Reversal of Propofol-induced Depression of the Hypoxic Ventilatory Response by BK-channel Blocker ENA-001: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: The use of anesthetics may result in depression of the hypoxic ventilatory response. Since there are no receptor-specific antagonists for most anesthetics, there is the need for agnostic respiratory stimulants that increase respiratory drive irrespective of its cause. The authors tested whether ENA-001, an agnostic respiratory stimulant that blocks carotid body BK-channels, could restore the hypoxic ventilatory response during propofol infusion. They hypothesize that ENA-001 is able to fully restore the hypoxic ventilatory response. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind crossover trial, 14 male and female healthy volunteers were randomized to receive placebo and low- and high-dose ENA-001 on three separate occasions. On each occasion, isohypercapnic hypoxic ventilatory responses were measured during a fixed sequence of placebo, followed by low- and high-dose propofol infusion. The authors conducted a population pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic analysis that included oxygen and carbon dioxide kinetics. RESULTS: Twelve subjects completed the three sessions; no serious adverse events occurred. The propofol concentrations were 0.6 and 2.0 µg/ml at low and high dose, respectively. The ENA-001 concentrations were 0.6 and 1.0 µg/ml at low and high dose, respectively. The propofol concentration that reduced the hypoxic ventilatory response by 50% was 1.47 ± 0.20 µg/ml. The steady state ENA-001 concentration to increase the depressed ventilatory response by 50% was 0.51 ± 0.04 µg/ml. A concentration of 1 µg/ml ENA-001 was required for full reversal of the propofol effect at the propofol concentration that reduced the hypoxic ventilatory response by 50%. CONCLUSIONS: In this pilot study, the authors demonstrated that ENA-001 restored the hypoxic ventilatory response impaired by propofol. This finding is not only of clinical importance but also provides mechanistic insights into the peripheral stimulation of breathing with ENA-001 overcoming central depression by propofol.

Morphine and Hydromorphone Effects, Side Effects, and Variability: A Crossover Study in Human Volunteers.

BACKGROUND: Balancing between opioid analgesia and respiratory depression continues to challenge clinicians in perioperative, emergency department, and other acute care settings. Morphine and hydromorphone are postoperative analgesic standards. Nevertheless, their comparative effects and side effects, timing, and respective variabilities remain poorly understood. This study tested the hypothesis that IV morphine and hydromorphone differ in onset, magnitude, duration, and variability of analgesic and ventilatory effects. METHODS: The authors conducted a randomized crossover study in healthy volunteers. Forty-two subjects received a 2-h IV infusion of hydromorphone (0.05 mg/kg) or morphine (0.2 mg/kg) 1 to 2 weeks apart. The authors measured arterial opioid concentrations, analgesia in response to heat pain (maximally tolerated temperature, and verbal analog pain scores at discrete preset temperatures to determine half-maximum temperature effect), dark-adapted pupil diameter and miosis, end-expired carbon dioxide, and respiratory rate for 12 h after dosing. RESULTS: For morphine and hydromorphone, respectively, maximum miosis was less (3.9 [3.4 to 4.2] vs. 4.6 mm [4.0 to 5.0], P < 0.001; median and 25 to 75% quantiles) and occurred later (3.1 ± 0.9 vs. 2.3 ± 0.7 h after infusion start, P < 0.001; mean ± SD); maximum tolerated temperature was less (49 ± 2 vs. 50 ± 2°C, P < 0.001); verbal pain scores at end-infusion at the most informative stimulus (48.2°C) were 82 ± 4 and 59 ± 3 (P < 0.001); maximum end-expired CO2 was 47 (45 to 50) and 48 mmHg (46 to 51; P = 0.007) and occurred later (5.5 ± 2.8 vs. 3.0 ± 1.5 h after infusion start, P < 0.001); and respiratory nadir was 9 ± 1 and 11 ± 2 breaths/min (P < 0.001), and occurred at similar times. The area under the temperature tolerance-time curve was less for morphine (1.8 [0.0 to 4.4]) than hydromorphone (5.4°C-h [1.6 to 12.1] P < 0.001). Interindividual variability in clinical effects did not differ between opioids. CONCLUSIONS: For morphine compared to hydromorphone, analgesia and analgesia relative to respiratory depression were less, onset of miosis and respiratory depression was later, and duration of respiratory depression was longer. For each opioid, timing of the various clinical effects was not coincident. Results may enable more rational opioid selection, and suggest hydromorphone may have a better clinical profile.

Neurocognitive Effect of Biased µ-Opioid Receptor Agonist Oliceridine, a Utility Function Analysis and Comparison with Morphine.

BACKGROUND: Oliceridine (Olinvyk) is a µ-opioid receptor agonist that in contrast to conventional opioids preferentially engages the G-protein-coupled signaling pathway. This study was designed to determine the utility function of oliceridine versus morphine based on neurocognitive tests and cold pressor test. METHODS: The study had a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, partial block three-way crossover design. Experiments were performed in 20 male and female volunteers. The subjects received intravenous oliceridine (1 or 3 mg; cohorts of 10 subjects/dose), morphine (5 or 10 mg; cohorts of 10 subjects/dose), or placebo on three separate occasions. Before and after dosing, neurocognitive tests, cold pressor test, and plasma drug concentrations were obtained at regular intervals. Population pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic analyses served as the basis for construction of a utility function, which is an objective function of probability of benefit minus probability of harm. Antinociception served as the measure of benefit, and slowing of saccadic peak velocity and increased body sway as the measures of neurocognitive harm. RESULTS: The oliceridine and morphine C50 values, i.e., the effect-site concentrations causing 50% effect, were as follows: antinociception, 13 ± 2 and 23 ± 7 ng/ml; saccadic peak velocity, 90 ± 14 and 54 ± 15 ng/ml; and body sway, 10 ± 2 and 5.6 ± 0.8 ng/ml, respectively. The ratio oliceridine/morphine of the therapeutic indices, C50(benefit)/C50(harm), were 0.34 (95% CI, 0.17 to 0.7; P < 0.01) for saccadic peak velocity and 0.33 (0.16 to 0.50; P < 0.01) for body sway. The oliceridine utility was positive across the effect-site concentration 5 to 77 ng/ml, indicative of a greater probability of benefit than harm. The morphine utility was not significantly different from 0 from 0 to 100 ng/ml. Over the concentration range 15 to 50 ng/ml, the oliceridine utility was superior to that of morphine (P < 0.01). Similar observations were made for body sway. CONCLUSIONS: These data indicate that over the clinical concentration range, oliceridine is an analgesic with a favorable safety profile over morphine when considering analgesia and neurocognitive function.

Opioid Overdose: Limitations in Naloxone Reversal of Respiratory Depression and Prevention of Cardiac Arrest.

Opioids are effective analgesics, but they can have harmful adverse effects, such as addiction and potentially fatal respiratory depression. Naloxone is currently the only available treatment for reversing the negative effects of opioids, including respiratory depression. However, the effectiveness of naloxone, particularly after an opioid overdose, varies depending on the pharmacokinetics and the pharmacodynamics of the opioid that was overdosed. Long-acting opioids, and those with a high affinity at the µ-opioid receptor and/or slow receptor dissociation kinetics, are particularly resistant to the effects of naloxone. In this review, the authors examine the pharmacology of naloxone and its safety and limitations in reversing opioid-induced respiratory depression under different circumstances, including its ability to prevent cardiac arrest.

Respiratory Effects of Biased Ligand Oliceridine in Older Volunteers: A Pharmacokinetic-Pharmacodynamic Comparison with Morphine.

BACKGROUND: Oliceridine is a G protein-biased µ-opioid, a drug class that is associated with less respiratory depression than nonbiased opioids, such as morphine. The authors quantified the respiratory effects of oliceridine and morphine in elderly volunteers. The authors hypothesized that these opioids differ in their pharmacodynamic behavior, measured as effect on ventilation at an extrapolated end-tidal Pco2 at 55 mmHg, V̇E55. METHODS: This four-arm double-blind, randomized, crossover study examined the respiratory effects of intravenous 0.5 or 2 mg oliceridine and 2 or 8 mg morphine in 18 healthy male and female volunteers, aged 55 to 89 yr, on four separate occasions. Participants' CYP2D6 genotypes were determined, hypercapnic ventilatory responses were obtained, and arterial blood samples were collected before and for 6 h after treatment. A population pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic analysis was performed on V̇E55, the primary endpoint; values reported are median ± standard error of the estimate. RESULTS: Oliceridine at low dose was devoid of significant respiratory effects. High-dose oliceridine and both morphine doses caused a rapid onset of respiratory depression with peak effects occurring at 0.5 to 1 h after opioid dosing. After peak effect, compared with morphine, respiratory depression induced by oliceridine returned faster to baseline. The effect-site concentrations causing a 50% depression of V̇E55 were 29.9 ± 3.5 ng/ml (oliceridine) and 21.5 ± 4.6 ng/ml (morphine), the blood effect-site equilibration half-lives differed by a factor of 5: oliceridine 44.3 ± 6.1 min and morphine 214 ± 27 min. Three poor CYP2D6 oliceridine metabolizers exhibited a significant difference in oliceridine clearance by about 50%, causing higher oliceridine plasma concentrations after both low- and high-dose oliceridine, compared with the other participants. CONCLUSIONS: Oliceridine and morphine differ in their respiratory pharmacodynamics with a more rapid onset and offset of respiratory depression for oliceridine and a smaller magnitude of respiratory depression over time.

Inhaled Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol does not enhance oxycodone-induced respiratory depression: randomised controlled trial in healthy volunteers.

BACKGROUND: In humans, the effect of cannabis on ventilatory control is poorly studied, and consequently, the effect of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) remains unknown, particularly when THC is combined with an opioid. We studied the effect of THC on breathing without and with oxycodone pretreatment. We hypothesised that THC causes respiratory depression, which is amplified when THC and oxycodone are combined. METHODS: In this randomised controlled crossover trial, healthy volunteers were administered inhaled Bedrocan® 100 mg (Bedrocan International B.V., Veendam, The Netherlands), a pharmaceutical-grade high-THC cannabis variant (21.8% THC; 0.1% cannabidiol), after placebo or oral oxycodone 20 mg pretreatment; THC was inhaled 1.5 and 4.5 h after placebo or oxycodone intake. The primary endpoint was isohypercapnic ventilation at an end-tidal Pco2 of 55 mm Hg or 7.3 kPa (VE55), measured at 1-h intervals for 7 h after placebo/oxycodone intake. RESULTS: In 18 volunteers (age 22 yr [3]; 9 [50%] female), oxycodone produced a 30% decrease in VE55, whereas placebo was without effect on VE55. The first cannabis inhalation resulted in VE55 changing from 20.3 (3.1) to 23.8 (2.4) L min-1 (P=0.06) after placebo, and from 11.8 (2.8) to 13.0 (3.9) L min-1 (P=0.83) after oxycodone. The second cannabis inhalation also had no effect on VE55, but slightly increased sedation. CONCLUSIONS: In humans, THC has no effect on ventilatory control after placebo or oxycodone pretreatment. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: 2021-000083-29 (EU Clinical Trials Register.).

Ketamine Psychedelic and Antinociceptive Effects Are Connected.

BACKGROUND: Ketamine produces potent analgesia combined with psychedelic effects. It has been suggested that these two effects are associated and possibly that analgesia is generated by ketamine-induced dissociation. The authors performed a post hoc analysis of previously published data to quantify the pharmacodynamic properties of ketamine-induced antinociception and psychedelic symptoms. The hypothesis was that ketamine pharmacodynamics (i.e., concentration-effect relationship as well as effect onset and offset times) are not different for these two endpoints. METHODS: Seventeen healthy male volunteers received escalating doses of S- and racemic ketamine on separate occasions. Before, during, and after ketamine infusion, changes in external perception were measured together with pain pressure threshold. A population pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic analysis was performed that took S- and R-ketamine and S- and R-norketamine plasma concentrations into account. RESULTS: The pharmacodynamics of S-ketamine did not differ for antinociception and external perception with potency parameter (median [95% CI]) C50, 0.51 (0.38 to 0.66) nmol/ml; blood-effect site equilibration half-life, 8.3 [5.1 to 13.0] min), irrespective of administration form (racemic ketamine or S-ketamine). R-ketamine did not contribute to either endpoint. For both endpoints, S-norketamine had a small antagonistic effect. CONCLUSIONS: The authors conclude that their data support an association or connectivity between ketamine analgesia and dissociation. Given the intricacies of the study related to the pain model, measurement of dissociation, and complex modeling of the combination of ketamine and norketamine, it is the opinion of the authors that further studies are needed to detect functional connectivity between brain areas that produce the different ketamine effects.

Respiratory Effects of the Atypical Tricyclic Antidepressant Tianeptine in Human Models of Opioid-induced Respiratory Depression.

BACKGROUND: Animal data suggest that the antidepressant and α-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionic acid receptor modulator tianeptine is able to prevent opioid-induced respiratory depression. The hypothesis was that oral or intravenous tianeptine can effectively prevent or counteract opioid-induced respiratory depression in humans. METHODS: Healthy male and female volunteers participated in two studies that had a randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled, crossover design. First, oral tianeptine (37.5-, 50-, and 100-mg doses with 8 subjects) pretreatment followed by induction of alfentanil-induced respiratory depression (alfentanil target concentration, 100 ng/ml) was tested. Primary endpoint was ventilation at an extrapolated end-tidal carbon dioxide concentration of 55 mmHg (V̇E55). Next, the ability of four subsequent and increasing infusions of intravenous tianeptine (target tianeptine plasma concentrations 400, 1,000, 1,500, and 2,000 ng/ml, each given over 15 min) to counteract remifentanil-induced respiratory depression was determined in 15 volunteers. Ventilation was measured at isohypercpania (baseline ventilation 20 ± 2 l/min). The primary endpoint was minute ventilation during the 60 min of tianeptine versus placebo infusion. RESULTS: Alfentanil reduced V̇E55 to 13.7 (95% CI, 8.6 to 18.8) l/min after placebo pretreatment and to 17.9 (10.2 to 25.7) l/min after 50-mg tianeptine pretreatment (mean difference between treatments 4.2 (-11.5 to 3.0) l/min, P = 0.070). Intravenous tianeptine in the measured concentration range of 500 to 2,000 ng/ml did not stimulate ventilation but instead worsened remifentanil-induced respiratory depression: tianeptine, 9.6 ± 0.8 l/min versus placebo 15.0 ± 0.9 l/min; mean difference, 5.3 l/min; 95% CI, 2.5 to 8.2 l/min; P = 0.001, after 1 h of treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Neither oral nor intravenous tianeptine were respiratory stimulants. Intravenous tianeptine over the concentration range of 500 to 2000 ng/ml worsened respiratory depression induced by remifentanil.

Stereoselective ketamine effect on cardiac output: a population pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic modelling study in healthy volunteers.

BACKGROUND: Ketamine has cardiac excitatory side-effects. Currently, data on the effects of ketamine and metabolite concentrations on cardiac output are scarce. We therefore developed a pharmacodynamic model derived from data from a randomised clinical trial. The current study is part of a larger clinical study evaluating the potential mitigating effect of sodium nitroprusside on the psychedelic effects of ketamine. METHODS: Twenty healthy male subjects received escalating esketamine and racemic ketamine doses in combination with either placebo or sodium nitroprusside on four visits: (i) esketamine and placebo, (ii) esketamine and sodium nitroprusside, (iii) racemic ketamine and placebo, and (iv) racemic ketamine and sodium nitroprusside. During each visit, arterial blood samples were obtained and cardiac output was measured. Nonlinear mixed-effect modelling was used to analyse the cardiac output time-series data. Ketamine metabolites were added to the model in a sequential manner to evaluate the effects of metabolites. RESULTS: A model including an S-ketamine and S-norketamine effect best described the data. Ketamine increased cardiac output, whereas modelling revealed that S-norketamine decreased cardiac output. No significant effects were detected for R-ketamine, metabolites other than S-norketamine, or sodium nitroprusside on cardiac output. CONCLUSIONS: S-Ketamine, but not R-ketamine, increased cardiac output in a dose-dependent manner. In contrast to S-ketamine, its metabolite S-norketamine reduced cardiac excitation in a dose-dependent manner. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch Cochrane Center 5359.

Deep neuromuscular block does not improve surgical conditions in patients receiving sevoflurane anaesthesia for laparoscopic renal surgery.

BACKGROUND: Deep neuromuscular block is associated with improved working conditions during laparoscopic surgery when propofol is used as a general anaesthetic. However, whether deep neuromuscular block yields similar beneficial effects when anaesthesia is maintained using volatile inhalation anaesthesia has not been systematically investigated. Volatile anaesthetics, as opposed to intravenous agents, potentiate muscle relaxation, which potentially reduces the need for deep neuromuscular block to obtain optimal surgical conditions. We examined whether deep neuromuscular block improves surgical conditions over moderate neuromuscular block during sevoflurane anaesthesia. METHODS: In this single-centre, prospective, randomised, double-blind study, 98 patients scheduled for elective renal surgery were randomised to receive deep (post-tetanic count 1-2 twitches) or a moderate neuromuscular block (train-of-four 1-2 twitches). Anaesthesia was maintained with sevoflurane and titrated to bispectral index values between 40 and 50. Pneumoperitoneum pressure was maintained at 12 mm Hg. The primary outcome was the difference in surgical conditions, scored at 15 min intervals by one of eight blinded surgeons using a 5-point Leiden-Surgical Rating Scale (L-SRS) that scores the quality of the surgical field from extremely poor1 to optimal5. RESULTS: Deep neuromuscular block did not improve surgical conditions compared with moderate neuromuscular block: mean (standard deviation) L-SRS 4.8 (0.3) vs 4.8 (0.4), respectively (P=0.94). Secondary outcomes, including unplanned postoperative readmissions and prolonged hospital admission, were not significantly different. CONCLUSIONS: During sevoflurane anaesthesia, deep neuromuscular block did not improve surgical conditions over moderate neuromuscular block in normal-pressure laparoscopic renal surgery. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NL7844 (www.trialregister.nl).

Effect of lumbar epidural blockade and propofol on mean arterial pressure, cardiac output and bispectral index: A randomised controlled and pharmacodynamic modelling study.

BACKGROUND: It is generally accepted that a neuraxial blockade strengthens the sedative effects of propofol. Deafferentation caused by neuraxial blockade is thought to play a key role. OBJECTIVES: The objective is to determine whether epidural blockade affects the bispectral index (BIS) of propofol and two other pharmacodynamic endpoints, mean arterial pressure (MAP) and cardiac output (CO). DESIGN: Randomised, placebo-controlled study. SETTING: University hospital. PATIENTS: Patients scheduled for surgery needing epidural analgesia. INTERVENTION: 28 ASA one or two patients received 0, 50, 100 or 150 mg of epidural ropivacaine. After stabilisation of the epidural blockade, propofol was given by target-controlled infusion. The propofol plasma target concentrations were increased at 6-min intervals from 0 to 1, 2.5, 4 and 6 µg ml-1. The study was performed before surgery. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Three endpoints, BIS, mean arterial blood pressure and CO were measured from baseline (prior to the administration of epidural ropivacaine) until 2 h after the start of propofol infusion. The propofol concentration-effect data were analysed to determine the interaction between epidural blockade and propofol sedation. RESULTS: In the absence of propofol, the increase in number of epidural blocked segments from 0 to 15.5 (range 6 to 21) reduced the MAP by 30%, without affecting BIS or CO. In the absence of epidural blockade, the increase in propofol concentration to 6 µg ml-1 reduced BIS, MAP and CO. When combined, epidural anaesthesia and intravenous propofol exhibited no pharmacodynamic interaction on any of the three endpoints. In addition, epidural blockade did not affect the propofol effect-site equilibration half-life for its haemodynamic effects (11.5 ±â€Š0.5 min) or for its effects on the BIS (4.6 ±â€Š0.4 min). CONCLUSION: Epidural blockade reduces the propofol requirements for sedative end points. This is not the result of a pharmacodynamic interaction. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch trial register CCMO, Central Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects, trial number NL 32295.058.10.

Ketamine Pharmacokinetics.

BACKGROUND: Several models describing the pharmacokinetics of ketamine are published with differences in model structure and complexity. A systematic review of the literature was performed, as well as a meta-analysis of pharmacokinetic data and construction of a pharmacokinetic model from raw data sets to qualitatively and quantitatively evaluate existing ketamine pharmacokinetic models and construct a general ketamine pharmacokinetic model. METHODS: Extracted pharmacokinetic parameters from the literature (volume of distribution and clearance) were standardized to allow comparison among studies. A meta-analysis was performed on studies that performed a mixed-effect analysis to calculate weighted mean parameter values and a meta-regression analysis to determine the influence of covariates on parameter values. A pharmacokinetic population model derived from a subset of raw data sets was constructed and compared with the meta-analytical analysis. RESULTS: The meta-analysis was performed on 18 studies (11 conducted in healthy adults, 3 in adult patients, and 5 in pediatric patients). Weighted mean volume of distribution was 252 l/70 kg (95% CI, 200 to 304 l/70 kg). Weighted mean clearance was 79 l/h (at 70 kg; 95% CI, 69 to 90 l/h at 70 kg). No effect of covariates was observed; simulations showed that models based on venous sampling showed substantially higher context-sensitive half-times than those based on arterial sampling. The pharmacokinetic model created from 14 raw data sets consisted of one central arterial compartment with two peripheral compartments linked to two venous delay compartments. Simulations showed that the output of the raw data pharmacokinetic analysis and the meta-analysis were comparable. CONCLUSIONS: A meta-analytical analysis of ketamine pharmacokinetics was successfully completed despite large heterogeneity in study characteristics. Differences in output of the meta-analytical approach and a combined analysis of 14 raw data sets were small, indicative that the meta-analytical approach gives a clinically applicable approximation of ketamine population parameter estimates and may be used when no raw data sets are available.

Benefit and Risk Evaluation of Biased µ-Receptor Agonist Oliceridine versus Morphine.

BACKGROUND: To improve understanding of the respiratory behavior of oliceridine, a µ-opioid receptor agonist that selectively engages the G-protein-coupled signaling pathway with reduced activation of the ß-arrestin pathway, the authors compared its utility function with that of morphine. It was hypothesized that at equianalgesia, oliceridine will produce less respiratory depression than morphine and that this is reflected in a superior utility. METHODS: Data from a previous trial that compared the respiratory and analgesic effects of oliceridine and morphine in healthy male volunteers (n = 30) were reanalyzed. A population pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic analysis was performed and served as basis for construction of utility functions, which are objective functions of probability of analgesia, P(analgesia), and probability of respiratory depression, P(respiratory depression). The utility function = P(analgesia ≥ 0.5) - P(respiratory depression ≥ 0.25), where analgesia ≥ 0.5 is the increase in hand withdrawal latency in the cold pressor test by at least 50%, and respiratory depression ≥ 0.25 is the decrease of the hypercapnic ventilatory response by at least 25%. Values are median ± standard error of the estimate. RESULTS: The two drugs were equianalgesic with similar potency values (oliceridine: 27.9 ± 4.9 ng/ml; morphine 34.3 ± 9.7 ng/ml; potency ratio, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.39 to 1.56). A 50% reduction of the hypercapnic ventilatory response by morphine occurred at an effect-site concentration of 33.7 ± 4.8 ng/ml, while a 25% reduction by oliceridine occurred at 27.4 ± 3.5 ng/ml (potency ratio, 2.48; 95% CI, 1.65 to 3.72; P < 0.01). Over the clinically relevant concentration range of 0 to 35 ng/ml, the oliceridine utility function was positive, indicating that the probability of analgesia exceeds the probability of respiratory depression. In contrast, the morphine function was negative, indicative of a greater probability of respiratory depression than analgesia. CONCLUSIONS: These data indicate a favorable oliceridine safety profile over morphine when considering analgesia and respiratory depression over the clinical concentration range.

Pharmacokinetics of ketamine and its major metabolites norketamine, hydroxynorketamine, and dehydronorketamine: a model-based analysis.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies show activity of ketamine metabolites, such as hydroxynorketamine, in producing rapid relief of depression-related symptoms and analgesia. To improve our understanding of the pharmacokinetics of ketamine and metabolites norketamine, dehydronorketamine, and hydroxynorketamine, we developed a population pharmacokinetic model of ketamine and metabolites after i.v. administration of racemic ketamine and the S-isomer (esketamine). Pharmacokinetic data were derived from an RCT on the efficacy of sodium nitroprusside (SNP) in reducing the psychotomimetic side-effects of ketamine in human volunteers. METHODS: Three increasing i.v. doses of esketamine and racemic ketamine were administered to 20 healthy volunteers, and arterial plasma samples were obtained for measurement of ketamine and metabolites. Subjects were randomised to receive esketamine/SNP, esketamine/placebo, racemic ketamine/SNP, and racemic ketamine/placebo on four separate occasions. The time-plasma concentration data of ketamine and metabolites were analysed using a population compartmental model approach. RESULTS: The pharmacokinetics of ketamine and metabolites were adequately described by a seven-compartment model with two ketamine, norketamine, and hydroxynorketamine compartments and one dehydronorketamine compartment with metabolic compartments in-between ketamine and norketamine, and norketamine and dehydronorketamine main compartments. Significant differences were found between S- and R-ketamine enantiomer pharmacokinetics, with up to 50% lower clearances for the R-enantiomers, irrespective of formulation. Whilst SNP had a significant effect on ketamine clearances, simulations showed only minor effects of SNP on total ketamine pharmacokinetics. CONCLUSIONS: The model is of adequate quality for use in future pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic studies into the efficacy and side-effects of ketamine and metabolites. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch Cochrane Center 5359.

Reduced postoperative pain using Nociception Level-guided fentanyl dosing during sevoflurane anaesthesia: a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The majority of postoperative patients report moderate to severe pain, possibly related to opioid underdosing or overdosing during surgery. Objective guidance of opioid dosing using the Nociception Level (NOL) index, a multiparameter artificial intelligence-driven index designed to monitor nociception during surgery, may lead to a more appropriate analgesic regimen, with effects beyond surgery. We tested whether NOL-guided opioid dosing during general anaesthesia results in less postoperative pain. METHODS: In this two-centre RCT, 50 patients undergoing abdominal surgery under fentanyl/sevoflurane anaesthesia were randomised to NOL-guided fentanyl dosing or standard care in which fentanyl dosing was based on haemodynamics. The primary endpoint of the study was postoperative pain assessed in the PACU. RESULTS: Median postoperative pain scores were 3.2 (inter-quartile range 1.3-4.3) and 4.8 (3.0-5.3) in NOL-guided and standard care groups, respectively (P=0.006). Postoperative morphine consumption (standard deviation) was 0.06 (0.07) mg kg-1 (NOL-guided group) and 0.09 (0.09) mg kg-1 (control group; P=0.204). During surgery, fentanyl dosing was not different between groups (NOL-guided group: 6.4 [4.2] µg kg-1vs standard care: 6.0 [2.2] µg kg-1, P=0.749), although the variation between patients was greater in the NOL-guided group (% coefficient of variation 66% in the NOL-guided group vs 37% in the standard care group). CONCLUSIONS: Despite absence of differences in fentanyl and morphine consumption during and after surgery, a 1.6-point improvement in postoperative pain scores was observed in the NOL-guided group. We attribute this to NOL-driven rather than BP- and HR-driven fentanyl dosing during anaesthesia. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: www.trialregister.nl under identifier NL7845.

Does nociception monitor-guided anesthesia affect opioid consumption? A systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

Monitors that estimate nociception during anesthesia may be used to guide opioid and other analgesics administration to optimize anesthesia care and possibly outcome. We reviewed the literature to evaluate current evidence of the effect of nociception-guided management over standard anesthesia practice during surgery. A systematic review of the literature on the effect of nociception monitoring on anesthesia practice was conducted. Reports were eligible if they compared nociception-guided anesthesia to standard practice during surgery. Primary endpoint of this review is intraoperative opioid consumption. Secondary endpoints included hemodynamic control, postoperative pain and pain treatment. We identified 12 randomized controlled trials that compared one of five different nociception monitoring techniques to standard anesthesia care. Most studies were single center studies of small sample size. Six studies reported intraoperative opioid consumption as primary outcome. There was considerable variability with respect to surgical procedure and anesthesia technique. For nociception monitors that were investigated by more than one study, analysis of the pooled data was performed. The surgical plethysmographic index was the only monitor for which an intra operative opioid sparing effect was found. For the other monitors, either no effect was detected, or pooled analysis could not be performed due to paucity of study data. On secondary outcomes, no consistent effect of nociception-guided anesthesia could be established. Although some nociception monitors show promising results, no definitive conclusions regarding the effect of nociception monitoring on intraoperative opioid consumption or other anesthesia related outcome can be drawn.Clinical trial number PROSPERO ID 102913.

A Pragmatic Utility Function to Describe the Risk-Benefit Composite of Opioid and Nonopioid Analgesic Medication.

It is not straightforward to simultaneously evaluate the beneficial and harmful effects of pain management, since different drugs may possess different analgesia and adverse effect profiles. Utility functions, derived from the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of individual outcome parameters, have been constructed to address this problem. Here, we construct "pragmatic" utility functions based on measurements of benefit and harm, but without making assumptions about the underlying pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics. Using data from two previous studies, utility functions were designed by estimating the probability of occurrence of benefit and harm and combining these into one function. Study 1 was a clinical trial on the effect of oral pregabalin on pain relief in chronic pancreatitis patients, with endpoint analgesia and dizziness monitored for 21 days. Study 2 was an experimental study on the effect of intravenous fentanyl on antinociception and respiratory depression in healthy volunteers. From study 1, the utility function was negative the first week of treatment, indicative of the greater probability of dizziness than analgesia, but positive thereafter. From study 2, the utility function showed a nadir 30 minutes after dosing, after which the probability function slowly increased toward zero. A pragmatic utility function based on the probability of two binary outcomes, analgesia and adverse effect, was successfully constructed using data from the two previous studies. The results yielded valuable insights into the utility of treatment and may be highly educative for physicians and potentially used in development of potent analgesics without serious side effects.

Analgesic and Respiratory Depressant Effects of R-dihydroetorphine: A Pharmacokinetic-Pharmacodynamic Analysis in Healthy Male Volunteers.

BACKGROUND: There is an ongoing need for potent opioids with less adverse effects than commonly used opioids. R-dihydroetorphine is a full opioid receptor agonist with relatively high affinity at the µ-, δ- and κ-opioid receptors and low affinity at the nociception/orphanin FQ receptor. The authors quantified its antinociceptive and respiratory effects in healthy volunteers. The authors hypothesized that given its receptor profile, R-dihydroetorphine will exhibit an apparent plateau in respiratory depression, but not in antinociception. METHODS: The authors performed a population pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic study (Eudract registration No. 2009-010880-17). Four intravenous R-dihydroetorphine doses were studied: 12.5, 75, 125, and 150 ng/kg (infused more than 10 min) in 4 of 4, 6 of 6, 6 of 6, and 4 of 4 male subjects in pain and respiratory studies, respectively. The authors measured isohypercapnic ventilation, pain threshold, and tolerance responses to electrical noxious stimulation and arterial blood samples for pharmacokinetic analysis. RESULTS: R-dihydroetorphine displayed a dose-dependent increase in peak plasma concentrations at the end of the infusion. Concentration-effect relationships differed significantly between endpoints. R-dihydroetorphine produced respiratory depression best described by a sigmoid EMAX-model. A 50% reduction in ventilation in between baseline and minimum ventilation was observed at an R-dihydroetorphine concentration of 17 ± 4 pg/ml (median ± standard error of the estimate). The maximum reduction in ventilation observed was at 33% of baseline. In contrast, over the dose range studied, R-dihydroetorphine produced dose-dependent analgesia best described by a linear model. A 50% increase in stimulus intensity was observed at 34 ± 11 pg/ml. CONCLUSIONS: Over the dose range studied, R-dihydroetorphine exhibited a plateau in respiratory depression, but not in analgesia. Whether these experimental advantages extrapolate to the clinical setting and whether analgesia has no plateau at higher concentrations than investigated requires further studies.

Nociception-guided versus Standard Care during Remifentanil-Propofol Anesthesia: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: The multidimensional index of nociception, the nociception level, outperforms blood pressure and heart rate in detection of nociceptive events during anesthesia. We hypothesized that nociception level-guided analgesia reduces opioid consumption and suboptimal anesthesia events such as low blood pressure and use of vasoactive medication. METHODS: In this single-blinded randomized study, 80 American Society of Anesthesiologists class I-III adult patients of either sex, scheduled for major abdominal procedures under remifentanil/propofol anesthesia by target-controlled infusion, were included. During the procedure nociception level, noninvasive blood pressure, and heart rate were monitored. Patients were randomized to receive standard clinical care or nociception level-guided analgesia. In the nociception level-guided group, remifentanil concentration was reduced when index values were less than 10 or increased when values were above 25 for at least 1 min, in steps of 0.5 to 1.0 ng/ml. Propofol was titrated to bispectral index values between 45 and 55. The primary outcomes of the study were remifentanil and propofol consumption and inadequate anesthesia events. RESULTS: Compared with standard care, remifentanil administration was reduced in nociception level-guided patients from (mean ± SD) 0.119 ± 0.033 to 0.086 ± 0.032 µg · kg · min (mean difference, 0.039 µg · kg · min; 95% CI, 0.025-0.052 µg · kg · min; P < 0.001). Among nociception level-guided patients, 2 of 40 (5%) experienced a hypotensive event (mean arterial pressure values less than 55 mm Hg) versus 11 of 40 (28%) patients in the control group (relative risk, 0.271; 95% CI, 0.08-0.77; P = 0.006). In the nociception level-guided group, 16 of 40 (40%) patients received vasoactive medication versus 25 of 40 (63%) patients in the standard care group (relative risk, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.40-0.99; P = 0.044). CONCLUSIONS: Nociception level-guided analgesia during major abdominal surgery resulted in 30% less remifentanil consumption.