Plasma concentration based response surface model predict better than effect-site concentration based model for wake-up time during gastrointestinal endoscopy sedation.

BACKGROUND: Sedation for esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and colonoscopy is characterized by rapid patient induction and emergence. The drugs midazolam and alfentanil have long been used for procedural sedation; however, the relationship between plasma or effect-site concentrations (Cp or Ce, respectively) and emergence remains unclear. The aim of this study is to develop patient wake-up prediction models for both Cp and Ce using response surface modeling, a pharmacodynamics tool for assessing patients' responses. METHODS: The Observer's Alertness/Sedation (OAA/S) score was used to monitor sedation depth during the examinations. Concentration pairs of midazolam and alfentanil were calculated for each of Cp and Ce using pharmacokinetic simulation software. Response surface models were developed using the Greco construct. Temporal analysis was done by comparing model-predicted wake-up time with true patient wake-up time. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients with an average body mass index of 21.85 ± 2.3 kg/m2 were pooled for analysis. The average duration of examination were 2.9 ± 1.4 min for EGD and 6.6 ± 2.7 min for colonoscopy. Seventy-five concentration pairs of midazolam and alfentanil were obtained for each Cp and Ce. The Cp-based Greco response surface model showed significant synergy between midazolam and alfentanil and was a better predictor of patient wake-up time, with an average deviation of 1.0 ± 3.9 min, while the Ce model show time deviation greater than 20 min. CONCLUSION: The early phases of drug distribution are unique and complicated by nonsteady-state concentrations, and our study revealed that Ce-based wake-up time prediction is more difficult under these circumstances.

Adaptation of non-linear mixed amount with zero amount response surface model for analysis of concentration-dependent synergism and safety with midazolam, alfentanil, and propofol sedation.

BACKGROUND: The non-linear mixed amount with zero amounts response surface model can be used to describe drug interactions and predict loss of response to noxious stimuli and respiratory depression. We aimed to determine whether this response surface model could be used to model sedation with the triple drug combination of midazolam, alfentanil and propofol. METHODS: Sedation was monitored in 56 patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy (modelling group) using modified alertness/sedation scores. A total of 227 combinations of effect-site concentrations were derived from pharmacokinetic models. Accuracy and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve were calculated. Accuracy was defined as an absolute difference <0.5 between the binary patient responses and the predicted probability of loss of responsiveness. Validation was performed with a separate group (validation group) of 47 patients. RESULTS: Effect-site concentration ranged from 0 to 108 ng ml-1 for midazolam, 0-156 ng ml-1 for alfentanil, and 0-2.6 µg ml-1 for propofol in both groups. Synergy was strongest with midazolam and alfentanil (24.3% decrease in U50, concentration for half maximal drug effect). Adding propofol, a third drug, offered little additional synergy (25.8% decrease in U50). Two patients (3%) experienced respiratory depression. Model accuracy was 83% and 76%, area under the curve was 0.87 and 0.80 for the modelling and validation group, respectively. CONCLUSION: The non-linear mixed amount with zero amounts triple interaction response surface model predicts patient sedation responses during endoscopy with combinations of midazolam, alfentanil, or propofol that fall within clinical use. Our model also suggests a safety margin of alfentanil fraction <0.12 that avoids respiratory depression after loss of responsiveness.

Pharmacokinetics of Fentanyl and Its Derivatives in Children: A Comprehensive Review.

Fentanyl and its derivatives sufentanil, alfentanil, and remifentanil are potent opioids. A comprehensive review of the use of fentanyl and its derivatives in the pediatric population was performed using the National Library of Medicine PubMed. Studies were included if they contained original pharmacokinetic parameters or models using established routes of administration in patients younger than 18 years of age. Of 372 retrieved articles, 44 eligible pharmacokinetic studies contained data of 821 patients younger than 18 years of age, including more than 46 preterm infants, 64 full-term neonates, 115 infants/toddlers, 188 children, and 28 adolescents. Underlying diagnoses included congenital heart and pulmonary disease and abdominal disorders. Routes of drug administration were intravenous, epidural, oral-transmucosal, intranasal, and transdermal. Despite extensive use in daily clinical practice, few studies have been performed. Preterm and term infants have lower clearance and protein binding. Pharmacokinetics was not altered by chronic renal or hepatic disease. Analyses of the pooled individual patients' data revealed that clearance maturation relating to body weight could be best described by the Hill function for sufentanil (R 2 = 0.71, B max 876 mL/min, K 50 16.3 kg) and alfentanil (R 2 = 0.70, B max (fixed) 420 mL/min, K 50 28 kg). The allometric exponent for estimation of clearance of sufentanil was 0.99 and 0.75 for alfentanil clearance. Maturation of remifentanil clearance was described by linear regression to bodyweight (R 2 = 0.69). The allometric exponent for estimation of remifentanil clearance was 0.76. For fentanyl, linear regression showed only a weak correlation between clearance and bodyweight in preterm and term neonates (R 2 = 0.22) owing to a lack of data in older age groups. A large heterogeneity regarding study design, clinical setting, drug administration, laboratory assays, and pharmacokinetic estimation was observed between studies introducing bias into the analyses performed in this review. A limitation of this review is that pharmacokinetic data, based on different modes of administration, dosing schemes, and parameter estimation methods, were combined.

Predicting the Best Fit: A Comparison of Response Surface Models for Midazolam and Alfentanil Sedation in Procedures With Varying Stimulation.

BACKGROUND: Selecting an effective dose of sedative drugs in combined upper and lower gastrointestinal endoscopy is complicated by varying degrees of pain stimulation. We tested the ability of 5 response surface models to predict depth of sedation after administration of midazolam and alfentanil in this complex model. The procedure was divided into 3 phases: esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD), colonoscopy, and the time interval between the 2 (intersession). METHODS: The depth of sedation in 33 adult patients was monitored by Observer Assessment of Alertness/Scores. A total of 218 combinations of midazolam and alfentanil effect-site concentrations derived from pharmacokinetic models were used to test 5 response surface models in each of the 3 phases of endoscopy. Model fit was evaluated with objective function value, corrected Akaike Information Criterion (AICc), and Spearman ranked correlation. A model was arbitrarily defined as accurate if the predicted probability is <0.5 from the observed response. RESULTS: The effect-site concentrations tested ranged from 1 to 76 ng/mL and from 5 to 80 ng/mL for midazolam and alfentanil, respectively. Midazolam and alfentanil had synergistic effects in colonoscopy and EGD, but additivity was observed in the intersession group. Adequate prediction rates were 84% to 85% in the intersession group, 84% to 88% during colonoscopy, and 82% to 87% during EGD. The reduced Greco and Fixed alfentanil concentration required for 50% of the patients to achieve targeted response Hierarchy models performed better with comparable predictive strength. The reduced Greco model had the lowest AICc with strong correlation in all 3 phases of endoscopy. Dynamic, rather than fixed, γ and γalf in the Hierarchy model improved model fit. CONCLUSIONS: The reduced Greco model had the lowest objective function value and AICc and thus the best fit. This model was reliable with acceptable predictive ability based on adequate clinical correlation. We suggest that this model has practical clinical value for patients undergoing procedures with varying degrees of stimulation.

Performance of alfentanil target-controlled infusion in normal and morbidly obese female patients.

BACKGROUND: Available alfentanil pharmacokinetic (PK) sets for target-controlled infusion (TCI) were derived from populations with normal BMI. The performance and accuracy of the models devised by Maitre and colleagues and Scott and colleagues were evaluated in a population including morbidly obese patients. METHODS: Alfentanil TCI using Maitre and colleagues' model was administered to 10 obese and six non-obese women (BMI 19.5-57.4 kg m(-2)) undergoing laparoscopic surgery. The initial effect-site target concentration was 100 ng ml(-1). Alfentanil arterial plasma concentrations were sampled from TCI onset to 220 min after its termination. Stanpump(®) software calculated predicted alfentanil concentrations. Data were analysed with a non-linear mixed-effect model (NONMEM, version 7.2), including calculations of the median performance error (MDPE) and the median absolute performance error (MDAPE). Scott and colleagues' model was evaluated retrospectively. RESULTS: Using Maitre and colleagues' model, MDPE and MDAPE (range) for the whole population were 13.3% and 23.9%, respectively. With Scott and colleagues' model, MDPE and MDAPE were -30.7% and 50.1%, respectively. We created a three-compartment model with BMI as the covariate (CL), yielding MDPE 1.1% and MDAPE 30.6%. CONCLUSIONS: Maitre and colleagues' PK set underestimated the predicted concentrations in our mixed-weighted population, but its bias and accuracy were acceptable for clinical application. Scott and colleagues' model was inaccurate. The NONMEM model seemed to be more accurate during the infusion and for high concentrations, but it needs to be validated in a larger population.

Xenon does not reduce opioid requirement for orthopedic surgery.

PURPOSE: Is to test the hypothesis that 70% xenon has a relevant opioid sparing effect compared to a minimum alveolar concentration (MAC)-equivalent combination of N(2)O and desflurane. METHODS: In this randomized, controlled study of 30 patients undergoing major orthopedic surgery, we determined the plasma alfentanil concentration required to suppress response to skin incision in 50% of patients (Cp(50)) anesthetized with xenon (70%) or a combination of N(2)O (70%) and desflurane (2%). A response was defined as movement, pressor response > 15 mmHg, heart rate > 90 beats x min(-1), autonomic reactions or a combination of these. At skin incision, alfentanil was administered at a randomly selected target plasma concentration thereafter the concentration was increased or decreased according to the patient's response. After skin incision, desflurane was adjusted to maintain the bispectral index below 60 and prevent responsiveness in both groups. RESULTS: The Cp(50) (+/- standard error) of alfentanil was 83 +/- 48ng x mL(-1) with xenon and 49 +/- 26 ng x mL(-1) with N(2)O/desflurane (P =0.451). During surgery five xenon and 15 N(2)O/desflurane patients were given desflurane at 1.0 +/- 0.5 volume % and 2.5 +/- 0.7 volume %. The total age adjusted MAC was 0.97 +/- 0.07 and 0.94 +/- 0.07 respectively (P = 0.217). The intraoperative plasma alfentanil concentrations were 95 +/- 80 and 93 +/- 60 ng x mL(-1) respectively (mean +/- SD; P = 0.451). Patients given xenon were slightly more bradycardic, whereas blood pressure was similar. CONCLUSION: Xenon compared to a MAC-equivalent combination of N(2)O and desflurane does not substantially reduce opioid requirement for orthopedic surgery. A small but clinically irrelevant difference cannot be excluded, however.

Elimination of alfentanil delivered by infusion is not altered by the chronic administration of atorvastatin.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Statins are prescribed for patients with hypercholesterolemia. Atorvastatin is metabolized by cytochrome P4503A4 and inhibits P4503A4 activity in vitro. Alfentanil is a potent opioid used in clinical anaesthetic practice and is also metabolized by P4503A4. This study tested the hypothesis that chronic atorvastatin administration inhibits the metabolism of alfentanil. METHODS: Sixteen patients undergoing elective surgery were studied as matched pairs. One member of each pair was maintained on standard doses of atorvastatin for at least 4 months. Each patient received an alfentanil bolus (80 microg kg(-1)) intravenously (i.v.), followed by an alfentanil infusion (0.67 microg kg(-1) min(-1)) for 90 min. Serial plasma alfentanil concentrations were measured using gas chromatography-nitrogen phosphorous detection. Pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated using two-compartment linear modelling. RESULTS: One patient and the corresponding match were excluded from the analysis. The elimination half-life of alfentanil was similar in the control and atorvastatin groups (98.8 +/- 12.4 versus 98.3 +/- 11.3 min, respectively). The clearance (Cl), volume of distribution at steady-state (Vdss) and area under the curve (AUC) were similar in the two groups (Cl = 0.20 (+/- 0.06) and 0.22 (+/- 0.04) L min(-1), Vdss = 0.38 (+/- 0.07) and 0.39 (+/- 0.07) L kg(-1), AUC = 0.05 (+/- 0.02) and 0.04 (+/- 0.01) mg min mL(-1)). CONCLUSIONS: Concurrent atorvastatin administration does not alter the pharmacokinetics of alfentanil in patients undergoing elective surgery.

Alfentanil infusion as a component of intravenous anaesthesia for coronary artery bypass surgery with "fast-track" recovery.

Alfentanil and propofol total intravenous anaesthesia was assessed in 25 patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). A manually controlled alfentanil infusion, calculated from estimated lean body mass and published pharmacokinetic data, was effective in achieving target plasma concentrations, while the "Diprifusor" system was used to vary propofol target concentrations according to changes in haemodynamics and anaesthetic requirement. The effects of CPB on alfentanil plasma concentrations were offset by changes in protein binding and free-fraction of the drug. With the use of only two target plasma concentrations for alfentanil (changed after CPB), a pre-determined infusion profile ensured effective plasma concentrations during surgery and concentrations unlikely to inhibit extubation within six hours of sternal closure.

Alfentanil causes less postoperative nausea and vomiting than equipotent doses of fentanyl or sufentanil in outpatients.

BACKGROUND: The relative potencies of alfentanil, fentanyl, and sufentanil as a risk factor for postoperative nausea and vomiting have not been determined. They were compared in a randomized study designed to obtain equipotent plasma concentrations of these three opioids at the beginning of the recovery period. METHODS: The study included 274 patients treated on an outpatient basis. The steady state opioid plasma concentration providing a predicted 50% reduction of the minimum alveolar concentration of isoflurane was used to determine the relative potency of the opioids. The opioids were prepared in equal volumes at concentrations of alfentanil 150 microg/ml, fentanyl 50 microg/ml, and sufentanil 5 microg/ml and were administered in vol/kg. Anesthesia was induced in a blinded fashion with a bolus of the study opioid (0.05 ml/kg) and 4-6 mg/kg thiopental and was maintained with isoflurane (0.6-1%) in a nitrous oxide-oxygen mixture with a continuous infusion of the study opioid (0.06 ml x kg(-1) x h(-1)). If necessary, up to five additional boluses of opioid (0.02 ml/kg) could be given. This opioid administration protocol was tested by pharmacokinetic simulations. RESULTS: The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting was not different in the postanesthesia care unit, but in the ambulatory surgery unit it was significantly lower for alfentanil compared with fentanyl and sufentanil (12, 34, and 35%, respectively P < 0.005). Pharmacokinetic modeling showed that the end-anesthesia opioid plasma concentrations were approximately equipotent in the three groups. However, modeling does not support that the difference between groups in the postoperative period can be explained by a more rapid disappearance of alfentanil from the plasma. CONCLUSIONS: Alfentanil, compared with approximately equipotent doses of fentanyl and sufentanil, is associated with a lower incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting in outpatients.

Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic modeling of the respiratory depressant effect of alfentanil.

BACKGROUND: Although respiratory depression is the most well-known and dangerous side effect of opioids, no pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic model exists for its quantitative analysis. The development of such a model was the aim of this study. METHODS: After institutional approval approval and informed consent were obtained, 14 men (American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I or II; median age, 42 yr [range, 20-71 yr]; median weight, 82.5 kg [range, 68-108 kg]) were studied before they underwent major urologic surgery. An intravenous infusion of alfentanil (2.3 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1)) was started while the patients were breathing oxygen-enriched air (fraction of inspired oxygen [FIO2 = 0.5) over a tightly fitting continuous positive airway pressure mask. The infusion was discontinued when a cumulative dose of 70 microg/kg had been administered, the end-expiratory partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PE(CO2) exceeded 65 mmHg, or apneic periods lasting more than 60 s occurred During and after the infusion, frequent arterial blood samples were drawn and analyzed for the concentration of alfentanil and the arterial carbon dioxide pressure (PaCO2). A mamillary two-compartment model was fitted to the pharmacokinetic data. The PaCO2 data were described by an indirect response model The model accounted for the respiratory stimulation resulting from increasing PaCO2. The model parameters were estimated using NONMEM. Simulations were performed to define the respiratory response at steady state to different alfentanil concentrations. RESULTS: The indirect response model adequately described the time course of the PaCO2. The following pharmacodynamic parameters were estimated (population means and interindividual variability): EC50, 60.3 microg/l (32%); the elimination rate constant of carbon dioxide (Kel), 0.088 min(-1) (44%); and the gain in the carbon dioxide response, 4(28%) (fixed according to literature values). Simulations revealed the pronounced role of PaCO2 in maintaining alveolar ventilation in the presence of opioid. CONCLUSIONS: The model described the data for the entire opioid-PaCo2 response surface examined. Indirect response models appear to be a promising tool for the quantitative evaluation of drug-induced respiratory depression.

Anestesia Total Intravenosa en Neurocirugía: Tasas de Infusión e influencia de la edad / Total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) in neurosurgery

La anestesia total intravenosa (ATIV), es una técnica anestésica atractiva para el paciente neuroquirúrgico, debido sus ventajas demostradas en este tipo de intervenciones. El objetivo de nuestro estudio es determinar clínicamente la tasa de infusión promedio (TIP) tanto de propofol comode alfentanil adecuada para el paciente neuroquirúrgico comparándola con los reportes para otros tipos de cirugías y la influencia de la edad sobre la misma. Se estudiaron 150 pacientes programados para diferentes procedimientos neuroquirúrgicos bajo ARIV. Se dividieron en tres grupos de acuerdo a su edad: Grupo 1:£40 años, grupo 2:41 a 64 años, grupo 3:>64 años. La inducción de la anestesia se llevó al cabo con alfentanil y propofol en bolo. Una vez perdido el reflejo palpebral, se inició la infusión de alfentanil y propofol. La tasa de infusión (TI) inicial para propofol fue de 10 mg/kg/h-1 y 60µg/kg-1 para el anfentanil, variando éstas de acuerdo a los requerimientos clínicos. Comparamos la TIP de ambos fármacos entre los tres grupos, encontrando para el alfentanil una TIP para el grupo 1 de 41.84 ñ 14.28, para el grupo 2 de 33.8 ñ 8.46 y para pacientes ancianos de 27-17 ñ 10.55 µg/kg/h-1 existiendo una diferencia estadísticamente se encontró diferencia significativa entre el grupo 1 (8.78 ñ 4.52) y el grupo 2(7.34 ñ 1.48), no encontrando diferencias con otros reportes

Estudio sobre la condición física de la combinación de anestésicos locales y opiáceos: sus implicancias teóricas en la anestesia subaracnoidea / Study on the physical condition of the combination local anesthetics'-opiates: its theoretical implicancies in the spinal anesthesia

La baricidad de los agentes anestésicos se relaciona con la condición física del líquido cefalorráquideo (LCR), modificándose nuestra práctica cotidiana cuando utilizamos drogas hiperbaras para anestesia subaracnoidea. En la presente década se observó una tendencia creciente a utilizar combinaciones de anestésicos locales y opiáceos. En relación a dichas mezclas, se analizaron la farmacocinética y farmacodinamia pero no se profundizó el estudio respecto de su densidad y baricidad. En este trabajo se midieron las densidades de las drogas anestésicas usadas habitualmente en bloqueos regionales (a 37ºC) y diferentes combinaciones entre las mismas, comprobándose que estas últimas son menores que las de los componentes por separado. Por lo tanto, las combinaciones de anestésicos locales y opiáceos presentan un comportamiento hipobaro respecto del LCR. Tal condición debería ser tenida en cuenta al realizar un bloqueo raquídeo pues modificaría la localización y extensión del mismo.

Hepatic disposition of alfentanil and sufentanil in patients undergoing orthotopic liver transplantation.

Alfentanil and sufentanil are used in the anesthetic management of patients undergoing orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) and are extensively metabolized by the liver. We examined the influence of OLT on the removal of these opioids. 14 patients undergoing OLT were given either alfentanil (40 micrograms/kg intravenous [IV] bolus) or sufentanil (5 micrograms/kg IV bolus) during the induction of anesthesia, followed by infusion during surgery (1 microgram.kg-1.min-1 alfentanil or 0.01 microgram.kg-1.min-1 sufentanil) and the postoperative period (0.5 microgram.kg-1.min-1 or 0.005 microgram.kg-1.min-1). A catheter was inserted into the hepatic vein to determine the drugs' hepatic extraction coefficient and hepatic clearance. The hepatic extraction coefficient was 0.14 for alfentanil and 0.35 for sufentanil. The total and hepatic clearance of alfentanil were similar, while the hepatic clearance of sufentanil was 50% of the total clearance (P < 0.05). The total clearance of alfentanil was significantly linked to its hepatic clearance (r2 = 0.81, P < 0.001). We conclude that the total clearance of sufentanil is greater than its hepatic clearance. This difference suggests that there is extrahepatic metabolism of sufentanil in patients undergoing OLT.

Effect of diltiazem on midazolam and alfentanil disposition in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting.

BACKGROUND: Midazolam and alfentanil are desirable anesthetic adjuncts for cardiac anesthesia. They are metabolized by cytochrome P450 3A (CYP3A) enzymes. These isozymes are inhibited by concurrent medications, including the calcium channel antagonist diltiazem, which may have an effect on recovery from anesthesia. METHODS: Thirty patients having coronary artery bypass grafting were randomly assigned to receive either diltiazem (60 mg orally 2 h before induction of anesthesia and an infusion of 0.1 mg.kg-1.h-1 started at induction and continued for 23 h) or placebo in a double-blind study. Anesthesia was induced with 0.1 mg/kg midazolam, 50 micrograms/kg alfentanil, and 20 to 80 mg propofol and maintained with infusions of 1 microgram.kg-1.min-1 of both midazolam and alfentanil supplemented with isoflurane. Plasma midazolam and alfentanil concentrations and areas under the plasma concentration-time curves were determined. The terminal half-life and the time for the drug plasma level to decrease 50% after cessation of the infusion (t50) were calculated for midazolam and alfentanil. Separation from mechanical ventilation and tracheal extubation were performed according to the study protocol. RESULTS: Diltiazem increased the mean concentration-time curves (from end of anesthesia until 23 h) of midazolam by 24% (P < 0.05) and that of alfentanil by 40% (P < 0.05). The mean half-life of midazolam was 43% (P < 0.05) and that of alfentanil was 50% (P < 0.05) longer in patients receiving diltiazem. The mean t50 of alfentanil was 40% longer (P < 0.05) in patients receiving diltiazem, but the change in the mean t50 of midazolam (25%) was not statistically significant. In patients receiving diltiazem, tracheal extubation was performed on average 2.5 h later (P = 0.054) than in those receiving placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Diltiazem slows elimination of midazolam and alfentanil and may delay tracheal extubation after large doses of these anesthetic adjuncts. CYP3A-mediated drug interactions should be considered as confounders when recovery from anesthesia with midazolam and alfentanil infusions is assessed.

Comparación de tres opiáceos en anestesia para la revascularización miocárdica / Comparing three opiates anesthesia for myocardial revascularization

Se estudiaron y compararon los efectos hemodinámicos de la anestesia realizada con tres opiáceos: alfentanilo, fentanilo y sufentanilo, en 30 pacientes sometidos a revascularización miocárdica, cuyos ventrículos izquierdos mantenían función contráctil conservada o ligeramente deteriorada. La inducción fue realizada con 125 µg. kg.-1 de alfentanilo (seguido de 15 mg de midazolam), o con 16 µg.kg-1 de fentanilo, o con 4 µg.kg-1 de sufentanilo. El mantenimiento consistió en infusiones contínuas de los tres opiáceos a razón de 3 µg.kg-1.min-1 para el alfentanilo, 0.1 µg.kg-1.min-1 para el fentanilo y 0.04 µg.kg-1.min-1 para el sufentanilo. Al mismo tiempo en los tres casos se infundió también midazolam a razón de 2 µg.kg-1.min-1. Estas dosis fueron fijas hasta después de la salida de CEC, en que fueron disminuídas a la mitad. Los resultados de las mediciones, efectuadas en iguales momentos del procedimiento anestésico quirúrgico, mostraron una mayor inestabilidad para el alfentanilo que para los otros dos. De éstos, a las dosis utilizadas, el sufentanilo muestra un perfil de más estabilidad, con menor requerimiento de adyuvantes para mantener los parámetros dentro de la menor disparidad con respecto a los valores basales. Asimismo el tiempo de recuperación es más corto con éste que con fentanilo.

Clinical pharmacokinetics of alfentanil, fentanyl and sufentanil. An update.

Alfentanil, fentanyl and sufentanil are synthetic opioid analgesics acting at specific opioid receptors. These opioids are widely used as analgesics to supplement general anaesthesia for various surgical procedures or as primary anaesthetic agents in very high doses during cardiac surgery. Fentanyl and sufentanil especially are administered via infusion for long term analgesia and sedation in intensive care patients. Opioid analgesics are mainly administered using the intravenous route. However, other techniques of administration, including epidural, intrathecal, transdermal and intranasal applications, have been demonstrated. Important pharmacokinetic differences between alfentanil, fentanyl and sufentanil have been shown in many reports. Alfentanil has the most rapid analgesic onset and time to peak effect as well as the shortest distribution and elimination half-lives. The volume of distribution and total body clearance of this agent are smaller when compared with those of fentanyl and sufentanil. The pharmacokinetics of the opioid analgesics can be affected by several factors including patient age, plasma protein content, acid-base status and cardiopulmonary bypass, but not significantly by renal insufficiency or compensated hepatic dysfunction. In addition, pharmacokinetic properties can be influenced by changes in hepatic blood flow and administration of drug combinations which compete for the same plasma protein carrier or metabolising pathway. Although comparing specific pharmacokinetic parameters such as half-lives is deeply entrenched in the literature and clinical practice, simply comparing half-lives is not a rational way to select an opioid for specific requirements. Using pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic models, computer simulations based on changes in the effect site opioid concentration or context-sensitive half-times seem to be extremely useful for selecting an opioid on a more rational basis.

Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of propofol/alfentanil infusions for sedation in ICU patients.

OBJECTIVE: Population pharmacokinetic analysis and pharmacodynamic profile of propofol/alfentanil infusions for sedation and analgesia of intensive care unit patients for up to 24 h. DESIGN: Institutional Review Board-approved prospective clinical trial. SETTING: The ten-bed intensive care unit of an university hospital. PATIENTS: 18 consecutive patients (ten men/eight women; age: 17-73 years, mean 51.6 +/- 16.7 years, SD; body weight: 60-110 kg, mean 82.9 +/- 11.2 kg, SD) requiring mechanical ventilation and prolonged sedation/analgesia after major surgery or trauma. INTERVENTIONS: Plasma propofol and alfentanil concentrations were measured at regular intervals during the long-term drug infusion using a high-performance liquid chromatography (propofol) and radioimmunoassay (alfentanil) analysis. The depth of sedation was controlled by monitoring a two-lead online EEG. Thus, drug application was computer controlled via a closed-loop EEG median-frequency feedback system. RESULTS: ICU long-term infusion population pharmacokinetics (open three-compartment model) revealed for propofol: central compartment distribution volume (V1): 31.2 +/- 5.3 l; steady-state distribution volume (Vdss): 499 +/- 173 l; total clearance (Cltot): 1001- +/- 150 ml/min; redistribution half-life (t1/2 gamma): 90 +/- 23 min; elimination half-life (t1/2 beta): 558 +/- 218 minutes. For alfentanil: V1: 31.9 +/- 10.1 l; Vdss: 124 +/- 41 l; Cltot: 345 +/- 70 ml/min; t1/2 gamma: 36 +/- 15 min; t1/2 beta: 275 +/- 94 min, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The population pharmacokinetic analysis of propofol/alfentanil for ICU sedation therapy revealed increased volumes of drug distribution and decreased elimination characteristics as compared to pharmacokinetic data from short-term infusions in surgical patients. This can be attributed in part to altered distribution/redistribution processes and/or drug elimination under the condition of ICU therapy. No significant drug accumulation was observed. For future long-term sedation and analgesia of ICU patients with propofol/alfentanil, this altered pharmacokinetic behaviour should be taken into consideration to allow a more individualized and safer dosing of this drug combination.

Pharmacokinetics of computer-controlled alfentanil administration in children undergoing cardiac surgery.

BACKGROUND: Cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) induces changes in the pharmacokinetics of drugs. The purpose of this study was to model the pharmacokinetics of alfentanil in children undergoing cardiac surgery to provide accurate dosage titration intraoperatively as well as in the postoperative period. METHODS: Fourteen children (aged 3 months to 8 yr) undergoing cardiac surgery with CPB were administered alfentanil via a computer-controlled infusion pump. During surgery, the computer-controlled infusion pump was set to target plasma alfentanil concentrations of 500-2500 micrograms/ml. After surgery, the computer-controlled infusion pump was set to target plasma concentrations of 200-500 micrograms/ml. Parameters for children previously published by Goresky et al. were programmed into the device. Arterial blood samples were taken throughout the infusion. Plasma samples were assayed by radioimmunoassay. Alfentanil pharmacokinetics were estimated using a pooled-data approach with a simple weight-proportional, three-compartment mamillary model with parameters expressed in volumes and clearances as well as a CPB-adjusted, three-compartment model in which the parameters were allowed to change before, during, and after CPB. The accuracy of the three models was compared using cross-validation. RESULTS: Plasma alfentanil concentrations during computer-controlled infusion pump administration exceeded target concentrations for the first 10 min of drug administration, and from 300 min to the end of the study. The median absolute performance error was 33%. Pharmacokinetic modeling estimated a set of parameters for a simple three-compartment model with a median absolute weighted residual of 18.4%. A CPB-adjusted model nominally decreased the median absolute weighted residual to 17.0%. The performance of these models as measured by cross-validation performance was 18.9% median absolute performance error for the simple model and 18.4% median absolute performance error for the CPB-adjusted model. Parameters for the simple three-compartment model are: V1 = 19.2 ml.kg-1; V2 = 99 ml.kg-1; V3 = 2344 ml.kg-1; Cl1 = 2.5 ml.kg-1.min-1; Cl2 = 38 ml.kg-1.min-1; and Cl3 = 15 ml.kg-1.min-1. In the CPB-adjusted model V1, V2, and Cl2 changed with the onset of CPB. After CPB, V1 and Cl2 returned to the initial values, while V2 was described by a third value. CONCLUSIONS: The population pharmacokinetics of alfentanil in children undergoing cardiac surgery were well described by both a simple weight-proportional, three-compartment model and a weight-proportional, CPB-adjusted three-compartment model. Cross-validation estimated an expected median inaccuracy of approximately 18-20% with the estimated models in identical experimental circumstances. The flexible CPB-adjusted pharmacokinetic model could be used for modeling any drug with linear pharmacokinetics given in the context of CPB.

Esmolol y alfentanil para control de la taquicardia e hipertensión inducidas por intubación endotraqueal / Esmolol and alfentanil for control of tachycardia and hypertension induced by endotracheal intubation

Se realizó un estudio experiemtal comparativo para determinar la eficacia del esmolol y afentanil en el control de la tensión arterial y la frecuencia cardiaca durante la laringoscopía e intubación en 30 pacientes sometidos a cirugía electiva bajo anestesia general inhalatoria. Previamente a la laringoscopía se administraron intravenosamente en grupos de 10: Esmolol (150 g/kg/min), Alfentanil (15g/kg) y Placebo (salina 5 ml). No hubo incrementos en la frecuencia cardiaca durante la laringoscopía e intubación en los grupos tratados con alfentanil y esmolol, en tanto que el grupo con tratamiento placebo presentó un incremento del 79 por ciento (p < 0.00001). En relación a la tensión arterial el grupo con tratamiento placebo presntó un incremento del 25 por ciento (p < 0.00001), mientras los grupos de alfentanyl y esmolol no presentaron cambios estadísticamente significativos en relación a las sifras basales. Ambos fármacos disminuyen las respuestas de taquicardia e hipertensión secundarias a laringoscopía e intubación