Effect-site concentrations of remifentanil causing bradycardia in hypnotic and non-hypnotic patients

Remifentanil provides an increased proportion of time under light sedation than fentanyl when combined with dexmedetomidine for mechanical ventilation

Objective

To compare the effects of remifentanil versus fentanyl during light sedation with dexmedetomidine in adults receiving mechanical ventilation (MV) in the intensive care unit.

Methods

In this retrospective cohort study, we compared the use of remifentanil versus fentanyl in adults receiving MV with dexmedetomidine sedation. The primary outcome was the proportion of time under light sedation (Richmond Agitation–Sedation Scale score between −1 and 0) during MV.

Results

We included 94 patients and classified 58 into the remifentanil group and 36 into the fentanyl group. The mean proportion of time under light sedation during MV was 66.6% ± 18.5% in the remifentanil group and 39.9% ± 27.3% in the fentanyl group. In the multivariate analysis with control for confounding factors, patients in the remifentanil group showed a significantly higher proportion of time under light sedation than patients in the fentanyl group (mean difference: 24.3 percentage points; 95% confidence interval: 12.9–35.8).

Conclusions

Remifentanil use might increase the proportion of time under light sedation in patients receiving MV compared with fentanyl administration.

Comparison of haemodynamic- and electroencephalographic-monitored effects evoked by four combinations of effect-site concentrations of propofol and remifentanil, yielding a predicted tolerance to laryngoscopy of 90

This prospective study evaluates haemodynamic and electroencephalographic effects observed when administering four combinations of effect-site concentrations of propofol (Ce_PROP) and remifentanil (Ce_REMI), all yielding a single predicted probability of tolerance of laryngoscopy of 90% (P_TOL = 90%) according to the Bouillon interaction model. We aimed to identify combinations of Ce_PROP and Ce_REMI along a single isobole of P_TOL that result in favourable hypnotic and haemodynamic conditions. This knowledge could be of advantage in the development of drug advisory monitoring technology. 80 patients (18–90 years of age, ASA I–III) were randomized into four groups and titrated towards Ce_PROP (Schnider model, ug⋅ml⁻¹) and Ce_REMI (Minto model, ng⋅ml⁻¹) of respectively 8.6 and 1, 5.9 and 2, 3.6 and 4 and 2.0 and 8. After eleven minutes of equilibration, baseline measurements of haemodynamic endpoints and bispectral index were compared with three minutes of responsiveness measurements after laryngoscopy. Before laryngoscopy, bispectral index differed significantly (p < 0.0001) between groups in concordance with Ce_PROP. Heart rate decreased with increasing Ce_REMI (p = 0.001). The haemodynamic and arousal responses evoked by laryngoscopy were not significantly different between groups, but Ce_PROP = 3.6 μg⋅ml⁻¹ and Ce_REMI = 4 ng⋅ml⁻¹ evoked the lowest median value for ∆HR and ∆SAP after laryngoscopy. This study provides clinical insight on the haemodynamic and hypnotic consequences, when a model based predicted P_TOL is used as a target for combined effect-site controlled target- controlled infusion of propofol and remifentanil. Heart rate and bispectral index were significantly different between groups despite a theoretical equipotency for P_TOL, suggesting that each component of the anaesthetic state (immobility, analgesia, and hypnotic drug effect) should be considered as independent neurophysiological and pharmacological phenomena. However, claims of (in)accuracy of the predicted P_TOL must be considered preliminary because larger numbers of observations are required for that goal.

Effect of remifentanil and midazolam on ED95 of propofol for loss of consciousness in elderly patients: A randomized, clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Older people are more vulnerable to hemodynamic instability caused by propofol due to their decreased initial distribution volume and increased sensitivity to propofol. Midazolam or remifentanil can often be coadministered because of their synergistic or additive effects with propofol as well as amnesic properties and the blockade of sympathetic stimulation. However, no study has confirmed the appropriate dose of propofol for loss of consciousness in aged patients when administered with other drugs, including opioids or benzodiazepines.

METHODS

Patients >65 years scheduled for general anesthesia were enrolled. The patients were randomized into 3 groups using a computer-generated randomization table. Patients in group P (propofol) received only propofol for loss of consciousness, those in group PR (propofol-remifentanil) received remifentanil before propofol, and those in group PMR (propofol-midazolam-remifentanil) received remifentanil and midazolam before propofol. After propofol administration, loss of both eyelash reflex and verbal response represented success. The 95% effective dose of propofol for loss of consciousness in each group, which was the primary outcome, was determined using a modified biased coin up-and-down method.

RESULTS

In total, 120 patients were randomized into the 3 groups (n = 40). The 95% effective dose of propofol for loss of consciousness was 1.13, 0.87, and 0.72 mg/kg in groups P, PR, and PMR, respectively. The mean blood pressure (MBP) in group PMR was more significantly decreased before propofol injection (P = .041) as well as 2 minutes (P = .005) and 3 minutes after propofol administration (P<.001), compared with group P, but there were no intergroup differences at other time points.

CONCLUSIONS

The effective dose of propofol for loss of consciousness in elderly patients could be decreased by 23% and 36% when remifentanil pretreatment was used without and with midazolam, respectively. However, the decrease in MBP was greater with remifentanil and midazolam pretreatment than with propofol alone. These findings suggest that pretreatment with midazolam for propofol infusions with remifentanil in elderly patients should be cautiously used, due to hemodynamic instability during induction.

Effects of remifentanil with or without midazolam pretreatment on the 95% effective dose of propofol for loss of consciousness during induction: A randomized, clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Propofol is a rapid, efficient hypnotic agent with antiemetic effects. However, a high dosage is related to hemodynamic abnormalities such as hypotension and bradycardia. Pretreatment with remifentanil can decrease injection pain and stabilize hemodynamics during the induction period. Remifentanil or midazolam in combination with propofol can provide synergistic or additive effects during anesthesia induction. However, the hypnotic doses of propofol required in patients who receive pretreatment with remifentanil or midazolam remain unclear.

METHODS

Patients aged 20 to 50 years who were scheduled to undergo surgery under general anesthesia were enrolled in this study. The patients were randomized into 3 groups using a computer-generated randomization table. Patients in Group P (Propofol) received only propofol for loss of consciousness, those in Group PR (Propofol-Remifentanil) received remifentanil prior to propofol, and those in Group PMR (Propofol-Midazolam-Remifentanil) received remifentanil and midazolam prior to propofol. After propofol administration, loss of both the eyelash reflex and verbal response represented success. The 95% effective dose of propofol for loss of consciousness in each group, which was the primary outcome, was determined using a modified biased coin up-and-down method.

RESULTS

A total of 124 patients were initially enrolled. Of these, 4 were excluded, and the remaining 120 patients were randomized to each (n = 40) of the 3 groups. The 95% effective dose of propofol for loss of consciousness was 1.74 , 1.38, and 0.92 mg/kg in Groups P, PR, and PMR, respectively. Blood pressure decreased at 2 minutes after propofol administration in all the groups. However, compared with Group P, Groups PR and PMR exhibited a significant decrease in blood pressure.

CONCLUSIONS

The effective dose of propofol for loss of consciousness could be decreased by 21% and 47% when remifentanil pretreatment was used without and with midazolam, respectively. However, the decrease in blood pressure was greater with pretreatment than sole propofol use. These findings suggest that the combination of remifentanil with or without midazolam may have no benefit on hemodynamic stability during induction using propofol.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT02536690 (clinicaltrials.gov).

Journal of clinical monitoring and computing 2016 end of year summary: anesthesia

Clinical monitoring and computing are essential during general anesthesia. As a result it would be impossible to review all the articles published in the Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing that are relevant to anesthesia. We therefore will limit this summary to those articles that are uniquely related to anesthesia. The topics include: anesthesia machines; ensuring the airway; anesthetic depth; neuromuscular transmission monitoring; locoregional anesthesia; ultrasound; and pain.