Pharmacokinetics of long-term sufentanil infusion for sedation in ICU patients

Utilization of pain and sedation therapy on noninvasive mechanical ventilation in Korean intensive care units: a multi-center prospective observational study

Background

The use of sedative drugs may be an important therapeutic intervention during noninvasive ventilation (NIV) in intensive care units (ICUs). The purpose of this study was to assess the current application of analgosedation in NIV and its impact on clinical outcomes in Korean ICUs.

Methods

Twenty Korean ICUs participated in the study, and data was collected on NIV use during the period between June 2017 and February 2018. Demographic data from all adult patients, NIV clinical parameters, and hospital mortality were included.

Results

A total of 155 patients treated with NIV in the ICUs were included, of whom 26 received pain and sedation therapy (sedation group) and 129 did not (control group). The primary cause of ICU admission was due to acute exacerbation of obstructed lung disease (45.7%) in the control group and pneumonia treatment (53.8%) in the sedation group. In addition, causes of NIV application included acute hypercapnic respiratory failure in the control group (62.8%) and post-extubation respiratory failure in the sedation group (57.7%). Arterial partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PaCO₂) levels before and after 2 hours of NIV treatment were significantly decreased in both groups: from 61.9±23.8 mm Hg to 54.9±17.6 mm Hg in the control group (P<0.001) and from 54.9±15.1 mm Hg to 51.1±15.1 mm Hg in the sedation group (P=0.048). No significant differences were observed in the success rate of NIV weaning, complications, length of ICU stay, ICU survival rate, or hospital survival rate between the groups.

Conclusions

In NIV patients, analgosedation therapy may have no harmful effects on complications, NIV weaning success, and mortality compared to the control group. Therefore, sedation during NIV may not be unsafe and can be used in patients for pain control when indicated.

Population pharmacokinetics of intravenous sufentanil in critically ill patients supported with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation therapy

Background

Sufentanil is commonly used for analgesia and sedation during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Both ECMO and the pathophysiological changes derived from critical illness have significant effects on the pharmacokinetics (PK) of drugs, yet reports of ECMO and sufentanil PK are scarce. Here, we aimed to develop a population PK model of sufentanil in ECMO patients and to suggest dosing recommendations.

Methods

This prospective cohort PK study included 20 patients who received sufentanil during venoarterial ECMO (VA-ECMO). Blood samples were collected for 96 h during infusion and 72 h after cessation of sufentanil. A population PK model was developed using nonlinear mixed effects modelling. Monte Carlo simulations were performed using the final PK parameters with two typical doses.

Results

A two-compartment model best described the PK of sufentanil. In our final model, increased volume of distribution and decreased values for clearance were reported compared with previous PK data from non-ECMO patients. Covariate analysis showed that body temperature and total plasma protein level correlated positively with systemic clearance (CL) and peripheral volume of distribution (V2), respectively, and improved the model. The parameter estimates of the final model were as follows: CL = 37.8 × EXP (0.207 × (temperature − 36.9)) L h⁻¹, central volume of distribution (V1) = 229 L, V2 = 1640 × (total plasma protein/4.5)^2.46 L, and intercompartmental clearance (Q) = 41 L h⁻¹. Based on Monte Carlo simulation results, an infusion of 17.5 μg h⁻¹ seems to reach target sufentanil concentration (0.3–0.6 μg L⁻¹) in most ECMO patients except hypothermic patients (33 °C). In hypothermic patients, over-sedation, which could induce respiratory depression, needs to be monitored especially when their total plasma protein level is low.

Conclusions

This is the first report on a population PK model of sufentanil in ECMO patients. Our results suggest that close monitoring of the body temperature and total plasma protein level is crucial in ECMO patients who receive sufentanil to provide effective analgesia and sedation and promote recovery.

Trial registration

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02581280, December 1st, 2014.

Dose determination of sufentanil for intravenous patient-controlled analgesia with background infusion in abdominal surgeries: A random study

Objectives

Sufentanil has been widely used in epidural PCA, while its use in intravenous PCA has rarely been reported. Based on its use in target controlled infusion, we reckoned that the effect-site concentration of sufentanil would be steady if background infusion is given in intravenous PCA. This prospective, single center, randomized study with a three arm parallel group design aims to find out the appropriate dose of sufentanil when used in intravenous PCA with background infusion in abdominal surgeries.

Methods

Patients diagnosed with gastrointestinal cancer and consented to the study were recruited. The analgesia pump with one of three different doses of sufentanil (1.5, 2.0 or 2.5 μg/kg) was attached to the patient through peripheral venous line right after surgery. The primary endpoint was pain scale VAS up to 48 hours postoperatively.

Results

In our study 90 patients were analyzed. In group B (SF 2.0) and C (SF2.5), patients had better pain relief than in group A (SF 1.5). There was no difference between group B and C in pain intensity at rest. While in group C more patients got pain relived at activity than in group B. All three groups had low and similar incidence of adverse effects of sufentanil.

Conclusion

The dose 2.5 μg/kg of sufentanil with background infusion is preferred because of better pain alleviation at activity without increase of adverse effects up to 48 hours after surgery.

Monitoring of sedation depth in intensive care unit by therapeutic drug monitoring? A prospective observation study of medical intensive care patients

Background

Analgosedation is a cornerstone therapy for mechanically ventilated patients in intensive care units (ICU). To avoid inadequate sedation and its complications, monitoring of analgosedation is of great importance. The aim of this study was to investigate whether monitoring of analgosedative drug concentrations (midazolam and sufentanil) might be beneficial to optimize analgosedation and whether drug serum concentrations correlate with the results of subjective (Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale [RASS]/Ramsay Sedation Scale) and objective (bispectral (BIS) index) monitoring procedures.

Methods

Forty-nine intubated, ventilated, and analgosedated critically ill patients treated in ICU were clinically evaluated concerning the depth of sedation using RASS Score, Ramsay Score, and BIS index twice a day. Serum concentrations of midazolam and sufentanil were determined in blood samples drawn at the same time. Clinical and laboratory data were statistically analyzed for correlations using the Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient rho (ρ).

Results

Average age of the population was 57.8 ± 16.0 years, 61% of the patients were males. Most frequent causes for ICU treatments were sepsis (22%), pneumonia (22%), or a combination of both (25%). Serum concentrations of midazolam correlated weakly with RASS (ρ = − 0.467) and Ramsay Scores (ρ = 0.476). Serum concentrations of sufentanil correlated weakly with RASS (ρ = − 0.312) and Ramsay Scores (ρ = 0.295). Correlations between BIS index and serum concentrations of midazolam (ρ = − 0.252) and sufentanil (ρ = − 0.166) were low.

Conclusion

Correlations between drug serum concentrations and clinical or neurophysiological monitoring procedures were weak. This might be due to intersubject variability, polypharmacy with drug-drug interactions, and complex metabolism, which can be altered in critically ill patients. Therapeutic drug monitoring is not beneficial to determine depth of sedation in ICU patients.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s40560-018-0331-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Conscious sedation for balloon mitral valvotomy: A comparison of fentanyl versus sufentanil

Context:

Analgesia and sedation are required for the comfort of patient and the cardiologist during balloon mitral valvotomy.

Aims:

In this study, efficacy of analgesia, sedation, and patient satisfaction with sufentanil was compared with fentanyl.

Settings and Design:

Single-centered, prospective single-blind study of sixty patients.

Materials and Methods:

Patients between 15 and 45 years of rheumatic mitral stenosis with valve area of 0.8–1 cm² undergoing elective balloon mitral valvotomy, randomly divided to receive bolus injection fentanyl 1 mcg/kg (Group 1, n = 30) followed by infusion at 1 mcg/kg/h or bolus of injection sufentanil 0.1 mcg/kg (Group 2, n = 30) followed by continuous infusion at 0.1 mcg/h. Both the groups received injection midazolam bolus 0.02 mg/kg followed by infusion at 15 mcg/kg/h. Pain intensity (by visual analog score [VAS]), level of sedation (by Ramsay sedation scale), overall patient and operator's satisfaction, effect on cardiorespiratory parameters, and discharge score (by modified Aldrete score) were assessed.

Statistical Analysis Used:

Statistical analysis used Student's unpaired t-test and Chi-square test. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results:

Mean number of bolus doses in fentanyl group was 0.9 versus 0.13 in sufentanil group (P < 0.01). The mean value of mean blood pressure in fentanyl group was 83.52 mmHg versus 88 mmHg in sufentanil group (P < 0.05), but the value was within normal range in both the groups. The mean VAS – patient's opinion in fentanyl group was 8.97 versus 9.53 in sufentanil group (P < 0.05). Mean discharge score in fentanyl group was 17.87 versus 18.23 in sufentanil group (P < 0.05). No statistically significant difference was found with respect to heart rate, respiratory rate, oxygen saturation, PaCO₂ values, and anxiety scores.

Conclusion:

Sufentanil was found to be better with respect to analgesia, patient satisfaction, and recovery however not cost-effective for continuous infusion technique.

Prolonged infusion of sedatives and analgesics in adult intensive care patients: A systematic review of pharmacokinetic data reporting and quality of evidence

Although pharmacokinetic (PK) data for prolonged sedative and analgesic agents in intensive care unit (ICU) has been described, the number of publications in this important area appear relatively few, and PK data presented is not comprehensive. Known pathophysiological changes in critically ill patients result in altered drug PK when compared with non-critically ill patients. ClinPK Statement was recently developed to promote consistent reporting in PK studies, however, its applicability to ICU specific PK studies is unclear. In this systematic review, we assessed the overall ClinPK Statement compliance rate, determined the factors affecting compliance rate, graded the level of PK evidence and assessed the applicability of the ClinPK Statement to future ICU PK studies. Of the 33 included studies (n=2016), 22 (67%) were low evidence quality descriptive studies (Level 4). Included studies had a median compliance rate of 80% (IQR 66% to 86%) against the ClinPK Statement. Overall pooled compliance rate (78%, 95% CI 73% to 83%) was stable across time (P=0.38), with higher compliance rates found in studies fitting three compartments models (88%, P<0.01), two compartments models (83%, P<0.01) and one compartment models (77%, P=0.17) than studies fitting noncompartmental or unspecified models (69%) (P<0.01). Data unique to the interpretation of PK data in critically ill patients, such as illness severity (48%), organ dysfunction (36%) and renal replacement therapy use (32%), were infrequently reported. Discrepancy between the general compliance rate with ClinPK Statement and the under-reporting of ICU specific parameters suggests that the applicability of the ClinPK Statement to ICU PK studies may be limited in its current form.

Pathophysiology, assessment, and management of pain in critically ill adults

PURPOSE

The pathophysiology of pain in critically ill patients, the role of pain assessment in optimal pain management, and pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic strategies for pain prevention and treatment are reviewed.

SUMMARY

There are many short- and long-term consequences of inadequately treated pain, including hyperglycemia, insulin resistance, an increased risk of infection, decreased patient comfort and satisfaction, and the development of chronic pain. Clinicians should have an understanding of the basic physiology of pain and the patient populations that are affected. Pain should be assessed using validated pain scales that are appropriate for the patient's communication status. Opioids are the cornerstone of pain treatment. The use of opioids, administered via bolus dosing or continuous infusion, should be guided by patient-specific goals of care in order to avoid adverse events. A multimodal approach to pain management, including the use of regional analgesia, may improve patient outcomes and decrease opioid-related adverse events, though there are limited relevant data in adult critically ill patient populations. Nonpharmacologic strategies have been shown to be effective adjuncts to pharmacologic regimens that can improve patient-reported pain intensity and reduce analgesic requirements. Analgesic regimens need to take into account patient-specific factors and be closely monitored for safety and efficacy.

CONCLUSION

Acute pain management in the critically ill is a largely underassessed and undertreated area of critical care. Opioids are the cornerstone of treatment, though a multimodal approach may improve patient outcomes and decrease opioid-related adverse events.

[Special aspects of analgosedation in cardiogenic shock patients]

Patients with cardiogenic shock pose a challenge to physicians due to cardiorespiratory instability in addition to the underlying medical condition. If analgosedation and ventilation are indicated, commonly administered drugs themselves often influence hemodynamics and oxygenation. The present article provides an overview of the available substances with consideration of the patients' condition, then monitoring and optimization of analgosedation.

Pharmacokinetics of sufentanil during long-term infusion in critically ill pediatric patients

The aim of this study was to develop a population pharmacokinetic model of sufentanil and to assess the influence of covariates in critically ill children admitted to a pediatric intensive care unit. After institutional approval, 41 children were enrolled in the study. Blood samples for pharmacokinetic (PK) assessment were collected from routinely placed arterial catheters during and after discontinuation of infusion. Population nonlinear mixed-effects modeling was performed using NONMEM. A 2-compartment model described sufentanil PK sufficiently. Typical values of the central and peripheral volume of distribution and the metabolic and intercompartmental clearance for a theoretical patient weighing 70 kg were VC = 7.90 l, VT  = 481 L, Cl =  5.3 L/h, and Q = 38.3 L/h, respectively. High interindividual variability of all PK parameters was noted. Allometric/isometric principles to scale sufentanil PK revealed that to achieve the same steady-state sufentanil concentrations in plasma for pediatric patients of different body weights, the infusion rate should follow the formula (infusion rate for a 70-kg adult patient, μg/h) × (body weight/70 kg)(0.75). Severity of illness described by PRISM score, the monitored physiological and laboratory parameters, and coadministered drugs such as vasopressors were not found to be significant covariates.

Effects of ropivacaine, bupivacaine and sufentanil in colon and pancreatic cancer cells in vitro

The perioperative period is supposed to be a vulnerable period for cancer progression. Results of clinical studies indicate that the use of regional anesthesia can influence and improve oncological outcome of cancer patients. Uncontrolled cell proliferation and resistance to apoptotic cell death are important characteristics of solid tumors. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of the clinically used local anesthetics ropivacaine or bupivacaine and the opioid analgesic sufentanil on cell proliferation, cell cycle distribution and apoptosis of colon (HT 29 and SW 480) and pancreatic (PaTu 8988t and PANC 1) cancer cell lines in vitro. Cell proliferation was measured by Cell Proliferation ELISA BrdU Assay. Apoptosis was analyzed by annexin V staining and cell cycle distribution was detected by flow cytometry. Ropivacaine, bupivacaine and sufentanil did not change apoptosis rate and cell cycle distribution in clinically concentration. Only high concentrations of ropivacaine or bupivacaine revealed antiproliferative potency. Protective effects of epidural anesthesia observed in clinical studies seem not to be based on direct effects of these drugs on cancer cells.

The effect of sufentanil administration on remifentanil-based anaesthesia during laparoscopic gynaecological surgery: a double-blind randomized controlled trial

This study assessed the effect of sufentanil administered before conclusion of remifentanil-based anaesthesia on postoperative hyperalgesia and haemodynamic stability in patients undergoing laparoscopic gynaecological surgery. The patients were randomly allocated to a sufentanil administration group (S group) or a normal saline administration group (C group). Anaesthesia was induced and maintained with controlled administration of remifentanil at 10 ng · mL(-1) and propofol under bispectral index guidance. Once the surgical specimen was procured, sufentanil or normal saline was administered at 0.15 ng · mL(-1) and maintained until extubation. The haemodynamic status during anaesthetic emergence was evaluated. The pain and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) were assessed for 72 h following postanaesthetic care unit (PACU) discharge. The S group had significantly lower mean systemic arterial blood pressure and heart rate changes between the start of drug administration and extubation. Postoperative pain was significantly lower in the S group until 24 h following PACU discharge. There were no significant differences in PONV incidence and severity 72 h after PACU discharge between the two groups. Sufentanil administration before concluding remifentanil-based anaesthesia improved postoperative hyperalgesia and achieved haemodynamic stability at extubation without delaying recovery or increasing PONV during laparoscopic gynaecological surgery. Clinical trial registration is found at KCT0000785.

The pain, agitation, and delirium practice guidelines for adult critically ill patients: a post-publication perspective

The recently published Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Management of Pain, Agitation, and Delirium in Adult Patients in the Intensive Care Unit differ from earlier guidelines in the following ways: literature searches were performed in eight databases by a professional librarian; psychometric validation of assessment scales was considered in their recommendation; discrepancies in recommendation votes by guideline panel members are available in online supplements; and all recommendations were made exclusively on the basis of evidence available until December of 2010. Pain recognition and management remains challenging in the critically ill. Patient outcomes improve with routine pain assessment, use of co-analgesics and administration as well as dose adjustment of opiates to patient needs. Thoracic epidurals help ease patients undergoing abdominal aortic surgery. Little data exists to guide clinicians as to the type or dose of co-analgesics; no opiate choice is associated with better patient outcomes. Lighter or no sedation is beneficial, and interruption is desirable in patients who require deep sedation for specific pathologic states. Delirium screening is probably useful; no treatment modality can be unequivocally recommended, and the benefit of prophylaxis is established only for early mobilization. The details of these recommendations, as well as more recent publications that complement the guidelines, are provided in this commentary.

Sedation and analgesia in the mechanically ventilated patient

Sedation and analgesia are important components of care for the mechanically ventilated patient in the intensive care unit (ICU). An understanding of commonly used medications is essential to formulate a sedation plan for individual patients. The specific physiological changes that a critically ill patient undergoes can have direct effects on the pharmacology of drugs, potentially leading to interpatient differences in response. Objective assessments of pain, sedation, and agitation have been validated for use in the ICU for assessment and titration of medications. An evidence-based strategy for administering these drugs can lead to improvements in short- and long-term outcomes for patients. In this article, we review advances in the field of ICU sedation to provide an up-to-date perspective on management of the mechanically ventilated ICU patient.

Remifentanil-based sedation to treat noninvasive ventilation failure: a preliminary study

OBJECTIVE

To assess the feasibility and safety of remifentanil-based sedation during noninvasive ventilation (NIV) in patients with NIV failure.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Prospective clinical investigation in a 16-bed intensive care unit of a university hospital in France.

PATIENTS

Thirteen patients in NIV failure due to discomfort and/or refusal to continue this ventilatory support: 10 with acute respiratory failure and 3 with acute hypercapnic respiratory failure.

INTERVENTION

Patients were administered methylene blue and were sedated (Ramsay scale 2-3) by a continuous perfusion of remifentanil during NIV. Cardiorespiratory and ventilatory parameters, blood gas analysis, and adverse events were prospectively recorded.

MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS

The 13 patients received a total of 125 NIV sessions, totaling 1200 h, of NIV under remifentanil-based sedation (mean remifentanil dose 0.1+/-0.03 microg/kg per minute). Three patients also required propofol. PaO2/FIO2 ratio increased from 134+/-69 to 187+/-43 mmHg after 1 h. In patients with acute respiratory failure respiratory rate decreased from 34+/-12 per minute before remifentanil to 25+/-4 per minute after 1h. In the three patients with acute hypercapnic respiratory failure PaCO2 decreased from 69+/-7 to 42+/-5 mmHg. Four patients required endotracheal intubation without aspiration pneumonia. Twelve of the 13 patients left the ICU.

CONCLUSION

This pilot study shows that remifentanil-based sedation is safe and effective in the treatment of NIV failure due to low tolerance.

Sedation in the critically ill patient

Critically ill patients who require intensive care need effective analgesia and sedation to control potentially unpleasant symptoms, such as pain and anxiety. Analgesics and sedatives are also used to allow patients to tolerate nursing procedures and tracheal intubation as well as to aid mechanical ventilation. Metabolism of traditional opioids is dependent on organ function, which is abnormal among critically ill patients. The use of a score system to ensure sufficient but not excessive sedation should be mandatory. Sufentanil and remifentanil are more predictable opioids that are suitable for either sedation or analgesia in critically ill patients to achieve an adequate Ramsay score from 2 to 4.

Rémifentanil-midazolam versus sufentanil-midazolam pour la sédation prolongée en réanimation

OBJECTIVE

Remifentanil has a unique metabolic pathway that holds potential benefits for long-term sedation. We compared remifentanil-midazolam to sufentanil-midazolam in 41 critically ill adults requiring mechanical ventilation.

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized double-blind trial.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Infusion rates were titrated every 4 hours to achieve the desired Ramsay score. Five fold increases in dose requirement was considered as the development of tolerance. Drugs requirement, development of tolerance and weaning time of ventilation were compared.

RESULTS

The study was stopped after an interim analysis. The remifentanil and sufentanil groups were comparable regarding IGS II: 56+/-22 vs 64+/-26, mean+/-SD, ICU length of stay: 26 (8-45) vs 19 (11-34) days, and sedation duration: 6 (4-19) vs 6 (3-16)days, median [interquartile range, IQR]). There was a shorter weaning time in the remifentanil group as compared to sufentanil group: 22 h (12-53) vs 96 (47-142) h, median [IQR], p=0.04). The daily opioid infusion rate needed to be decreased over time only in sufentanil group, p < 0.001. Tolerance occurred in 6 (30%; CI(95), 10 to 40%) remifentanil and no sufentanil patients (P=0.02).

CONCLUSION

Sufentanil infusion needed to be reduced over time and prolonged the weaning time when compared to remifentanil.