Assessing the clinical or pharmaco-economical benefit of target controlled desflurane delivery in surgical patients using the Zeus anaesthesia machine.

The Zeus anaesthesia machine includes an auto-control mode which allows targeting of end-tidal volatile and inspired oxygen concentrations. We assessed the clinical benefits and economic impact of this target-controlled anaesthesia compared with conventional manually controlled anaesthesia. Eighty patients were randomly assigned to receive desflurane either with a fresh gas flow set by the anaesthetist or in auto-control mode. Drug delivery was adjusted to maintain bispectral index between 40-60 units and systolic arterial pressure under 15 mmHg above its pre-induction value (upper limit) and over 90 mmHg (lower limit). Blood pressure was maintained in the desired range for 89% and 91% of the maintenance period for auto-control and manual control respectively (p = 0.49). Bispectral index was in the desired range for 82% and 79% of the maintenance period, for auto-control and manual control respectively (p = 0.46). Oxygen consumption was more than halved by the use of auto-control mode, and mean (SD) desflurane consumption during surgery was 0.07 (0.04) vs 0.2 (0.07) ml.min(-1) in auto-control and manual control respectively (p < 0.0001). The number of drug delivery adjustments per hour was significantly lower in auto-control mode (mean (SD) 7 (2) vs 15 (12); p < 0.0001). Thus, the auto-control mode provided similar haemodynamic stability and bispectral control as did conventional manually controlled anaesthesia, but led to a reduction in gas and vapour consumption with a more clinically acceptable workload.

Evaluation of the predictive performance of four pharmacokinetic models for propofol.

BACKGROUND: This study has compared the predictive performance of four pharmacokinetic models, two of which are currently incorporated in commercial target-controlled infusion pumps for the administration of propofol. METHODS: Arterial propofol concentrations and patient characteristic data were available from nine patients who, in a published study, had received a standardized infusion of propofol. Predicted concentrations with 'Diprifusor' (Marsh), 'Schnider', 'Schuttler', and 'White' models were obtained by computer simulation. The predictive performance of each model was assessed overall and over the following phases: rapid infusion (1-5 min), early (1-21 min), maintenance (21-min end-infusion), and recovery (2-20 min post-infusion). RESULTS: The overall assessment, based on 29-36 samples from each patient, indicated that all four models were clinically acceptable. However, the negligible bias (-0.1%) with the 'Schnider' model was accompanied by overprediction in the rapid infusion phase and underprediction during recovery. This changing bias over time was not detected as 'divergence' when assessed on absolute performance error (APE), (1.4% h(-1)) but became significant (13.2% h(-1)) when based on changes in signed PE over time. The 'Schuttler' model performed well at most phases but overpredicted concentrations during recovery. The White model led to a marginal improvement over 'Diprifusor' and would be expected to reduce the positive bias usually seen with 'Diprifusor' systems. CONCLUSIONS: In assessing the predictive performance of pharmacokinetic models, additional information can be obtained by analysis of bias at different phases of an infusion. The evaluation of divergence should involve linear regression analysis of both absolute and signed PEs.

Remifentanil and other opioids.

Most opioids used in anaesthesia are of the anilidopiperidine family, including fentanyl, alfentanil, sufentanil and remifentanil. While all share similar pharmacological properties, remifentanil, the newest one, is probably the most original, which is the reason this review focusses especially on this drug. Remifentanil is a potent mu-agonist that retains all the pharmacodynamic characteristics of its class (regarding analgesia, respiratory depression, muscle rigidity, nausea and vomiting, pruritus, etc.) but with a unique pharmacokinetic profile that combines a short onset and the fastest offset, independent of the infusion duration. Consequently, it offers a unique titratability when its effects need to be quickly achieved or suppressed, but it requires specific drug delivery schemes such as continuous infusion, target-controlled infusion and anticipated postoperative pain treatment. Kinetic differences between opioids used in anaesthesia and some clinical uses of remifentanil are reviewed in this chapter.

Propofol sedation using Diprifusor target-controlled infusion in adult intensive care unit patients.

This multicentre, non-comparative study investigated the range of target blood propofol concentrations required to sedate 122 adult intensive care patients when propofol was administered using Diprifusor target-controlled infusion systems together with opioid analgesia. Depth of sedation was assessed with a modified Ramsay score and the target blood propofol setting was adjusted to achieve the sedation desired for each patient. A desired level of sedation was achieved for 84% of the sedation period. In postcardiac surgery patients the median time-weighted average propofol target setting was 1.34 microg.ml(-1) (10th - 90th percentiles: 0.79-1.93 microg.ml(-1)). Values in brain injured and general ICU patients were 0.98 (10th - 90th percentiles: 0.60-2.55) microg.ml(-1) and 0.42 (10th - 90th percentiles: 0.16-1.19) microg.ml(-1), respectively. Measured propofol concentrations were generally close to values predicted by the Diprifusor system. Target settings in the range of 0.2-2.0 microg.ml(-1) are proposed for propofol sedation in this setting with titration as required in individual patients.

Desflurane-remifentanil-nitrous oxide anaesthesia for abdominal surgery: optimal concentrations and recovery features.

BACKGROUND: Intraoperative combinations of volatile and opioid agents are used to achieve unconsciousness, hypnotic sparing, haemodynamic stability and uneventful recovery. This study describes the influence of different remifentanil concentrations on these variables when combined with desflurane during abdominal surgery. METHODS: Sixty-one healthy adult patients were randomly allocated to one of five predefined remifentanil target concentrations (3, 5, 7, 10 or 15 ng ml(-1)). Anaesthesia was titrated to maintain mean blood pressure (MBP), heart rate (HR) and BIS trade mark within predetermined values by adjusting desflurane delivery. Postoperative analgesia using propacetamol and morphine was initiated 30-45 min before skin closure, and continued using morphine PCA. RESULTS: Desflurane requirements adjusted to both BIS and haemodynamics were not significantly modified by the remifentanil concentration (median Fet(DES) 2.7% before incision, 2.5% intraoperatively, and 2.2% during closure), resulting in a calculated drug consumption of 0.22-0.25 ml min(-1) (with 1.5 l min(-1) fresh gas flow). High remifentanil concentration decreased MBP and HR, and reduced the duration of tachycardia, but increased the duration of hypotension. The optimal balance was obtained with a remifentanil concentration of 5-7 ng ml(-1) for intubation, 3 ng ml(-1) until incision, 10 ng ml(-1) during intra-abdominal surgery and 5-7 ng ml(-1) during closure. Post-operative morphine requirements were not significantly modified by intraoperative remifentanil concentrations (median 30 mg/24 h, range [2-88]). CONCLUSION: Remifentanil target concentrations from 3 to 15 ng ml(-1) had little influence on desflurane requirements or postoperative morphine consumption, but markedly modified intraoperative haemodynamic stability, suggesting that the target concentration should closely follow the successive noxious stimulations.

Remifentanil sedation compared with propofol during regional anaesthesia.

BACKGROUND: The short onset and offset of remifentanil may allow for accurate dosing of sedative effect with few side-effects and rapid recovery. In this study remifentanil is compared with propofol for sedation during successful regional anaesthetic blocks. METHODS: After informed consent was given, 125 patients undergoing surgery under spinal or brachial plexus anaesthesia were randomized to receive, either propofol: bolus 500 microg/kg plus initial infusion 50 microgkg/min or remifentanil: bolus 0.5 microg/kg plus initial infusion 0.1 microgkg/min. Study drug infusion rate was titrated throughout the procedure according to level of sedation and side-effects. Pain, discomfort, sedation level and side-effects were recorded at regular intervals until discharge from the post operative care unit (PACU). RESULTS: Two patients in the remifentanil group versus ten in the propofol group were treated for discomfort or pain during surgery (P<0.02). Due to a significantly higher rate of respiratory depression (46% vs. 19% with propofol, P<0.01) the mean remifentanil infusion rate was decreased to 0.078 +/- 0.028 microgkg/min, whereas it was kept stable with propofol. Propofol patients had significantly higher (P<0.05) sedation levels and experienced more frequent amnesia of the procedure. Eleven propofol patients experienced pain at injection site, versus two remifentanil patients (P<0.02). Nausea and vomiting were more frequent in the remifentanil patients during infusion (27% vs. 2% in the propofol group, P<0.001) but similar postoperatively. Time to discharge from PACU was similar in the two groups. CONCLUSION: Propofol results in less respiratory depression and nausea when sedation is needed during a case with a successful regional block. Remifentanil may be considered as an alternative if pain during the procedure is a major concern or if amnesia is contraindicated.

[Target controlled infusion (TCI) anesthesia using propofol. Assessment of training and practice in the operating room]. / Anesthésie intraveineuse à objectif de concentration (Aivoc) avec le propofol. Evaluation des formations et pratiques au bloc opératoire.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate overall awareness of TCI and the need for training in the TCI technique. To assess, among trained anaesthetists, the value of the session and the impact of TCI technique on their working practice. STUDY DESIGN: Two prospective domestic surveys during the first quarter of 1999. METHODS: Three hundred anaesthetists representative of French anaesthetists as a whole, and 336 anaesthetists who had taken part in a training course. RESULTS: The notoriety of TCI was high and greater in the public sector compared with the private sector. Almost 3/4 of anaesthetists believed that training was necessary but only four anaesthetists out of ten TCI users said they had taken part in training sessions. After the training session nine anaesthetists out of ten became TCI users and would have recommended the training course despite the low number and variety of anaesthetic procedures observed during the practical part of training. The main difficulties reported during initial use were the choice of target concentrations and the management of drug interactions. Familiarisation to the technique was rapid (less than 20 procedures). Despite the lack of long experience (< 6 months for more than 2/3 of them), TCI appeared to be more likely used for anaesthesia of average duration. CONCLUSIONS: TCI was perceived to be an innovative concept with a requirement of a specific training. This preliminary appraisal of training sessions was generally satisfactory but underline a need for future training sessions focused on practical aspects.

[Accessory anesthetic breathing systems: verification before use]. / Circuits anesthésiques accessoires: vérification avant utilisation.

Accessory or ancillary anaesthesia breathing systems can be defined as all those connected to the fresh gas outlet of the anaesthetic apparatus and used instead of the circle system associated with the ventilator, which is the main circuit. They include: the Mapleson systems, the systems with a nonrebreathing valve and the disposable systems with a carbon dioxide absorber. They can be a cause of major accidents when not checked before and monitored during use. This technical note describes techniques of preanaesthetic checking and monitoring during anaesthesia.

[Pros or cons of accessory anesthetic circuits. I. Arguments for their use]. / Pour ou contre les circuits anesthésiques accessoires. I. Arguments pour leur utilisation.

In addition to the circle breathing system, which represents the main circuit of the anaesthetic machine, the use of an accessory breathing system (ABS), either a partial rebreathing system according to Mapleson's classification, or a system including a non-rebreathing valve, is appropriate for the anaesthetic management of many patients, depending on their physical status, age, indication and duration of surgery. The same safety rules, namely full checking procedure before use of the system and monitoring of inhaled gases and end-tidal CO2 must be applied as for the main circle system. Potential complications resulting from non compliance with these rules cannot be considered valuable reasons for denying the use of breathing systems that have safely been used for decades in millions of patients.

Influence of analgesic supplementation on the target propofol concentrations for anaesthesia with 'Diprifusor' TCI.

Forty healthy patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery were randomly allocated to receive an initial blood propofol target concentration of either 4 micrograms.ml-1 or 6 micrograms.ml-1 for induction of anaesthesia with a 'Diprifusor' target controlled infusion system for propofol, and analgesic supplementation with either nitrous oxide 67% in oxygen or alfentanil 15-20 micrograms.kg-1.h-1. Anaesthesia was induced within 3 min in 80% and 95% of patients with propofol target concentrations of 4 micrograms.ml-1 and 6 micrograms.ml-1, respectively. The frequency of discomfort on infusion was similar for both target concentrations. During maintenance, supplementary doses of alfentanil were required to provide adequate surgical conditions in approximately half of the patients receiving nitrous oxide. There was no statistically significant difference between the target concentration [mean (SD)] of propofol for total intravenous anaesthesia [5.1 (2.0) micrograms.ml-1] compared with a technique using nitrous oxide [4.6 (1.2) micrograms.ml-1] supplemented as needed with small doses of alfentanil.