Succinylcholine was first introduced into clinical practice in the 1950s, and is currently the only depolarizing neuromuscular blocker in use. It is unique among the drugs used for muscle relaxation in its rapid onset and short duration of action. These characteristics account for its extensive use in scenarios requiring emergency control of the airway. However, succinylcholine has the potential to cause significant adverse effects, and rapid acting nondepolarizing agents offer an alternative for rapid tracheal intubation. Despite its side effect profile, succinylcholine is still widely used in clinical practice.
Succinylcholine Pseudocholinesterase deficiency Phase II blockade Dibucaine number Malignant hyperthermia
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Jonsson M, Dabrowski M, Gurley DA, et al. Activation and inhibition of human muscular and neuronal nicotinic acetylcholine receptors by succinylcholine. Anesthesiology. 2006;104:724–33.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Donati D. Neuromuscular blocking agents. In: Barash et al., editors. Clinical anesthesia. 7th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2013. p. 523–57.Google Scholar
Miller RD. Neuromuscular blocking drugs. In: Basics of anesthesia. 6th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier Saunders; 2011. p. 143–61.Google Scholar
Naguib M, Samarkandi AH, El-Din ME, Abdullah K, Khaled M, Alharby SW. The dose of succinylcholine required for excellent endotracheal intubating conditions. Anesth Analg. 2006;102:151–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Gronert GA. Cardiac arrest after succinylcholine: mortality greater with rhabdomyolysis than receptor upregulation. Anesthesiology. 2001;94:523–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Schreiber JU, Lysakowski C, Fuchs-Buder T, et al. Prevention of succinylcholine-induced fasciculation and myalgia: a meta-analysis of randomized trials. Anesthesiology. 2005;103:877–84.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Naguib M, Lien CA, Claude M. Pharmacology of neuromuscular blocking drugs. In: Miller RD, editor. Miller’s anesthesia. 8th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier Saunders; 2015. p. 958–91.Google Scholar