• P J Newman, A C Quinn, R M Grounds, J M Hunter, A H Boyd, N B Eastwood, B J Pollard, A J Pearson, N J Harper, R J Beale, M Sutjarittam, J M Elliot, and J F Bion.
• St. George's Hospital, London, UK.
• Crit. Care Med. 1997 Jul 1;25(7):1139-42.

ObjectiveTo evaluate and compare the safety and efficacy of cisatracurium (51W89) and atracurium administered by continuous infusion to critically ill patients requiring neuromuscular blocking agents to facilitate mechanical ventilation.DesignOpen, randomized, multicenter study of patients receiving cisatracurium or atracurium infusion to facilitate mechanical ventilation.SettingFive university teaching hospital intensive care units in the United Kingdom.PatientsSixty-one adult patients requiring neuromuscular blocking agents to facilitate mechanical ventilation.InterventionsBolus doses followed by continuous infusions of cisatracurium or atracurium were administered. Onset, maintenance, and recovery of neuromuscular blockade were measured, using transcutaneous ulnar nerve stimulation and an accelerometer.Measurements And Main ResultsForty patients received cisatracurium (mean duration 48.1 +/- 4.2 [SEM] hrs), and 21 patients received atracurium (mean duration 46.1 +/- 5.8 hrs). The infusion rate for patients receiving cisatracurium was 3.1 +/- 0.2 microg/kg/min, and for patients receiving atracurium 10.4 +/- 0.9 microg/kg/min. There were no significant differences in mean times to 70% recovery of Train-of-Four ratio (cisatracurium 60 mins, atracurium 57 mins), although there was considerable interpatient variation (20 to 175 mins with cisatracurium vs. 35 to 85 mins with atracurium). One patient who received cisatracurium exhibited intermittent bronchospasm during and after the study period.ConclusionsCisatracurium, an isomer of atracurium, appears to be a suitable agent for providing muscle relaxation in critically ill patients.

19 keywords...

hide…