Safety and efficacy of a low-dose combination of midazolam, alfentanil, and propofol for deep sedation of elderly patients undergoing ERCP

BACKGROUND

Proper sedation of patients, particularly elderly individuals, who are more susceptible to sedation-related complications, is of significant importance in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). This study aims to assess the safety and efficacy of a low-dose combination of midazolam, alfentanil, and propofol for deep sedation in elderly patients undergoing ERCP, compared to a group of middle-aged patients.

METHODS

The medical records of 610 patients with common bile duct stones who underwent elective ERCP under deep sedation with a three-drug regimen, including midazolam, alfentanil, and propofol at Shandong Provincial Third Hospital from January 2023 to September 2023 were retrospectively reviewed in this study. Patients were categorized into three groups: middle-aged (50-64 years, n = 202), elderly (65-79 years, n = 216), and very elderly (≥ 80 years, n = 192). Intraoperative vital signs and complications were compared among these groups.

RESULTS

The three groups showed no significant difference in terms of intraoperative variation of systolic blood pressure (P = 0.291), diastolic blood pressure (P = 0.737), heart rate (P = 0.107), peripheral oxygen saturation (P = 0.188), bispectral index (P = 0.158), and the occurrence of sedation-related adverse events including hypotension (P = 0.170) and hypoxemia (P = 0.423).

CONCLUSION

The results suggest that a low-dose three-drug regimen consisting of midazolam, alfentanil, and propofol seems safe and effective for deep sedation of elderly and very elderly patients undergoing ERCP procedures. However, further studies are required to verify these findings and clarify the benefits and risks of this method.

Comparison of ciprofol-alfentanil and propofol-alfentanil sedation during bidirectional endoscopy: A prospective, double-blind, randomised, controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Although propofol is widely used for gastrointestinal endoscopic sedation, cardiopulmonary adverse events remain common. Ciprofol is a new intravenous anaesthetic agent demonstrating respiratory and hemodynamic stability.

AIMS

This study aimed to clarify the benefits of ciprofol combined with alfentanil in bidirectional endoscopy (esophagogastroduodenoscopy followed by colonoscopy) to reduce adverse events and improve post-endoscopic recovery.

METHODS

A total of 185 patients scheduled to undergo bidirectional endoscopy were randomly divided into two groups: ciprofol combined with alfentanil or propofol combined with alfentanil. All patients received 7 µg/kg alfentanil intravenously before the study drugs were administered. The propofol group received a bolus of 1.2 mg/kg (0.12 ml/kg) propofol intravenously, whereas the ciprofol group received a bolus of 0.3 mg/kg (0.12 ml/kg) ciprofol intravenously. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with cardiopulmonary adverse events (i.e., any one of the airway obstruction, apnoea, hypotension, hypertension, bradycardia, tachycardia or arrhythmias).

RESULTS

Compared with propofol, ciprofol reduced cardiopulmonary adverse events by 43.51 % (34.4% vs. 60.9 %, P <0.001), mitigated respiratory adverse events by 54.74 % (17.2% vs. 38.0 %, P = 0.002) overall and by 59.05 % (12.9% vs. 31.5 %, P = 0.002) during the induction period.

CONCLUSIONS

Ciprofol can significantly decrease respiratory depression events and provides a better sedative efficacy than propofol with higher recovery quality and satisfaction.

Use of Remimazolam Combined With Alfentanil for Plastic Surgery Anesthesia Cases: A Clinical Trial

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to observe the safety and effectiveness of remimazolam benzenesulfonate combined with alfentanil for painless and comfort anesthesia in plastic surgery.

METHODS

Two hundred patients with American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) I-II for elective facial autologous lipofilling + autologous liposuction (thigh or abdomen) plastic surgery in our hospital were selected. One hundred patients received comfort anesthesia (observation group) on odd-numbered day of surgery, and other 100 patients received painless anesthesia (control group) on even-numbered day. Patients in both groups were given slow injection of remimazolam benzenesulfonate 0.1 mg/kg and alfentanil 5 μg/kg to induce sleep before local anesthesia. Depending on body action reaction to surgical stimulation, patients in the observation group were received with remimazolam 0.05 mg/kg and alfentanil 2.5 μg/kg for maintenance until the end of surgery after local anesthesia, and patients in the control group received with remimazolam 0.25 to 0.5 mg/kg/h and alfentanil 25 to 50 μg/kg/h in continuous pumps. Time to fall asleep, sedation score, time to end of medication, time to open eyes, recovery score, and the presence of body movement, glossoptosis, arousal or jaw support during hypoxia, hypotension, bradycardia, operation time, total amount of remimazolam and alfentanil used, and the presence of postoperative complications such as pruritus, dizziness, nausea, and vomiting were recorded in both 2 groups.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in the preoperative vital sign parameters as mean arterial pressure, heart rate, and oxygen saturation between 2 groups ( P > 0.05). Intraoperative mean arterial pressure and heart rate were significantly lower in both groups compared with preoperative ( P < 0.05), but there was no statistically significant between the 2 groups ( P > 0.05). There was no significant decrease in oxygen saturation in both groups under the condition of intraoperative oxygen inhalation ( P > 0.05). There was no significant difference between the 2 groups in the incidence of adverse reactions, such as intraoperative body movement induced by skin cutting, glossoptosis requiring jaw thrust, postoperative pruritus, dizziness, nausea, and vomiting ( P > 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in time to fall asleep, sedation score during local anesthesia, time to open eyes after stopping anesthetics, and recovery score between the 2 groups ( P > 0.05). Meanwhile, the total amount of remimazolam and alfentanil use was significantly reduced in patients in the observation group compared with the control group ( P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Remimazolam benzenesulfonate combined with alfentanil can be used as a comfort anesthesia and painless anesthesia protocol in plastic surgery, which has the advantages of rapid onset of action, safety and comfort for patients, rapid recovery, and good cooperation. Furthermore, the protocol of remimazolam benzenesulfonate combined with alfentanil used in the observation group can significantly reduce the total amount of remimazolam and alfentanil used.

Efficacy and Safety of the Remimazolam-Alfentanil Combination for Sedation During Gastroscopy: A Randomized, Double-blind, Single-center Controlled Trial

PURPOSE

Propofol infusion is a popular single drug of choice for sedation in the gastrointestinal endoscopy suite. Drug combinations are more beneficial than single-drug regimens in gastroscopy sedation. However, the cardiopulmonary complications of propofol sedation raise concern. Remimazolam is a novel, ultra-short-acting benzodiazepine sedative, and alfentanil is a weak opioid. During endoscopic procedures, remimazolam is an effective and safe sedative procedure. No synergistic effect has been reported when remimazolam was combined with alfentanil in gastroscopy sedation. Here, we evaluated the effective dose, sedative efficacy, and safety of the remimazolam-alfentanil combination in gastroscopy sedation and compared the results with those of the propofol-alfentanil combination.

METHODS

This study was conducted in two parts. In Part 1, Dixon's up-and-down method (sequential distribution) was adopted for determining the 95% effective dose (ED95) (95% CI) and 95% CI of remimazolam combined with 5 µg/kg alfentanil. In Part 2, after obtaining the predictive remimazolam ED95, 161 patients were randomized into the remimazolam group (remimazolam-alfentanil) and the propofol group (propofol-alfentanil). The effectiveness of the drug combinations was measured according to successful sedation parameters. Changes in vital signs and the appearance of adverse events were used to assess the safety of drug combinations. Evaluation of patient and physician satisfaction was included as quality indicators of treatment.

RESULTS

Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics were comparable between the 2 parts of the study. The ED95 of remimazolam in inhibiting a positive response to gastroscopy placement into the pharyngeal cavity was 0.33 mg/kg (95% CI, 0.289 to 1.023). The procedure success rate was 97.53% in the remimazolam group and 97.50% in the propofol group. The difference in the success rate of the procedure between the remimazolam and propofol groups was 0.03% (95% CI, -2.5 to 2.4). However, the incidence of injection pain, hypotension, respiratory depression, and dizziness was lower in the remimazolam group compared with the propofol group (P < 0.05). Furthermore, patients from the propofol group were more likely to be drowsy, and their work efficiency was reduced the day after leaving the hospital, whereas patients in the remimazolam group were less affected (P < 0.05).

IMPLICATIONS

The ED95 of remimazolam was 0.33 mg/kg when it was combined with alfentanil (5 µg/kg) for gastroscopy sedation. The sedation strategy of remimazolam-alfentanil has noninferior efficacy, fewer adverse effects, and a better postoperative recovery process than propofol-alfentanil for patients undergoing gastroscopy. Chinese Clinical Trials Registry identifier: ChiCTR2100051565.

Efficacy and safety of remifentanil for endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition: a single center retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Remifentanil is a rapid onset and rapid recovery opioid. The combination of remifentanil and propofol for deep sedation decreases the incidents of movement, cough, and hiccup. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of remifentanil during endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed patients in whom endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition was performed for solid mass lesions of the upper gastrointestinal tract and adjacent organs. All patients were premedicated with midazolam (2 mg), and target-controlled infusion of propofol, opioid, and Bispectral Index (BIS) monitoring were administered as necessary to maintain moderate-to-deep sedation. The opioids used were a bolus of alfentanil or remifentanil infusion. The discharge time, consumption of propofol and opioid, adverse events, diagnostic accuracy, and sensitivity and specificity for malignancy, were compared.

RESULTS

Tissue acquisition was achieved in 123 patients (alfentanil group, n = 64; remifentanil group, n = 59). The discharge time of the remifentanil group (16.5 ± 3.2 min) was significantly shorter than that of the alfentanil group (19.0 ± 4.9 min, P = 0.001). The consumption of propofol, adverse events, diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity for malignancy in the alfentanil group were not significantly different from those in the remifentanil group.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of alfentanil or remifentanil for target-controlled infusion of propofol-BIS monitoring can provide good sedative and diagnostic quality for endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition. However, remifentanil resulted in faster recovery than alfentanil.

Sedoanalgesia for cardioversion: comparison of alfentanil, remifentanil and fentanyl combined with propofol and midazolam: a prospective, randomized, double-blind study

OBJECTIVE

Electrical cardioversion (EC) is a short but painful procedure to restore sinus rhythm. The aim of this study is to compare the effect of fentanyl, remifentanil and alfentanil in association with propofol and midazolam for elective EC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Ninety-nine patients older than 18-years, American Society of Anesthesiologists I/II/III grades undergoing elective EC were randomized into 3 groups. All patients received 2 mg midazolam and propofol (0.5 mg/kg). Group A received alfentanil (5 µg/kg i.v. bolus), Group F received fentanyl (0.5 µg/kg i.v. bolus) and Group R received remifentanil (0.25 µg/kg i.v. bolus). Hemodynamics and respiratory variables [Heart rate (HR), systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), mean arterial pressure (MAP), SpO2, respiratory rate (RR)], and Modified Aldrete recovery score (MARS) were assessed at six different time points (baseline, right after EC, and 3rd min, 5th min, 10th min, 30th min following EC). Also, induction times (time to reach RSS to 5) and recovery times (time to reach MARS to 8) were recorded. The incidence of respiratory depression, bradycardia, hypotension and adverse effects were also recorded.

RESULTS

Hemodynamic variables were similar in all groups. SpO2 values in Group R were significantly lower at 3rd min (p = 0.005). Induction and recovery times were longest in Group F. There were significant differences at 3rd, 5th and 10th minute MARS values between groups. The incidence of hypotension and bradycardia were similar in all groups (p > 0.05) but respiratory depression was higher in Group R (p = 0.047).

CONCLUSIONS

Propofol alfentanil combination has more beneficial advantages in their rapid onset, early recovery time and less respiratory depression than remifentanil and fentanyl.

Comparison of the incidence and severity of cough after alfentanil and remifentanil injection

BACKGROUND

Intravenous administration of fentanyl derivatives can induce cough paradoxically. This study examined the incidence and severity of cough after a bolus of alfentanil and remifentanil.

METHODS

Four hundred and sixty-five patients, aged 18-70 years, were allocated randomly to three groups to receive alfentanil 10 microg/kg, remifentanil 1 microg/kg or an equal volume of 0.9% saline intravenously over 10 s. Any episode of cough was classified as coughing and graded as mild (1-2), moderate (3-4) or severe (5 or more).

RESULTS

The overall incidence of cough was higher in the opioid groups than in the saline group. The remifentanil group [39/150 patients; 26.0% (95% CI, 19.6-33.6%)] showed a higher incidence than the alfentanil group [11/152 patients; 7.2% (95% CI, 0.4-12.6%)] (P<0.001). There was no significant difference in the severity of cough between the alfentanil group and the remifentanil group.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that equipotent boluses of alfentanil and remifentanil induced coughing, even though the incidence of cough after alfentanil administration was lower than that after remifentanil administration.

The potential for mu-opioid receptor agonists to be anti-emetic in humans: a review of clinical data

In animal models of vomiting, mu-opioid (MOP, OP(3)) receptors mediate both emesis and anti-emesis. mu-receptors within the blood-brain barrier, mediating anti-emesis, are more rapidly accessible to lipid-soluble mu-opioid receptor agonists such as fentanyl than to morphine, and fentanyl has broad-spectrum anti-emetic effects in a number of species. Whether a similar situation exists in humans is not known. A search was performed for clinical studies comparing the emetic side effects of opioids administered peri-operatively in an attempt to identify differences between morphine and more lipid-soluble mu-receptor-selective agonists such as fentanyl. Overall, the evidence appears to suggest that fentanyl and other phenylpiperidines are associated with less nausea and vomiting than morphine, but not all studies support this, and fentanyl-like drugs are associated with nausea and vomiting per se. Good evidence, however, exists to show that fentanyl and alfentanil do not cause more nausea and vomiting than the ultra fast-acting remifentanil. Because remifentanil is cleared rapidly post-operatively, such trials suggest that the emetic side effects of fentanyl and alfentanil are minimal. The clinical evidence, although limited, is at least consistent with the possibility that central mu-opioid receptors may mediate anti-emesis in humans. It is possible that the role of mu-opioid agonists in anti-emesis may become clearer in the future as a result of the use of peripheral mu-opioid receptor antagonists.

Does propofol and alfentanil-induced sedation cause periodic apnoea in chronic renal failure patients?

AIMS

There is evidence suggesting that the respiratory response to sedation is different in patients with sleep apnoea, which is common in patients with chronic renal failure (CRF). This study examined the respiratory response of sedation with propofol and alfentanil, whose pharmacokinetics are not affected by the renal function, in CRF patients.

METHODS

Chronic renal failure patients who underwent arteriovenous-fistular surgery (CRF group) and patients who underwent chemoport insertion (control group) were enrolled in this study. Sedation was induced by infusing propofol 1.5 micro/ml and alfentanil 0.2 micro/kg/min continuously in both groups. In the desaturation study, the respiratory rate and peripheral oxygen saturation in room air were checked. In the apnoea-hypopnoea study, the patient's sedation (Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation) score, apnoea-hypopnoea index (AHI) was recorded using a portable ventilation effort recorder (microMesam) while applying 5 l/min of oxygen through a facial mask.

RESULTS

The desaturation event was more common (21.5/h vs. 2/h, p = 0.001) in the CRF patients. Apnoea and hypopnoea (AHI: 13.0 vs. 1.6, p = 0.012, per cent of patients with an AHI > 5: 53.3% vs. 7.1%, p = 0.014) occurred more frequently in the CRF patients but the sedation score was not different.

CONCLUSION

Chronic renal failure patients have a higher risk of developing apnoea and hypopnoea during sedation, which highlights the need for careful monitoring and management in these patients.

Randomized clinical trial of propofol with and without alfentanil for deep procedural sedation in the emergency department

OBJECTIVES

The objectives were to compare the efficacy, occurrence of adverse events, and recovery duration of propofol with and without alfentanil for use in procedural sedation in the emergency department (ED).

METHODS

This was a randomized nonblinded prospective trial of adult patients undergoing procedural sedation for painful procedures in the ED. Patients with pain before the procedure were given intravenous (IV) morphine sulfate until their pain was adequately treated at least 20 minutes before starting the procedure. Patients received 1 mg/kg propofol either with or without a supplemental dose of 10 mug/kg alfentanil for deep procedural sedation. Doses, vital signs, nasal end-tidal CO(2) (ETCO(2)), pulse oximetry, and bispectral electroencephalographic (EEG) analysis scores were recorded. Subclinical respiratory depression was defined as a change in ETCO(2) of >10 mmHg, an oxygen saturation of <92% at any time, or an absent ETCO(2) waveform at any time. Clinical events related to respiratory depression were noted during the procedure, including the addition of or increase in the flow rate of supplemental oxygen, the use of a bag-valve mask apparatus, airway repositioning, or stimulation to induce breathing. After the procedure, patients were asked if they experienced pain during the procedure or had recall of the procedure.

RESULTS

A total of 150 patients were enrolled; 146 underwent sedation and were included in the analysis. Seventy-four patients received propofol, and 71 received propofol with alfentanil. No clinically significant complications were noted. Subclinical respiratory depression was seen in 24/74 patients in the propofol group and 30/71 patients in the propofol/alfentanil group (effect size = 9.8%, 95% CI = -5.8% to 25.5%). Clinical signs of respiratory depression included an increase in supplemental oxygen use in 25 of the 74 propofol patients and 31 of the 71 propofol/alfentanil patients (effect size 9.9%, 95% CI = -5.9% to 25.7%), the use of bag-valve mask apparatus in seven patients in the propofol group and 12 in the propofol/alfentanil group (effect size = 5.6%, 95% CI = -3.5% to 18.4%), airway repositioning in 13 propofol patients and 20 propofol/alfentanil patients (effect size = 10.6%, 95% CI = -3.0% to 24.2%), and stimulation to induce breathing in 11 propofol patients and 20 propofol/alfentanil patients (effect size = 13.3%, 95% CI = 0.1% to 26.5%). The total time of the procedure was longer for the alfentanil/propofol group (median = 11 minutes, range = 5-22 minutes) than for the propofol group (median = 9 minutes, range = 1 to 43 minutes; effect size = 1.93 minutes, 95% CI = 0.73 to 2.58, p = 0.02). Pain during the procedure was reported by 10 of the 74 patients in the propofol group and 7 of the 71 patients in the propofol/alfentanil group (effect size = 4.5%, 95% CI = -6.8% to 14.1%). Recall of some part of the procedure was reported by 12 patients in the propofol group and 9 in the propofol/alfentanil group (effect size = 3.5%, 95% CI = -7.9% to 15.0%). All procedures were successfully completed.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of supplemental alfentanil with propofol for procedural sedation did not result in a difference in reported pain or recall immediately after the procedure. There was an increase in the proportion of patients who required stimulation to induce respiration during the procedure in patients who received propofol with supplemental alfentanil. The addition of supplemental opioid to procedural sedation with propofol does not appear beneficial.

Analgesia for retrobulbar block--comparison of remifentanil, alfentanil and fentanyl

BACKGROUND

The injection of retrobulbar block is associated with significant pain and discomfort. Therefore a short-acting IV analgesic before retrobulbar injection has been advocated.

OBJECTIVE

To compare remifentanil, alfentanil and fentanyl in providing analgesia for retrobulbar block injection.

METHODS

69 patients were enrolled randomly into three groups of 23 each to receive either Remifentanil 1 microg/kg, Alfentanil 20 microg/kg or Fentanyl 2 microg/kg as an IV bolus dose prior to retrobulbar injection. Mean arterial pressure (MAP) and heart rate (HR) were recorded and Numerical Pain Score (NPS) were assessed by a blinded observer.

RESULTS

Remifentanil prevented increase in MAP and HR while alfentanil and fentanyl were ineffective in this purpose (p < 0.05). NPS was significantly lower in remifentanil group (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Remifentanil 1 microg/kg prior to retrobulbar injection provide excellent hemodynamic stability and ensure analgesia.

Influence of CYP3A5 genotype on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the cytochrome P4503A probes alfentanil and midazolam

The hepatic and first-pass cytochrome P4503A (CYP3A) probe alfentanil (ALF) is also metabolized in vitro by CYP3A5. Human hepatic microsomal ALF metabolism is higher in livers with at least one CYP3A5*1 allele and higher CYP3A5 protein content, compared with CYP3A5*3 homozygotes with little CYP3A5. The influence of CYP3A5 genotype on ALF pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics was studied, and compared to midazolam (MDZ), another CYP3A probe. Healthy volunteers (58 men, 41 women) were genotyped for CYP3A5 *1, *3, *6, and *7 alleles. They received intravenous MDZ then ALF, and oral MDZ and ALF the next day. Plasma MDZ and ALF concentrations were determined by mass spectrometry. Dark-adapted pupil diameters were determined coincident with blood sampling. In CYP3A5(*)3/(*)3 (n=62), (*)1/(*)3 (n=28), and (*)1/(*)1 (n=8) genotypes, systemic clearances of ALF were 4.6+/-1.8, 4.8+/-1.7, and 3.9+/-1.7 ml/kg/min and those of MDZ were 7.8+/-2.3, 7.7+/-2.3, and 6.0+/-1.4 ml/kg/min, respectively (not significant), and apparent oral clearances were 11.8+/-7.2, 13.3+/-6.1, and 12.6+/-8.2 ml/kg/min for ALF and 35.2+/-19.0, 36.4+/-15.7, and 29.4+/-9.3 ml/kg/min for MDZ (not significant). Clearances were not different between African Americans (n=25) and Whites (n=68), or between CYP3A5 genotypes within African Americans. ALF pharmacodynamics was not different between CYP3A5 genotypes. There was consistent concordance between ALF and MDZ, in clearances and extraction ratios. Thus, in a relatively large cohort of healthy subjects with constitutive CYP3A activity, CYP3A5 genotype had no effect on the systemic or apparent oral clearances, or pharmacodynamics, of the CYP3A probes ALF and MDZ, despite affecting their hepatic microsomal metabolism.

Atelectasis in children undergoing either propofol infusion or positive pressure ventilation anesthesia for magnetic resonance imaging

BACKGROUND

Atelectasis because of anesthesia is a recognized problem but may be affected by the anesthetic technique. We compared magnetic resonance images of atelectasis in children undergoing two types of anesthesia.

METHODS

Children requiring anesthesia for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) had additional lung imaging sequences at the beginning and the end of anesthesia. Children had either i.v. propofol infusion (PI) without an artificial airway (n = 26) or positive pressure ventilation (PPV) via a tracheal tube (n = 20); the technique was chosen for clinical reasons. The extent of atelectasis was scored by two independent radiologists.

RESULTS

The median ages (range) for PI and PPV groups were 45 months (1-77 months) and 18 months (2-74 months), respectively. The proportion of children with atelectasis was different in the first lung scan (42% vs 80%), but in the second scan atelectasis was seen frequently in both groups (82% vs 94%) with a greater extent in the PPV group. The atelectasis score was higher in young children, but all children had normal oxygen requirements and saturations.

CONCLUSIONS

Many factors may influence the development of atelectasis but this study found less extensive atelectasis with PI than PPV. PI allows for sufficient motionlessness, required for high diagnostic image quality in pediatric MRI.

A novel mixture of propofol, alfentanil, and lidocaine for regional block with monitored anesthesia care in ophthalmic surgery

STUDY OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study is to determine the efficacy and safety of sedation/analgesia using a mixture of propofol, alfentanil, and lidocaine.

DESIGN

A retrospective case review was undertaken.

SETTING

This study took place at a university medical center.

PATIENTS

Eighty-nine American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status 1, 2, and 3 adult patients undergoing ophthalmic surgery with regional block and monitored anesthesia care were studied.

INTERVENTION

Six milliliters of propofol, 2 mL of alfentanil, and 2 mL of 2% lidocaine (6-2-2 mixture) were freshly mixed. The bolus dose was determined based on the patients' age: 5 microg/kg of alfentanil (and 0.3 mg/kg of propofol) for patients older than 75 years; the dose increased 1 mug/kg per 10-year decrease in age; and up to 9 microg/kg of alfentanil (0.54 mg/kg of propofol) for patients younger than 45 years. Regional block was performed at 1 minute after bolus completion. Blood pressure (BP), Sa(O2), electrocardiogram, capnography, clinical signs of sedation, responses to block, need for airway support, nausea and vomiting (N/V), pain due to propofol infusion, recall, and patient and surgeon satisfaction were recorded.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Seventy-eight percent of patients achieved analgesia and sedation without adverse response to the block. Twelve percent achieved good analgesia and sedation with only eyebrow movement upon needle insertion. Twenty-seven percent had respiratory depression but were able to follow commands and maintain adequate ventilation. Two percent had brief apnea alleviated by chin lift or jaw thrust. None had pain because of propofol infusion or N/V. Before sedation, average systolic BP was significantly increased (P < 0.0001) compared with baseline. After sedation and block, systolic BP decreased 6% from baseline (P < 0.005).

CONCLUSION

Adjusted for age and weight, the dose of the 6-2-2 mixture met the sedation requirements for most patients. With a low incidence of need for airway support, no pain during infusion, and no N/V, this novel mixture of propofol, alfentanil, and lidocaine provided adequate analgesia and sedation as well as hemodynamic stability for ophthalmic surgery under regional block.

A Comparison of Effects of Alfentanil, Fentanyl, and Remifentanil on Hemodynamic and Respiratory Parameters During Stereotactic Brain Biopsy

The aim of this study was to compare the effects of 3 different sedative-analgesic regimens in patients with intracranial mass lesions undergoing stereotactic brain biopsy. A 135 outpatients with American Society of Anesthesiologists I to II were divided into 3 groups: group A (n = 45) received a loading dose of IV alfentanil 7.5 microg/kg followed by infusion rate of 0.25 microg/kg/min; group F (n = 45) received a bolus dose of 1 microg/kg IV fentanyl and repeated as needed; and group R (n = 45) received infusion of 0.05 microg/kg/min remifentanil. Target level of sedation was 3 to 4 of the Ramsay Sedation Scale. Systolic and diastolic blood pressure, heart rate, respiratory rate, peripheric oxygen saturation (SpO2), and end-tidal carbon dioxide were recorded at different stages of the procedures. The patients in group F had significantly lower mean heart rate than those in groups A and R, but this was not in the limits of the bradycardia. The patients in group A had significantly lower mean SpO2 than those in the other groups, but mean SpO2 values did not drop below 94%. There were no significant differences in end-tidal carbon dioxide and respiratory rate values among the groups. Our results suggest that all 3 regimens have relatively similar hemodynamic and respiratory responses. The use of bolus fentanyl technique caused less hemodynamic stability. The continuous infusion technique of remifentanil or alfentanil provided better control on hemodynamic parameters.

Comparison of alfetanil and ketamine in combination with propofol for patient-controlled sedation during fiberoptic bronchoscopy

BACKGROUND

During fiberoptic bronchoscopy, propofol, ketamine, benzodiazepines, and opiates are most commonly used, alone or in combination for sedation. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical efficacy of propofol/ketamine with propofol/alfentanil for patient-controlled sedation (PCS) during fiberoptic bronchoscopy.

METHOD

Patients undergoing fiberoptic bronchoscopy were randomly assigned to receive either propofol/alfentanil (PA group; n = 138) or propofol/ketamine (PK group; n = 138) via a patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) device for sedation and analgesia. Changes in blood pressure, heart rate (HR), and oxygen saturation were monitored. Degree of patient and bronchoscopist satisfaction was evaluated using a 10-cm visual analog scale (VAS) (0 = extremely uncomfortable to 10 = extremely comfortable).

RESULTS

After sedation, systolic arterial pressure (SAP) decreased in the PA group, but SAP was stable in the PK group. Compared with values immediately before starting bronchoscopy, SAP and HR increased during the procedure in both groups (P < 0.05). Patients in the PK group showed more satisfaction [(9.5 (6-10) vs. 9.0 (6-10)), P < 0.05] and amnesia (82% vs. 61%, P < 0.01). Despite these differences, the majority (greater than 90%) of the patients in both groups stated that they were comfortable during the procedure.

CONCLUSION

Our results show that although both techniques proved effective for sedation in patients undergoing fiberoptic bronchoscopy, ketamine is superior to alfentanil when used in combination with propofol because of the high patient satisfaction and amnesia.

Fast-track eligibility, costs and quality of recovery after intravenous anaesthesia with propofol-remifentanil versus balanced anaesthesia with isoflurane-alfentanil

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The randomized, patient- and observer-blinded study was performed in 120 patients undergoing ear, nose and throat surgery to test the hypothesis that intravenous anaesthesia with propofol-remifentanil when compared with a balanced anaesthesia technique using isoflurane-alfentanil improves the speed of recovery, minimizes postoperative side-effects and, thus, leads to an improved quality of recovery without increasing total costs.

METHODS

The total costs for each anaesthesia technique were calculated considering drug acquisition costs, personnel costs for the additional time spent in the operating room and the postanaesthesia care unit until fast-tracking eligibility, and the costs to treat the side-effects during and after operation.

RESULTS

The times from the end of surgery to tracheal extubation and the time until leaving the operating room were not different between the two groups. However, more patients receiving intravenous anaesthesia (80 versus 49%) were eligible for fast tracking and thus could bypass the recovery room. This was associated with an average cost saving of 6.00 euros per patient. However, intravenous anaesthesia was associated with higher total costs (89 euros versus 78 euros) mainly because of higher acquisition costs of the anaesthetics (34.60 euros versus 16.50 euros). There was no difference in the quality of recovery as measured by a Quality of Recovery score and patient satisfaction between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The higher acquisition costs of the intravenous anaesthetics propofol and remifentanil cannot be compensated for by improved speed of recovery. This anaesthesia technique is more cost intensive than balanced anaesthesia using isoflurane and alfentanil.

Mood change after anaesthesia with remifentanil or alfentanil

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

There are anecdotal reports of dysphoria occurring in patients on the first day after anaesthesia with remifentanil. This study was performed to investigate this allegation and to find a possible relationship to postoperative shivering or to nausea and vomiting.

METHODS

Patients undergoing otorhinolaryngeal surgery took part in a prospective, randomized, double-blind study comparing total intravenous anaesthesia with propofol (2 mg kg(-1) bolus injection then 100 microg kg(-1) min(-1)) and remifentanil (1 microg kg(-1) bolus then 0.1-0.5 microg kg(-1) min-1) or alfentanil (30 microg kg(-1) bolus then 0.16-0.83 microg kg((-1) min(-1)). The patients were carefully insulated and actively warmed by convective heating and rectal temperature was monitored continuously. Postoperative shivering was graded on a three-point scale, and the cumulative incidence of nausea and vomiting were registered at 24 h after surgery. Pre- and postoperative mood was measured with the von Zerssen mood scale (Befindlichkeits-Skala) and changes tested for significance. High scores reflect discontent and dysphoria.

RESULTS

The data of 98 patients (49 in each group, ASA I-II, age 42 +/- 13 yr, anaesthesia time 141 +/- 60 min; mean +/- SD; intergroup P values > 0.1) were evaluated. Core temperature did not change perioperatively (before 36.6 +/- 0.2 degrees C; after 36.8 +/- 0.3 degrees C, inter- and intragroup P > 0.1). The incidence of nausea was the same in each group; vomiting occurred with equal frequency (6/49 vs. 7/49). Shivering was significantly more frequent after remifentanil (41% vs. 10%, P < 0.001). The patients' mood remained stable after remifentanil but worsened after alfentanil (von Zerssen score from 9.3 +/- 2.5 to 13.9 +/- 3.6; mean +/- 95% confidence intervals; P < 0.01).

DISCUSSION

Postoperative shivering was more frequent after remifentanil but was unrelated to intraoperative heat loss. Contrary to preliminary informal observations, there was no evidence that remifentanil caused postanaesthetic dysphoria on the day one after surgery.

Piritramide and alfentanil display similar respiratory depressant potency

BACKGROUND

The question whether some opioids exert less respiratory depression than others has not been answered conclusively. We applied pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PKPD) modeling to obtain an estimate of the C50 for the depression of CO2 elimination as a measure of the respiratory depressant potency of alfentanil and piritramide, two opioids with vastly different pharmacokinetics and apparent respiratory depressant action.

METHODS

Twenty-three patients received either alfentanil (2.3 microg x kg(-1) x min-1, 14 patients, as published previously) or piritramide (17.9 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1), nine patients) until significant respiratory depression occurred. Opioid pharmacokinetics and the arterial PCO2 (PaCO2) were determined from frequent arterial blood samples. An indirect response model accounting for the respiratory stimulation due to increasing PaCO2 was used to describe the PaCO2 data.

RESULTS

The following pharmacodynamic parameters were estimated with NONMEM [population means and interindividual variability (CV)]: k(elCO2) (elimination rate constant of CO2) 0.144 (-) min(-1), F (gain of the CO2 response) 4.0 (fixed according to literature values) (28%), C50 (both drugs) 61.3 microg l-1 (41%), k(eo alfentanil) 0.654 (-) min(-1) and k(eo piritramide) 0.023 (-) min(-1). Assigning separate C50 values for alfentanil and piritramide did not improve the fit compared with a model with the same C50.

CONCLUSION

Since the C50 values did not differ, both drugs are equally potent respiratory depressants. The apparently lower respiratory depressant effect of piritramide when compared with alfentanil is caused by slower equilibration between the plasma and the effect site. Generalizing our results and based on simulations we conclude that slowly equilibrating opioids like piritramide are intrinsically safer with regard to respiratory depression than rapidly equilibrating opioids like alfentanil.

Remifentanil vs alfentanil in the total intravenous anaesthesia for paediatric abdominal surgery

BACKGROUND

Our aim was to investigate whether total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) with remifentanil and alfentanil would ensure appropriate analgesia and recovery conditions in anaesthesia for children undergoing abdominal surgery.

METHODS

Sixty children, scheduled for abdominal operations were randomized to receive, in a double-blind manner, either remifentanil (loading dose 1 microg x kg(-1); maintenance infusion, 0.25 microg x kg(-1) min(-1)) or alfentanil (loading dose 50 microg x kg(-1); maintenance infusion, 1 microg x kg(-1) min(-1)) as the analgesic component of TIVA. They were combined with propofol (loading dose, 2 mg x kg(-1); step 1 maintenance infusion, 10 mg x kg(-1) h(-1); step 2 maintenance infusion, 8 mg x kg(-1) h(-1); step 3 maintenance infusion, 6 mg x kg(-1) h(-1)) neuromuscular blockade was with mivacurium. Dose changes of the drugs, the times from cessation of anaesthesia to extubation, verbal responses, recovery of ventilation, orientation, and qualification for discharge from the postanaesthetic care unit (PACU) were recorded.

RESULTS

Demographics, duration of surgery and anaesthesia were similar between the two groups. Times to extubation and stay in the PACU were significantly shorter in the remifentanil group compared with the alfentanil group. Quality of emergence (QE) from anaesthesia scale scores were higher in the remifentanil group compared with the alfentanil group.

CONCLUSIONS

Remifentanil provides a more rapid recovery and adequate postoperative analgesia after TIVA for paediatric abdominal surgery, compared with alfentanil.

Effects of dopamine antagonists on alfentanil–induced locomotor activity in horses

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether specific dopamine receptor antagonists block alfentanil-induced locomotor stimulation in horses.

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized, prospective, crossover experiment.

ANIMALS

Eight adult horses (462-604 kg).

METHODS

Doses of dopamine-1 (D1) (NNC 01-0756) and dopamine-2 (D2) antagonists (eticlopride) were selected in a pilot study prior to a three part, blinded, cross-over study. In part 1, horses received 7.5 micro g kg-1 eticlopride, 5 micro g kg-1 NNC 01-0756 or an equal volume of saline. In part 2, they received both antagonists and in part 3, acepromazine at 0.05 mg kg-1. Locomotor activity was assessed by counting the steps taken by a marked forefoot per 2 minutes. The D antagonist was injected IV after a 20-minute control period. The horses were observed for 10 minutes before alfentanil (20 micro g kg-1) was injected IV. Locomotor activity was then monitored for 60 minutes. Statistical analysis was performed on step counts following alfentanil normalised by subtracting the mean control step count from each value recorded after alfentanil. Data were analysed using Friedman tests and Tukey-Kramer comparisons.

RESULTS

Alfentanil increased locomotor activity for 10 minutes. NNC 01-0756 tended to reduce locomotor activity between 0 and 10 minutes (p = 0.261), but neither D antagonist suppressed it significantly. The combination of D antagonists induced more step counts than saline or acepromazine (p = 0.0265) in the 20-40-minute period and more than saline, acepromazine or eticlopride between 40 and 60 minutes (p = 0.0003).

CONCLUSIONS

Neither D1 nor D2 antagonists inhibited alfentanil-induced locomotor activity. Both drugs appeared to cause locomotor stimulation of their own.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

D1 and D2 antagonism did not reduce opioid-induced excitement in horses and is not suitable for reducing the incidence of this unwanted side-effect of opioids.

[Remifentanil and eye surgery. A randomized, clinical comparison of propofol/remifentanil anesthesia and propofol/fentanyl/alfentanil anesthesia]

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to investigate how many patients, after anesthesia with either propofol/remifentanil or propofol/fentanyl/alfentanil, within 20 minutes from the end of surgery could be transferred directly to the general ward. The number of undesired preoperative incidents, the anesthetists', the surgeons', and the patients' evaluations of the anesthesia were registered. An evaluation of the economic consequences of the two methods was also intended.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study was clinically controlled, randomised, and partly blinded. A total of 80 patients undergoing eye surgery were recruited. The patients were scored 10, 15, and 20 minutes after the end of surgery according to a modified Aldrete score. With sufficient awakening score, the patients were transferred to the general ward.

RESULTS

Thirty-six patients in each group underwent the examination. In the propofol/remifentanil-group 31 (86%) could be transferred to the general ward compared to 15 (42%) in the proponol/fentanyl/alfentanil-group. In the propofol/remifentanil-group there were less reactions to the start of surgery, more episodes with preoperative hypotension and postoperative shivering. Otherwise there were no differences between the groups. It was estimated that the additional expenses for medcine were by far outweighed by the lower costs postoperatively.

DISCUSSION

With a propofol/remifentanil-anesthesia, the patients had a predictably short awakening time, so they could be transferred directly to the general ward. This may, especially in ambulatory surgery, mean cost savings and perhaps higher patient satisfaction.

Simultaneous assessment of drug interactions with low- and high-extraction opioids: application to parecoxib effects on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of fentanyl and alfentanil

BACKGROUND

Parecoxib is a parenteral cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitor intended for perioperative analgesia. It is an inactive prodrug hydrolyzed in vivo to the active inhibitor valdecoxib, a substrate for hepatic cytochrome P450 3A4 (CYP3A4); hence, a potential exists for metabolic interactions with other CYP3A substrates. This study determined the effects of parecoxib on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the CYP3A substrates fentanyl and alfentanil compared with the CYP3A inhibitor troleandomycin. Alfentanil is a low-extraction drug with a clearance that is highly susceptible to drug interactions; fentanyl is a high-extraction drug and, thus, is theoretically less vulnerable. We therefore also tested the hypothesis that the extraction ratio influences the consequence of altered hepatic metabolism of these opioids.

METHODS

After Institutional Review Board-approved, written, informed consent was obtained, 12 22- to 40-yr-old healthy volunteers were enrolled in the study. The protocol was a randomized, double-blinded, balanced, placebo-controlled, three-session (placebo, parecoxib, or troleandomycin pretreatment) crossover. Subjects received both alfentanil (15 microg/kg) and fentanyl (5 microg/kg; 15-min intravenous infusion) 1 h after placebo, parecoxib (40 mg intravenously every 12 h), or troleandomycin (every 6 h). Study sessions were separated by 7 or more days. Opioid concentrations in venous blood were determined by liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry. Pharmacokinetic parameters were determined by noncompartmental analysis. Opioid effects were determined by pupillometry, respiratory rate, and Visual Analog Scale scores.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between the placebo and parecoxib treatments in alfentanil or fentanyl plasma concentration, maximum observed plasma concentration, area under the plasma time-concentration time curve, clearance, elimination half-life, or volume of distribution. However, disposition of alfentanil, and to a lesser extent fentanyl, was significantly altered by troleandomycin. Clearances were reduced to 12% (0.64 +/- 0.25 ml. kg-1. min-1) and 61% (9.35 +/- 3.07) of control (5.53 +/- 2.16 and 15.3 +/- 5.0) for alfentanil and fentanyl (P < 0.001). Pupil diameter versus time curves were similar between placebo and parecoxib treatments but were significantly different after troleandomycin.

CONCLUSIONS

Single-dose parecoxib does not alter fentanyl or alfentanil disposition or clinical effects and does not appear to cause significant CYP3A drug interactions. CYP3A inhibition decreases alfentanil clearance more than fentanyl clearance, confirming that the extraction ratio influences the consequence of altered hepatic drug metabolism. Modified cassette, or "cocktail," dosing is useful for assessing drug interactions in humans.

Small doses of remifentanil and alfetanil in continuous total intravenous anesthesia in major abdominal surgery. A double blind comparison

AIM

The purpose of this study was to test the safety and efficacy of small doses of remifentanil and alfentanil in a continuous total intravenous anesthesia technique for patients undergoing major abdominal surgery.

METHODS

Sixty patients were enrolled in the study, and received in a double blind fashion either remifentanil (0.1 microg/kg/min) or alfentanil (alfentanil 0.75 microg/kg/min) in association with propofol (12 mg/kg/h at induction; 6-9 mg/kg/h for maintenance) and cisatracurium. Hemodynamic data, hypnosis monitoring data (Bispectral Index Score), ventilatory parameters and settings, drug utilisation were monitored during stress moments and during all the intraoperative period. Patients were evaluated also in the first 6 postoperative hours.

RESULTS

Mean amount of propofol for induction (BIS<60) was lower in the remifentanil group than in the alfentanil group. Significantly fewer patients receiving remifentanil responded to intubation in comparison with patients receiving alfentanil in terms of non invasive blood pressure (>30 mmHg) and heart rate variations. Significantly more patients receiving alfentanil had 1 or more responses to surgery. Incidence of hypotension was significantly higher in patients receiving remifentanil. There were no differences between the 2 groups in the times for spontaneous respiration, adequate respiration, adequate responsivness (OAA/s=5) and discharge from the recovery room. Time to extubation resulted slightly shorter (p<0.05) in patients who received remifentanil.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of remifentanil and alfentanil in association with propofol, in a continuous infusion total intravenous anesthesia technique, demonstrated to be safe and reliable strategies.

Remifentanil vs. alfentanil for direct laryngoscopy: a randomized study comparing two total intravenous anaesthesia techniques. TIVA for direct laryngoscopy

The ideal anaesthesia for direct laryngoscopy is profound and yet brief. The present study sought to determine whether a new anaesthetic technique based on infusion of the ultra short-acting opioid remifentanil was superior to our routine alfentanil multiple-dose technique in terms of haemodynamic stability, stress responses and recovery. A total of 58 patients were randomized to receive propofol and either remifentanil or alfentanil as part of a total intravenous anaesthesia. In the remifentanil group, systolic blood pressure during anaesthesia remained significantly lower than baseline values, while it increased significantly in the alfentanil group. None of the patients receiving remifentanil showed stress responses (hypertension, tachycardia, somatic or autonomic responses), compared to 22 patients (79%) in the alfentanil group (P < 0.0001). In the remifentanil group, hypotension or bradycardia requiring intervention arose in 5 (18%) and 3 patients (11%); neither response was seen in the alfentanil group. The period from the end of propofol infusion until extubation was 5 min longer in the remifentanil group (P < 0.0001), whereas the time from extubation until discharge was similar in the two groups. Thus, neither technique showed sufficient haemodynamic stability, and further studies are needed to determine optimal dosages of propofol and opioid.

Opioid-induced respiratory depression is associated with increased tidal volume variability

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

mu-agonistic opioids cause concentration-dependent hypoventilation and increased irregularity of breathing. The aim was to quantify opioid-induced irregularity of breathing and to investigate its time-course during and after an opioid infusion, and its ability to predict the severity of respiratory depression.

METHODS

Twenty-three patients breathing spontaneously via a continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) mask received an intravenous (i.v.) infusion of alfentanil (2.3 microg kg(-1) min(-1), 14 patients) or pirinitramide (piritramide) (17.9 microg kg(-1) min(-1), nine patients) until either a cumulative dose of 70 microg kg(-1) for alfentanil or 500 microg kg(-1) for pirinitramide had been achieved or the infusion had to be stopped for safety reasons. Tidal volumes (VT) and minute ventilation were measured with an anaesthesia workstation. For every 20 breaths, the quartile coefficient was calculated (Qeff20V(T)).

RESULTS

Both the decrease of minute volume and the increase of Qeff20V(T) during and after opioid infusion were highly significant (P < 0.001, ANOVA). Patients in which the alfentanil infusion had to be terminated prematurely had lower minute volumes (P = 0.002, t-test) and higher Qeff20V(T) (P = 0.034, t-test) than those who received the complete dose. Changes in the regularity of breathing measured as Qeff20V(T) parallel those of minute ventilation during and after opioid infusion.

CONCLUSIONS

Opioids cause a more complicated disturbance of the control of respiration than a mere resetting to higher PCO2. Furthermore, Qeff20V(T) appears to predict the severity of opioid-induced respiratory depression.

Cold allodynia and hyperalgesia in neuropathic pain: the effect of N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonist ketamine--a double-blind, cross-over comparison with alfentanil and placebo

Cold allodynia and hyperalgesia are frequent clinical findings in patients with neuropathic pain. While there have been several clinical studies showing the involvement of central sensitization mechanisms and N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor activation in mechanical allodynia/hyperalgesia and ongoing pain, the mechanisms of thermal allodynia and hyperalgesia have received less attention. The aim of the present study was to examine the effect of the NMDA-receptor antagonist ketamine on thermal allodynia/hyperalgesia, ongoing pain and mechanical allodynia/hyperalgesia in patients with neuropathic pain (11 patients with post-traumatic neuralgia and one patient with post-herpetic neuralgia). All the patients were known to suffer from severe cold allodynia (cold pain detection threshold (CPDT): 23.8 degrees C, median value). The mu-opioid agonist alfentanil was used as an active control. The study design was double-blind and placebo-controlled and the drugs were administered i.v. (bolus dose and infusion). CPDT in the asymptomatic contralateral area was found to be significantly decreased (cold allodynia) compared to CPDT in site- and age-matched normal controls. Heat pain detection thresholds were found to be normal and no consistent heat hyperalgesia occurred. Alfentanil significantly reduced cold allodynia (by increasing CPDT) in symptomatic area (P=0.0076). Ketamine did not significantly increase the threshold. Significant and marked reductions of hyperalgesia to cold (visual analogue score at threshold value) were seen following both alfentanil (4.5 before, 1.4 after, median value) and ketamine (6.8 before, 0.4 after, median value). Alfentanil and ketamine also significantly reduced ongoing pain and mechanical hyperalgesia. It is concluded that NMDA-receptor mediated central sensitization is involved in cold hyperalgesia, but since CPDT remained unaltered, it is likely that other mechanisms are present.

Postdelivery of alfentanil and ketamine has no effect on intradermal capsaicin-induced pain and hyperalgesia

OBJECTIVE

The predelivery of intravenous alfentanil (a mu opioid agonist) and ketamine (an -methyl d-aspartate antagonist) has recently been shown to decrease the secondary hyperalgesia induced by intradermal capsaicin. The focus of this study was to determine the effects of the postdelivery of intravenous alfentanil and ketamine on intradermal capsaicin-induced secondary hyperalgesia.

DESIGN

Double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, crossover study. Five minutes after an intradermal capsaicin injection, alfentanil and ketamine infusions were administered for a target plasma concentration of 75 ng/ml for alfentanil and 150 ng/ml for ketamine or placebo equivalent using a computer-controlled infusion pump and maintained for the remainder of the study. The investigator recorded the magnitude of the pain score at the time of injection and at 5-minute intervals. Fifteen minutes after the intradermal capsaicin injection, the region of secondary hyperalgesia and flare response was determined.

RESULTS

Alfentanil and ketamine plasma levels targeted after injection of intradermal capsaicin had no significant effect on pain scores, flare response, or secondary hyperalgesia.

CONCLUSIONS

Consistent with animal studies on preemptive analgesia, this study demonstrates that alfentanil and ketamine have a differential effect when delivered before and after a painful stimulus. Because of the differential effect seen, future studies on the pharmacology of human experimental pain should evaluate both predrug and postdrug delivery.

Patient-controlled sedation versus intravenous sedation for colonoscopy in elderly patients: a prospective randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

A prospective randomized trial was conducted to compare the safety, effectiveness, and patient acceptance of patient-controlled sedation and intravenous sedation for colonoscopy in a group of elderly patients undergoing outpatient colonoscopy.

METHODS

One hundred patients over 65 years of age were recruited and randomized to patient-controlled sedation (n = 50) or intravenous sedation (n = 50) groups by means of computer-generated numbers. In the patient-controlled sedation group, a mixture of propofol and alfentanil was delivered by means of a patient-controlled pump; each bolus delivered 4.8 mg propofol and 12 microg alfentanil. No loading dose was used and the lockout time was set at zero. In the intravenous sedation group, fixed doses of diazemuls (0.1 mg/kg) and meperidine (0.5 mg/kg) were given with further increases in dosages administered at the discretion of the endoscopist. Outcome measures assessed included cardiopulmonary complications, recovery time, pain score, and satisfaction score.

RESULTS

The mean (SD) age of patients in the patient-controlled sedation and intravenous sedation groups were, respectively, 72.4 years (5.3) and 73.5 years (6.1). The mean dose of propofol consumed in the patient-controlled sedation group was 0.79 (0.46) mg/kg. The mean doses of diazemuls and meperidine consumed in intravenous sedation group were, respectively, 5.8 (1.3) mg and 30.1 (6.8) mg. Hypotension occurred in 2 (4%) patients in the patient-controlled sedation group and 14 (28%) in the intravenous sedation group (p < 0.01). Oxygen desaturation was recorded for 4 patients (8%) in the intravenous sedation group. The median (interquartile range [IQR]) recovery time was significantly shorter in the patient-controlled sedation group compared with the intravenous sedation group (respectively, 0 minutes [IQR 0-5] vs. 5 minutes [IQR 5-10]; p < 0.01). There were no statistically significant differences between groups for pain and satisfaction scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient-controlled sedation appears to be safer than intravenous sedation, with comparable effectiveness and acceptance, in elderly patients undergoing elective outpatient colonoscopy.

Time course of cognitive recovery after propofol anaesthesia: a level of processing approach

The aim of this study was to investigate the time course of recovery of verbal memory after general anaesthesia, as a function of the level (shallow or deep) of processing induced at the time of encoding. Thirty-one patients anaesthetized with propofol and alfentanil were compared with 28 control patients receiving only alfentanil. Memory functions were assessed the day before and 1, 6 and 24 hr after operation. Results show that for the anaesthetized group, shallow processing was impaired for 6 hr after surgery whereas the deeper processing was not recovered even at 24 hr. In addition, no specific effect of age was found.

Mu-receptor agonism with alfentanil increases striatal dopamine D2 receptor binding in man

Animal studies indicate that mu-opioids indirectly modulate neurotransmission in the nigrostriatal dopaminergic pathway. We used positron emission tomography (PET) to study the effects of alfentanil (a mu-opioid receptor agonist) on striatal dopamine D2 receptor binding in eight healthy male volunteers. D2 receptor binding was determined by using [(11)C]raclopride as radioligand. Each subject underwent two PET sessions on the same day, the first without the drug (control) and the second during alfentanil infusion. Alfentanil was administered as target-controlled infusion to maintain pseudo steady-state plasma concentration of 80 ng/ml throughout the PET session. A freeze lesion model was used for pain testing at the end of both PET sessions. A mechanical pain stimulus of 5 N was rated by the subjects using a visual analog scale. Regions of interest for the putamen, caudate nucleus, and cerebellum were drawn on MRI images and transferred to PET images. Alfentanil increased the binding potential of [(11)C]raclopride in the putamen by 6.0% (P = 0.04) and in the caudate nucleus by 7.4% (P = 0.008). Alfentanil caused a small reduction in respiratory rate (P = 0.046) and oxygen saturation (P < 0.001), and a moderate consistent increase in end-tidal CO(2) (P < 0.001). Pain scores were significantly smaller after alfentanil PET scan (median VAS 9 (0-42) vs. 23.5 (15-52), P = 0.008). These results indicate that pharmacologically relevant concentrations of alfentanil increase D2 dopamine receptor binding in the striatum in man. This increase is assumed to reflect reduced dopamine release.

Postoperative nausea and vomiting after total intravenous anesthesia with propofol and remifentanil or alfentanil: how important is the opioid?

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To compare the frequency and duration of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) following total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) with propofol and either remifentanil or alfentanil in outpatients undergoing arthroscopic surgery of the extremities.

DESIGN

Randomized, third-party blinded study.

SETTING

University medical center.

PATIENTS

100 ASA physical status I and II patients scheduled for arthroscopic surgery of the knee or shoulder.

INTERVENTIONS

The anesthesia regimen consisted of a bolus followed by continuous infusion of propofol (2 mg/kg followed by 120 microg/kg/min) and the opioid (remifentanil 0.5 microg/kg followed by 0.1 microg/kg/min or alfentanil 10 microg/kg followed by 0.25 microg/kg/min). Patients breathed 100% oxygen spontaneously through a Laryngeal Mask Airway (or an endotracheal tube when medically indicated). Opioids were titrated to maintain blood pressure and heart rate within 20% of baseline and a respiratory rate of 10 to 16 breaths/min. Propofol was titrated downward as low as possible without permitting patient movement.

MEASUREMENTS

Nausea was determined by an 11-point categorical scale and was recorded before surgery and multiple time points thereafter. The times of emetic episodes were recorded. Treatment of PONV was at the discretion of the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) nurses who were blinded to the identity of the opioid used.

MAIN RESULTS

Nausea scores were 0 at all time points in over 70% of the patients in each group. None of the 100 patients vomited while in the hospital, and only one patient required antiemetic therapy.

CONCLUSION

When propofol-based TIVA is used for arthroscopic surgery, short-acting opioids do not significantly affect the risk of PONV.

Effects of low-dose alfentanil administration on central respiratory drive and respiratory pattern in spontaneously breathing ASA 1 patients

The aim of this study was to assess the short-term effects of the administration of low doses of alfentanil on respiratory drive and respiratory pattern. We studied 17 ASA I patients scheduled for minor surgery or endoscopic procedures. During spontaneous ventilation, Respiratory Rate, Tidal Volume, Total Respiratory Cycle, Inspiratory and Expiratory Time, Mean Inspiratory Flow, P0.1, S(a)O(2) and EtCO(2) were all measured. The inspired oxygen concentration was 21% and measurements were made at baseline, 5 min (T1), 10 min (T2) and 15 min (T3) following an intravenous bolus injection 10 microg.kg(-1) alfentanil. The administration of alfentanil produced a significant (p < 0.05) reduction in S(a)O(2), minute volume and P0.1. In ASA I spontaneously breathing patients, the pre-operative administration of low doses of alfentanil can initially reduce the respiratory centre activity leading to a reduction in minute volume and S(a)O(2). We therefore recommend careful monitoring of cardio-respiratory function in ASA I patients, following the administration of alfentanil.

Comparison of alfentanil and morphine in the prehospital treatment of patients with acute ischaemic-type chest pain

Patients with acute myocardial ischaemic pain would benefit from rapid pain relief. The clinical usefulness of alfentanil, which has a rapid onset of action, was therefore assessed as the initial pain relieving opioid in patients suffering from acute myocardial ischaemic pain. The effects of alfentanil were compared with those of morphine in the prehospital treatment of 40 haemodynamically stable patients suffering from acute ischaemic-type chest pain. After initial assessment, the patients were given either 0.5 mg alfentanil or 5 mg morphine intravenously in a randomized double-blind fashion. The dose was repeated 2 minutes later if severe pain persisted. Arterial pressure, heart rate, respiratory rate and pain expressed on a visual analogue scale was measured before and at 2, 4, 6, 10 and 15 minutes after administration of drugs. After randomization, four patients were excluded. Sixteen patients received alfentanil and 20 patients morphine. Pain relief was faster (p < 0.005) in the alfentanil group than in the morphine group. Alfentanil was found to provide effective analgesia during the follow-up period of 15 minutes. No haemodynamic or respiratory side effects occurred. It is concluded that alfentanil is an effective analgesic in the prehospital treatment of myocardial ischaemic pain.

Relative sensitivity to alfentanil and reliability of current perception threshold vs von Frey tactile stimulation and thermal sensory testing

Recent technological advances claim to allow quantitative measurement of the functional integrity of both large and small diameter sensory nerve fibers using the current perception threshold (CPT) sensory testing device. This device has yet to be validated against the corresponding gold standard references for sensory testing (thermal sensory testing [TST]) and von Frey tactile hair stimulation [VF]) to correlate its evaluation of similar sensory nerve perceptions. A baseline neurosensory examination using the CPT, TST and VF methods was performed on 19 healthy volunteers. Using a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled design, each subject received an alfentanil or diphenhydramine (as a placebo control) infusion in separate study sessions. The order of the study sessions was randomized and separated by 1 week. The 3 neurosensory examinations were repeated at 3 different targeted plasma levels of study drug. Changes in neurosensory thresholds were then compared between the 3 methods. All CPT measurements and the cold pain measurement showed a significantly higher degree of variability than the other TST and VF measurements. There appeared to be a correlation between the CPT 5 Hz pain threshold and the TST cold pain and warm sensation; intravenous alfentanil significantly elevated all 3 detection thresholds. In addition, there was no effect of alfentanil on the VF or the CPT 2000 Hz thresholds. However, we did not see the predicted relation between the 250 Hz CPT stimulus and cool sensation. From these studies, there is some evidence that similar fiber tracts may be measured between the CPT, TST, and VF methods, especially with the CPT 5 Hz measures and C-fiber tract activity.

Comparison of five experimental pain tests to measure analgesic effects of alfentanil

BACKGROUND

Several experimental pain models have been used to measure opioid effects in humans. The aim of the current study was to compare the qualities of five frequently used experimental pain tests to measure opioid effects.

METHODS

The increase of electrical, heat, and pressure pain tolerance and the decrease of ice-water and ischemic pain perception was determined at baseline and at four different plasma concentrations of alfentanil (n = 7) administered as target controlled infusion or placebo (n = 7). A linear mixed-effects modeling (NONMEM) was performed to detect drug, placebo, and time effect as well as interindividual and intraindividual variation of effect.

RESULTS

Only the electrical, ice-water, and pressure pain tests are sensitive to assess a concentration-response curve of alfentanil. At a plasma alfentanil concentration of 100 ng/ml, the increase in pain tolerance compared with baseline was 42.0% for electrical pain, 22.2% for pressure pain, and 21.7% for ice-water pain. The slope of the linear concentration-response curve had an interindividual coefficient of variation of 58.3% in electrical pain, 35.6% in pressure pain, and 60.0% in ice-water pain. The residual error including intraindividual variation at an alfentanil concentration of 100 ng/ml was 19.4% for electrical pain, 6.1% for pressure pain, and 13.0% for ice-water pain. Electrical pain was affected by a significant placebo effect, and pressure pain was affected by a significant time effect.

CONCLUSION

Electrical, pressure, and ice-water pain, but not ischemic and heat pain, provide significant concentration-response curves in the clinically relevant range of 200 ng/ml alfentanil or lower. The power to detect a clinically relevant shift of the curve is similar in the three tests. The appropriate test(s) for pharmacodynamic studies should be chosen according to the investigated drug(s) and the study design.

[Factors influencing early extubation after open heart surgery]

The authors have performed a retrospective study in order to review the occurrence and the influencing factors of early extubation among their patients. Those patients who had any severe complication in the immediate postoperative period (pericardial tamponade, low cardiac output syndrome, re-operation due to excessive bleeding, postperfusion lung syndrome, pulmonary edema) preventing early extubation, have been excluded from the study. In the remaining 690 patients early extubation within 8 hours and within 4 hours could be carried out in 525 (76.1%) and 164 cases (23.8%) respectively. Late (beyond 12 hours) extubation occurred in 68 cases (9.9%). Anaesthesia was governed by two different methods. Midazolam and alfentanyl (group 1) were used in 137 cases (19.9%) whilst 553 patients (80.1%) received propofol and alfentanyl (group 2). In group 1 and 2 early extubation was possible in 50.4 and 82.5% respectively (p < 0.0001). In further investigations 27 pre- and intraoperative variables of each patient have been studied and analysed. For statistical analysis authors used the SPSS software including T-test, Mann-Whitney-test, chi-square test and multivariate logistical regression analysis. On the basis of multivariate regression analysis factors influencing early extubation were as follows: age (B = 0.0775; p < 0.001), sex (B = 1.2900; p < 0.001), method of anaesthesia (B = 1.9753; p < 0.001), duration of anaesthesia (B = 0.0053; p < 0.001), re-do operation (B = 1.0482; p = 0.0469) and preoperative congestive heart failure (B = 0.9008; p = 0.0125). Pulmonary diseases known from patient history have not had a deep impact on early extubation. On the basis of our study early extubation has not resulted in an increased number of either the postoperative complications or the occurrence of perioperative myocardial infarction.

Concentration-effect relationship of intravenous alfentanil and ketamine on peripheral neurosensory thresholds, allodynia and hyperalgesia of neuropathic pain

Both mu opioid agonists and N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists are implicated in the regulation of neuropathic pain in post-nerve injury preclinical pain models. This study characterizes the effects of intravenously infused alfentanil (a mu-receptor agonist) and ketamine (an NMDA-receptor antagonist) on human neuropathic pain states, characterized by allodynia and hyperalgesia. Using diphenhydramine as the placebo, alfentanil and ketamine infusions were given in a randomized double-blind fashion 1 week apart via a computer-controlled infusion (CCI) pump that was programmed to target plasma levels of alfentanil at 25, 50 and 75 ng/ml and ketamine at 50, 100 and 150 ng/ml. At the beginning of each infusion and each targeted plasma level, baseline vital signs, neurosensory testing that included thermal thresholds, thermal pain and von Frey filament thresholds, and spontaneous and evoked pain scores were obtained. Moreover, the areas of allodynia or hyperalgesia to stroking and a 5.18 von Frey filament were mapped at the beginning and the end of each infusion. A total of seven males and five females with post-nerve injury allodynia and hyperalgesia were enrolled in the study. Elevations of cold, warm, hot pain and von Frey tactile thresholds were noted. Dose-dependent increases in cold and cold pain thresholds, and reductions in stroking pain scores were noted in both the alfentanil and the ketamine infusions. In addition, alfentanil showed a statistically significant dose-dependent reduction in both spontaneous and von Frey pain scores. Both the alfentanil and ketamine infusions showed a reduction in the stroking hyperalgesic area and ketamine showed a significant reduction in the von Frey hyperalgesia area. No significant CNS side effects and changes in vital signs were noted. A partial deafferentation state was found in the post-nerve injury patients who presented with allodynia and hyperalgesia. The effects of alfentanil on cold and cold pain thresholds and spontaneous pain scores correlates with previous studies suggesting an opiate central analgesic effect. In addition, the reduction of the hyperalgesic area and evoked pain scores with the alfentanil infusion suggests that opioids may have some peripheral effects in the post-nerve injury patients. Therefore, clinical utilization of opioids with careful titration may be beneficial in post-nerve injury patients with partial deafferentation. With the absence of significant CNS side effects, the ketamine infusion not only demonstrated the well-documented spinal cord mechanism of the NMDA receptor, but the result of the current study also suggests that a peripheral mechanism of NMDA receptor may exist. The relationship between central sensitization and regulation of peripheral NMDA-receptor expression requires further investigation.

Alfentanil-induced epileptiform activity: a simultaneous surface and depth electroencephalographic study in complex partial epilepsy

PURPOSE

Alfentanil is a high potency mu opiate receptor agonist commonly used during presurgical induction of anesthesia. This and other opiate receptor agonists have demonstrated proconvulsant effects in animals, but these properties have been less consistently demonstrated in humans. Most human scalp EEG studies have failed to demonstrate induction of epileptiform activity with these agents, which is inconsistent with findings using intracranial EEG. Simultaneous scalp and depth EEG recordings have yet to be performed in this setting. The relationship between opiate dose and proconvulsant activity is unclear.

METHODS

Simultaneous scalp and depth electrode recordings were performed on five patients with complex partial epilepsy (CPE) who underwent alfentanil anesthesia induction before depth electrode removal. Consecutive equal bolus doses of alfentanil were administered to each patient according to strict time intervals so as to assess their correlation with any induced epileptiform activity.

RESULTS

Epileptiform activity was induced by alfentanil in three of five patients. Two of these patients had electrographic seizures. Epileptiform activity was only detected from the depth electrodes, occurring within 2 min of the first bolus dose in all three cases. Further increase or spread of epileptiform activity did not occur despite cumulative bolus doses of alfentanil.

CONCLUSIONS

Alfentanil is proconvulsant in patients with CPE. Induced seizures may be subclinical and lack a scalp EEG correlate. There is a complex dose-response relationship. Alfentanil induction of anesthesia should be approached with caution in patients with CPE.

Comparison of patient-controlled sedation with propofol and alfentanil for third molar surgery--preliminary results of a pilot study

Propofol and alfentanil are commonly used for sedation and pain control. A preliminary study to compare the usefulness of these drugs was carried out in ten healthy patients requiring bilateral wisdom tooth surgery. The operations were done in two appointments with the patient receiving a different drug on each occasion. Anxiety levels were recorded on visual analogue scales pre and post-operatively. Both agents caused a decrease in anxiety scores, with propofol causing a more significant reduction. Vomiting and nausea with alfentanil was noted in three patients. Propofol also had an amnesic effect which alfentanil did not have. In conclusion, propofol would appear to be the drug of choice within the limitations of this pilot study.

[Premedication and sedation complications during ophthalmic anesthesia]

Sedation allows patients to tolerate unpleasant procedures while maintaining adequate cardiorespiratory function and the ability to respond purposefully to verbal command. For ophthalmic surgery patient's anxiety and discomfort can be relieved during placement of a peribulbar block and during surgery by intravenous sedation. Intravenous sedation should only be administered by an anesthetist. Three different classes of drugs are used for intravenous sedation: analgesics (fentanyl and alfentanil), benzodiazepines (midazolam) and profofol, an intravenous anesthetic. Sedation may result in ventilatory, cardiovascular and neurologic complications. Excessive sedation can induce hypoventilation from central ventilatory depression or airway obstruction. Uncontrolled and unexpected movements of the head could result in major surgical complications. For the prevention of the complications related to sedation the same monitoring as for general anesthesia is essential.

A comparison of patient-controlled analgesia fentanyl and alfentanil for labour analgesia

PURPOSE

To determine the analgesic efficacy of equipotent doses of PCA (patient-controlled analgesia) fentanyl and PCA alfentanil for labour pain.

METHODS

Twenty three, ASA I - II parturients between 32-42 wk gestational age in whom epidural analgesia was contraindicated were randomized to receive PCA fentanyl (Group F)or alfentanil (Group A). Plain numbered vials contained 21 ml fentanyl 50 microg x ml(-1) or alfentanil 500 microg x ml(-1). A one millilitre loading dose was administered. The PCA solution was prepared by diluting 10 ml study drug with 40 ml saline and the PCA pump was programmed to deliver a dose of 2 ml, delay of five minutes and a basal rate of 2 ml x hr(-1). Maternal measurements obtained were hourly drug dose, total dose, Visual Analog Pain Score (VAPS) q 30 min, sedation score q 1 hr and side effects. Neonates were assessed by 1,5, and 10-min Apgar scores, umbilical venous and arterial blood gases and neurobehavioural scores at four and 24 hr.

RESULTS

Mean VAPS from 7 - 10 cm cervical dilatation were higher in Group A than in Group F (85.7+/-13.9 vs. 64.6+/-12.1; P<0.01) There were no inter-group differences in VAPS from 1-3 cm, or from 4-6 cm dilatation, in maternal sedation scores or side effects, or in neonatal outcomes.

CONCLUSION

In the doses prescribed in this study, PCA fentanyl was found to provide more effective analgesia in late first stage labour than PCA alfentanil.

Alfentanil for intubation under halothane anaesthesia in children

Intubating conditions under halothane anaesthesia aided with alfentanil 20 micrograms.kg-1 were compared with suxamethonium 2 mg.kg-1 in 40 children presenting for day dental procedures. The condition of vocal cords, jaw relaxation and presence of movement and coughing were scored to give the overall intubating conditions. Successful intubation was achieved in 100% of the suxamethonium group and 94.7% of the alfentanil group. The cardiovascular response to intubation was attenuated in the alfentanil group. Some 43.7% of those receiving suxamethonium developed myalgia the day after surgery compared with 0% in the alfentanil group (P < 0.01).

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.

Ketamine antagonises alfentanil-induced hypoventilation in healthy male volunteers

BACKGROUND

The effects of ketamine on respiration, alone, or in combination with opioids, have not been completely clarified. Both stimulant and depressant effects have been reported, as well as attenuation of opioid-induced hypoventilation at the expense of increased oxygen consumption. These conflicting results might partly be due to dose-dependent mechanisms. We have, therefore, determined the ventilatory effects of ketamine, in combination with alfentanil, using infusions to different pseudo steady-state concentrations.

METHODS

On two separate days, eight healthy male volunteers were given alfentanil as a continuous computer-controlled infusion, aiming at a plasma concentration of 50 ng x mL(-1). After reaching apparent steady-state for alfentanil, racemic ketamine or placebo was administered in a protocol randomised for the two days. On the ketamine days a computer-controlled infusion, aiming for escalating ketamine plasma concentrations of 50, 100 and 200 ng x mL(-1), was added to the alfentanil infusion. On the placebo days saline was added. Using a face-mask with an occlusion valve, respiratory parameters were measured during air-breathing and after 6 repetitive 30-s CO2 challenges.

RESULTS

The alfentanil infusion induced hypoventilation by decreasing respiratory rate, while tidal volume and respiratory drive were unaffected. This hypoventilation was antagonised by ketamine in a concentration-dependent manner mainly through an increase in respiratory rate. The CO2 response was not affected by alfentanil or ketamine.

CONCLUSION

In the dose range of interest for postoperative, intensive-care and pain-clinic settings, ketamine antagonises the resting hypoventilation induced by alfentanil.