Search

Importance: Rocuronium and succinylcholine are often used for rapid sequence intubation, although the comparative efficacy of these paralytic agents for achieving successful intubation in an emergency setting has not been evaluated in clinical trials. Succinylcholine use has been associated with several adverse events not reported with rocuronium.Objective: To assess the noninferiority of rocuronium vs succinylcholine for tracheal intubation in out-of-hospital emergency situations.Design, Setting and Participants: Multicenter, single-blind, noninferiority randomized clinical trial comparing rocuronium (1.2 mg/kg) with succinylcholine (1 mg/kg) for rapid sequence intubation in 1248 adult patients needing out-of-hospital tracheal intubation. Enrollment occurred from January 2014 to August 2016 in 17 French out-of-hospital emergency medical units. The date of final follow-up was August 31, 2016.Interventions: Patients were randomly assigned to undergo tracheal intubation facilitated by rocuronium (n = 624) or succinylcholine (n = 624).Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the intubation success rate on first attempt. A noninferiority margin of 7% was chosen. A per-protocol analysis was prespecified as the primary analysis.Results: Among 1248 patients who were randomized (mean age, 56 years; 501 [40.1%] women), 1230 (98.6%) completed the trial and 1226 (98.2%) were included in the per-protocol analysis. The number of patients with successful first-attempt intubation was 455 of 610 (74.6%) in the rocuronium group vs 489 of 616 (79.4%) in the succinylcholine group, with a between-group difference of -4.8% (1-sided 97.5% CI, -9% to ∞), which did not meet criteria for noninferiority. The most common intubation-related adverse events were hypoxemia (55 of 610 patients [9.0%]) and hypotension (39 of 610 patients [6.4%]) in the rocuronium group and hypoxemia (61 of 616 [9.9%]) and hypotension (62 of 616 patients [10.1%]) in the succinylcholine group.Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients undergoing endotracheal intubation in an out-of-hospital emergency setting, rocuronium, compared with succinylcholine, failed to demonstrate noninferiority with regard to first-attempt intubation success rate.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02000674. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Importance: Bag-mask ventilation (BMV) is a less complex technique than endotracheal intubation (ETI) for airway management during the advanced cardiac life support phase of cardiopulmonary resuscitation of patients with out-of-hospital cardiorespiratory arrest. It has been reported as superior in terms of survival.Objectives: To assess noninferiority of BMV vs ETI for advanced airway management with regard to survival with favorable neurological function at day 28.Design, Settings, and Participants: Multicenter randomized clinical trial comparing BMV with ETI in 2043 patients with out-of-hospital cardiorespiratory arrest in France and Belgium. Enrollment occurred from March 9, 2015, to January 2, 2017, and follow-up ended January 26, 2017.Intervention: Participants were randomized to initial airway management with BMV (n = 1020) or ETI (n = 1023).Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was favorable neurological outcome at 28 days defined as cerebral performance category 1 or 2. A noninferiority margin of 1% was chosen. Secondary end points included rate of survival to hospital admission, rate of survival at day 28, rate of return of spontaneous circulation, and ETI and BMV difficulty or failure.Results: Among 2043 patients who were randomized (mean age, 64.7 years; 665 women [32%]), 2040 (99.8%) completed the trial. In the intention-to-treat population, favorable functional survival at day 28 was 44 of 1018 patients (4.3%) in the BMV group and 43 of 1022 patients (4.2%) in the ETI group (difference, 0.11% [1-sided 97.5% CI, -1.64% to infinity]; P for noninferiority = .11). Survival to hospital admission (294/1018 [28.9%] in the BMV group vs 333/1022 [32.6%] in the ETI group; difference, -3.7% [95% CI, -7.7% to 0.3%]) and global survival at day 28 (55/1018 [5.4%] in the BMV group vs 54/1022 [5.3%] in the ETI group; difference, 0.1% [95% CI, -1.8% to 2.1%]) were not significantly different. Complications included difficult airway management (186/1027 [18.1%] in the BMV group vs 134/996 [13.4%] in the ETI group; difference, 4.7% [95% CI, 1.5% to 7.9%]; P = .004), failure (69/1028 [6.7%] in the BMV group vs 21/996 [2.1%] in the ETI group; difference, 4.6% [95% CI, 2.8% to 6.4%]; P < .001), and regurgitation of gastric content (156/1027 [15.2%] in the BMV group vs 75/999 [7.5%] in the ETI group; difference, 7.7% [95% CI, 4.9% to 10.4%]; P < .001).Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with out-of-hospital cardiorespiratory arrest, the use of BMV compared with ETI failed to demonstrate noninferiority or inferiority for survival with favorable 28-day neurological function, an inconclusive result. A determination of equivalence or superiority between these techniques requires further research.Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02327026. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article assesses and quantifies the association between short-term exposure to high levels of air pollutants and myocardial infarction (MI) risk. Results of evaluation revealed that main air pollutants including carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide and sulfur dioxide were associated to a near-term increase in MI risk. It appeared that ozone was the only pollutant that was found to have no link with MI risk. Suggested possible mechanisms for the associations are inflammation, abnormal regulation of the cardiac autonomic system, increase in blood viscosity as well as vasoconstrictors as a result of air pollution, direct induction of cardiac ischemia by vasospasm.

A letter to the editor is presented in response to the article "Main air pollutants and myocardial infarction: a systematic review and meta-analysis," by H. Mustafić and colleagues in a previous issue.