Remifentanil Versus Rocuronium for Optimizing Video Laryngoscopy-assisted Tracheal Intubation

NCT ID: NCT06564857

Last Updated: 2025-12-10

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

RECRUITING

Clinical Phase

PHASE4

Total Enrollment

2648 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2025-11-17

Study Completion Date

2027-04-08

Brief Summary

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

Globally, we are approaching 1 million surgical procedures each day. Tracheal intubation is the mainstay of securing the patient's airway and breathing during general anaesthesia. Approximately 100.000 tracheal intubations are performed annually in Denmark. Airway management remains the primary reason for anaesthesia-related morbidity and mortality. It has been traditionally accepted that best tracheal intubation conditions are obtained by paralysing the patient's muscles, including vocal cords, using a neuromuscular blocking agent (NMBA) such as rocuronium. However, using NBMA may increase the risk of pulmonary complications, intra-operative awareness, in which the patient is paralysed but awake during surgery, anaphylaxis, and re-intubation. In addition, there is a risk of residual neuromuscular blockade postoperatively. In the US, prolonged ventilation and unplanned intubation are the top two most costly perioperative complications. An alternative to NMBA is a large dose of opioids to depress laryngeal reflexes during intubation. The most commonly used non-NMBA modality includes bolus administration of remifentanil. However, remifentanil may cause bradycardia and hypotension. Even short periods of hypotension have been shown to increase the risk of myocardial injury and other serious adverse events such as renal failure, delirium, and even mortality.

Evidence also indicates that intubation conditions using only opioids to facilitate intubation, including remifentanil, are inferior to NMBA. However, these trials are underpowered to assess effects on patient-important outcomes and are mostly at high risk of bias. A recent trial has suggested that remifentanil intubation conditions may not be very different. Almost all existing research comparing NMBA to opioids has focused on intubation conditions for direct laryngoscopy using a conventional Macintosh laryngoscopy blade. In recent years, the implementation and availability of the video laryngoscope have grown exponentially and become universal. The video laryngoscope has vastly improved the ease of tracheal intubation, and the number of failed intubations has decreased by two-thirds in Denmark, where a rapid implementation of the video laryngoscope took place. However, limited evidence exists on whether NMBA improves intubation conditions compared to remifentanil when performing video laryngoscope-assisted tracheal intubation.

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.

Tracheal Intubation Video Laryngoscopy Remifentanil Rocuronium

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

Parallel Assignment, multicenter
Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

QUADRUPLE

Participants Caregivers Investigators Outcome Assessors

Study Groups

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

REMI-arm

Bolus of remifentanil at anaesthesia induction

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Remifentanil

Intervention Type DRUG

Age \< 70 years: Bolus of 4 μg/kg Ideal Body Weight remifentanil at anaesthesia induction; Age \>= 70 years: Bolus of 2 μg/kg ideal Body Weight remifentanil at anaesthesia induction

ROCU-arm

Bolus of rocuronium at anaesthesia induction

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Rocuronium

Intervention Type DRUG

Bolus of 0.6 mg/kg Ideal Body Weight rocuronium at anaesthesia induction

Interventions

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

Remifentanil

Age \< 70 years: Bolus of 4 μg/kg Ideal Body Weight remifentanil at anaesthesia induction; Age \>= 70 years: Bolus of 2 μg/kg ideal Body Weight remifentanil at anaesthesia induction

Intervention Type DRUG

Rocuronium

Bolus of 0.6 mg/kg Ideal Body Weight rocuronium at anaesthesia induction

Intervention Type DRUG

Other Intervention Names

Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.

Remifentanil 5 mg diluted in 100 ml saline, which corresponds to Remifentanil 50 micrograms/ml Rocuronium 10 mg/ml

Eligibility Criteria

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

Inclusion Criteria

* Adults ≥ 18 years
* Undergoing general anaesthesia requiring oro-tracheal intubation
* Absence of indication for rapid sequence induction
* American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status score I - III

Exclusion Criteria

* Known allergies or contraindications to rocuronium (e.g. neuromuscular disease) or remifentanil
* Awake intubation
* Double-lumen endotracheal tube
* Oral, pharyngeal, and laryngeal surgery
* Surgical contraindication for NMBAs (e.g. use of nerve stimulator)
* Patients who are pregnant or breastfeeding
* Patients who do not understand Danish or are unable to give informed consent
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

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

Nordsjaellands Hospital

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.

Anders K Nørskov, PhD

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Department of Anaesthesia, Nordsjællands Hospital - Hillerød, Denmark

Matias Vested, PhD

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Department of Anaesthesia Centre of Head and Orthopedics Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen

Locations

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

Department of Anesthesiology, NOH, Rigshospitalet

Copenhagen, , Denmark

Site Status RECRUITING

Department of Anesthesiology, North Zeeland Hospital

Hillerød, , Denmark

Site Status RECRUITING

Countries

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

Denmark

Central Contacts

Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.

Anders K Nørskov, PhD

Role: CONTACT

48292510 ext. +45

Lars H Lundstrøm, PhD

Role: CONTACT

48296512 ext. +45

Facility Contacts

Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.

Matias Vedsted, MD, PhD

Role: primary

+4535457547

Lars Lundstrøm, MD, Phd

Role: primary

+4548296512

Other Identifiers

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

2025-521405-40-01

Identifier Type: CTIS

Identifier Source: secondary_id

ROCVIDEO

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

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