation without the use of muscle relaxants. Anaesthesia. 1999 Nov;54(11):1037-40. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2044.1999.00904.x.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 10540091 (View on PubMed)

Bouvet L, Stoian A, Rimmele T, Allaouchiche B, Chassard D, Boselli E. Optimal remifentanil dosage for providing excellent intubating conditions when co-administered with a single standard dose of propofol. Anaesthesia. 2009 Jul;64(7):719-26. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2009.05916.x.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 19624626 (View on PubMed)

Fujii Y, Itakura M. A comparison of pretreatment with fentanyl and lidocaine preceded by venous occlusion for reducing pain on injection of propofol: a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in adult Japanese surgical patients. Clin Ther. 2009 Oct;31(10):2107-12. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2009.10.012.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 19922881 (View on PubMed)

Fattorini F, Romano R, Ciccaglioni A, Pascarella MA, Rocco A, Mariani V, Pietropaoli P. Effects of remifentanil on human heart electrical system. A transesophageal pacing electrophysiological study. Minerva Anestesiol. 2003 Sep;69(9):673-7, 677-9. English, Italian.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 14564237 (View on PubMed)

Maruyama K, Nishikawa Y, Nakagawa H, Ariyama J, Kitamura A, Hayashida M. Can intravenous atropine prevent bradycardia and hypotension during induction of total intravenous anesthesia with propofol and remifentanil? J Anesth. 2010 Apr;24(2):293-6. doi: 10.1007/s00540-009-0860-2. Epub 2010 Jan 26.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 20101512 (View on PubMed)

Fuchs-Buder T, Claudius C, Skovgaard LT, Eriksson LI, Mirakhur RK, Viby-Mogensen J; 8th International Neuromuscular Meeting. Good clinical research practice in pharmacodynamic studies of neuromuscular blocking agents II: the Stockholm revision. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2007 Aug;51(7):789-808. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-6576.2007.01352.x.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 17635389 (View on PubMed)

Egan TD, Brock-Utne JG. Asystole after anesthesia induction with a fentanyl, propofol, and succinylcholine sequence. Anesth Analg. 1991 Dec;73(6):818-20. doi: 10.1213/00000539-199112000-00025. No abstract available.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 1952185 (View on PubMed)

Maryniak JK, Bishop VA. Sinus arrest after alfentanil. Br J Anaesth. 1987 Mar;59(3):390-1. doi: 10.1093/bja/59.3.390. No abstract available.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 3103664 (View on PubMed)

Starr NJ, Sethna DH, Estafanous FG. Bradycardia and asystole following the rapid administration of sufentanil with vecuronium. Anesthesiology. 1986 Apr;64(4):521-3. doi: 10.1097/00000542-198604000-00023. No abstract available.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 2870669 (View on PubMed)

Wang J, Winship S, Russell G. Induction of anaesthesia with sevoflurane and low-dose remifentanil: asystole following laryngoscopy. Br J Anaesth. 1998 Dec;81(6):994-5. doi: 10.1093/bja/81.6.994-a. No abstract available.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 10211042 (View on PubMed)

Adnet F, Borron SW, Racine SX, Clemessy JL, Fournier JL, Plaisance P, Lapandry C. The intubation difficulty scale (IDS): proposal and evaluation of a new score characterizing the complexity of endotracheal intubation. Anesthesiology. 1997 Dec;87(6):1290-7. doi: 10.1097/00000542-199712000-00005.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 9416711 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

HAO

Identifier Type: OTHER

Identifier Source: secondary_id

12 522 03

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.