Gender differences in the pharmacokinetics of propofol in elderly patients during and after continuous infusion.

Differences in the pharmacokinetics of propofol between male and female patients during and after continuous infusion have not been described in detail in patients aged 65 yr and older. To increase our insight into the pharmacokinetics of propofol in this patient population and to obtain pharmacokinetic parameters applicable in target controlled infusion (TCI), the pharmacokinetics of propofol during and after continuous infusion were studied in 31 ASA class 1 and 2 patients, aged 65-91 yr, scheduled for general surgery. Patients received propofol 1.5 mg kg(-1) i.v. in 1 min followed by 7 mg kg(-1) h(-1) until skin closure in the presence of a variable rate infusion of alfentanil during oxygen-air ventilation. On the basis of arterial blood samples that were taken up to 24 h post-infusion, the pharmacokinetics of propofol were evaluated in a two-stage manner. Multiple linear regression analysis was used to explore the effect of age, weight, gender and lean body mass as covariates. Gender significantly affected the pharmacokinetics of propofol. V3, Cl1 and Cl2 were significantly different between male and female patients, weight only affected Cl1. The pharmacokinetic parameters were: V1=4.88 litre, V2=24.50 litre, V3 (litre)=115+147 x gender (gender: male=1, female=2), Cl1 (litre min(-1))=-0.29+0.022 x weight+0.22 x gender, Cl2 (litre min(-1))=2.84-0.65 x gender (male=1, female=2), and Cl3=0.788 litre min(-1).

Target-controlled infusion of alfentanil for postoperative analgesia: contribution of plasma protein binding to intra-patient and inter-patient variability.

We have examined the influence of plasma protein binding on inter-individual and intra-individual variability in the effective postoperative analgesic concentration (EAC) of alfentanil and on the performance of the target-controlled infusion system used. Ten patients received standardized anaesthesia and target-controlled alfentanil for postoperative analgesia. Analgesia was assessed using a visual analogue scale (VAS). Plasma protein binding of alfentanil was assessed at four different times (on arrival in the recovery room, at 21:00 on the day of surgery and at 09:00 and 21:00 on the first postoperative day). Bias and inaccuracy were examined on the day of surgery and on the first postoperative day. Unbound fractions of alfentanil varied from 5 to 15% and varied in time. In general, the unbound fractions on the day of surgery were higher than those on the first postoperative day. Thirty-nine percent of inter-individual variability in the EAC of alfentanil (range 33-140 ng ml-1) at the onset of therapy could be explained by protein binding. At the other observation times, correlations between unbound fraction and EAC were only moderate. Bias on the day of surgery was -19% and 12% on the first postoperative day (ns). Inaccuracy was 23% and 18%, respectively (ns). We conclude that inter-individual variations in plasma protein binding can explain a significant portion of inter-individual variability in the EAC of alfentanil in the early postoperative phase.

Effect-site modelling of propofol using auditory evoked potentials.

Auditory evoked potentials (AEP) were used to monitor central nervous system effects during induction and recovery from anaesthesia produced by infusion of propofol 30 mg kg-1 h-1 in 22 healthy male patients. Non-parametric and parametric modelling techniques were used successfully to calculate the parameter keo which linked pharmacokinetic with pharmacodynamic aspects of drug action in only 15 of the study patients. In the non-parametric analysis, keo was found to have a mean value of 0.2 (range 0.1-0.36) min-1. Estimation of keo allowed calculation of the effect-site concentration (Ce50) associated with 50% of AEP effect for the population (2.08 micrograms ml-1; 95% confidence limits 1.7-2.45). There were no significant differences between keo values calculated by non-parametric and individual parametric modelling techniques. During recovery, 50% of patients demonstrated evidence of waking at an effect-site concentration of 2.28 micrograms ml-1.

Pharmacokinetics of prilocaine after intravenous administration in volunteers: enantioselectivity.

BACKGROUND: Prilocaine exists in two stereoisomeric configurations, the enantiomers S(+)- and R(-)-prilocaine. The drug is clinically used as the racemate. This study examined the pharmacokinetics of the enantiomers after intravenous administration of the racemate. METHODS: Ten healthy male volunteers received 200 mg racemic prilocaine as a 10-min intravenous infusion. Blood samples were collected for 8 h after the start of the infusion. Plasma concentrations were measured by stereoselective high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). Unbound fractions of the enantiomers in blank blood samples, spiked with racemic prilocaine, were determined using equilibrium dialysis. RESULTS: The unbound fraction of R(-)-prilocaine (mean +/- SD, 70%+/-8%) was smaller (P < 0.05) than that of S(+)-prilocaine (73%+/-5%). The total plasma clearance of R(-)-prilocaine (2.57+/-0.46 l/min) was larger (P < 0.0001) than that of S(+)-prilocaine (1.91+/-0.30 l/min). The steady-state volume of distribution of R(-)-prilocaine (279+/-94 l) did not differ from that of S(+)-prilocaine (291+/-93 l). The terminal half-life of R(-)-prilocaine (87+/-27 min) was shorter (P < 0.05) than that of S(+)-prilocaine (124+/-64 min), as was the mean residence time of R(-)-prilocaine (108+/-30 min) compared with S(+)-prilocaine (155+/-59 min; P < 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: The pharmacokinetics of prilocaine are enantioselective. The difference in clearance is most likely a result of a difference in intrinsic metabolic clearance. The difference in the pharmacokinetics of the enantiomers of prilocaine does not seem to be clinically relevant.

Recirculatory and compartmental pharmacokinetic modeling of alfentanil in pigs: the influence of cardiac output.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac output (CO) is likely to influence the pharmacokinetics of anesthetic drugs and should be accounted for in pharmacokinetic models. The influence of CO on the pharmacokinetic parameters of alfentanil in pigs was evaluated using compartmental and recirculatory models. METHODS: Twenty-four premedicated pigs were evaluated during halothane (0.6-2%) anesthesia. They were assigned randomly to one of three groups. One group served as control. In the other groups, the baseline CO was decreased or increased by 40% by pharmacologic intervention (propranolol or dobutamine). Boluses of alfentanil (2 mg) and indocyanine green (25 mg) were injected into the right atrium. Blood samples were taken for 150 min from the right atrium and aortic root. Arterial concentration-time curves of indocyanine green and alfentanil were analyzed using compartmental models (two-stage and mixed-effects approach) and a recirculatory model, which can describe lung uptake and early distribution. RESULTS: The CO of individual pigs varied from 1.33 to 6.44 l/min. Three-compartmental modeling showed that CO is a determinant of the central compartment volume (V1, r2 = 0.54), fast peripheral compartment volume (V2, r2 = 0.29), steady state distribution volume (Vss, r2 = 0.29), fast distribution clearance (Cl12, r2 = 0.39), and elimination clearance (Cl10, r2 = 0.51). Recirculatory modeling showed that CO is a determinant of total distribution volume (r2 = 0.48), elimination clearance (r2 = 0.54), and some distribution clearances. The pulmonary distribution volume was independent of CO. CONCLUSIONS: Cardiac output markedly influences the pharmacokinetics of alfentanil in pigs. Therefore, accounting for CO enhances the predictive value of pharmacokinetic models of alfentanil.

Alfentanil as an adjuvant to epidural bupivacaine in the management of postoperative pain after laparotomies: lack of evidence of spinal action.

UNLABELLED: In this double-blind study, we compared the efficacy of epidural versus i.v. administration of alfentanil in combination with small-dose bupivacaine for postoperative pain relief. Thirty-two patients were randomly allocated to one of two study groups. Patients from both groups received an epidural loading dose of 60 mg of bupivacaine (12 mL of 0.5%). Subsequently, patients in the epidural (EPI) group received an infusion (8 mL/h) of 0.125% bupivacaine (10 mg/h) plus alfentanil (0.36 mg/h) and an i.v. infusion (8 mL/h) of NaCl 0.9%. Patients in the i.v. group received an epidural infusion (8 mL/h) of 0.125% bupivacaine (10 mg/h) and an i.v. infusion (8 mL/h) of alfentanil (0.36 mg/h). Infusions were maintained for 24 h. These dose regimens were such that equivalent subanalgesic plasma concentrations of alfentanil were obtained. Patient-controlled analgesia with morphine was available to both groups. Time to onset of postoperative pain and morphine consumption were used as variables to compare the two regimens. Measured plasma concentrations of alfentanil during the postoperative observation period were similar (< 20 ng/mL) in both groups. Median times to onset of postoperative pain (EPI 600 min, i.v. 360 min) and total morphine consumption (EPI 11 mg, i.v. 10 mg) did not differ between the groups (P > 0.2). We conclude that, in combination with epidural bupivacaine 0.125%, an i.v. infusion of alfentanil is equally effective as an epidural infusion of alfentanil if the plasma concentrations are the same. The study did not demonstrate a spinal mechanism of action for alfentanil. IMPLICATIONS: This randomized, double-blind study showed that, when combined with small-dose bupivacaine (0.125%), epidurally administered alfentanil is not more effective than i.v. administered alfentanil for postoperative pain management when the regimens are such that equivalent subanalgesic plasma alfentanil concentrations are obtained. A spinal mechanism of action for alfentanil could therefore not be demonstrated.

Target-controlled infusion of alfentanil for postoperative analgesia: a feasibility study and pharmacodynamic evaluation in the early postoperative period.

We have examined the feasibility of target-controlled infusion of alfentanil (TCIA) and the pharmacodynamics of alfentanil in the early postoperative period. Patients were allocated randomly to one of the three groups to receive balanced anaesthesia with bolus injections of fentanyl (group F), sufentanil (group S) or alfentanil (group A). In the recovery room all patients received the same analgesic regimen, comprising TCIA. To evaluate the efficacy of postoperative analgesia, pain scores were measured on a visual analogue scale (VAS) and patients indicated a need for additional analgesia. EC50, the concentration at which, with a 50% probability, patients reported adequate analgesia, was estimated using logistic regression. Six patients did not complain of pain. The time from the last intraoperative bolus injection of opioid until patients complained of postoperative pain was shorter (P < 0.05) in group A (mean 68 min) than in group F (101 min) and group S (136 min). The time to onset of satisfactory analgesia was comparable in the three groups (median 18 min in group F, 15 min in group S and 14 min in group A). EC50 of alfentanil was determined in 28 patients; mean values were 26 ng ml-1 (group F), 39 ng ml-1 (group S) and 52 ng ml-1 (group A). We conclude that TCIA, under the conditions studied, resulted in a fast onset of adequate analgesia, irrespective of the opioid administered during operation. Also, there was no effect of opioids administered during operation on postoperative pharmacodynamics of alfentanil.

Pharmacokinetics of the enantiomers of mepivacaine after intravenous administration of the racemate in volunteers.

The pharmacokinetics of R(-)-mepivacaine and S(+)-mepivacaine were investigated in 10 healthy volunteers. The volunteers received racemic mepivacaine, hydrochloride (dose 60 mg) via a 10-min intravenous infusion. Blood samples were collected at gradually increasing intervals until 8 h after the start of the infusion. Plasma concentrations of the enantiomers were determined with a stereoselective high-performance liquid chromatographic (HPLC) method. Unbound fractions of the enantiomers were determined using equilibrium dialysis. The unbound fraction of R(-)-mepivacaine (mean +/- SD: 35.6% +/- 4.5%) was larger (P < 0.0001) than that of S(+)-mepivacaine (25.1% +/- 4.6%). The total plasma clearance and steady-state volume of distribution of R(-)-mepivacaine, based on total plasma concentrations (total plasma clearance [CL] = 0.79 +/- 0.12 L/min; volume of distribution at steady state [VSS] = 103 +/- 14 L) as well as on unbound plasma concentrations (plasma clearance of unbound drug [CLu] = 2.24 +/- 0.30 L/min; volume of distribution of unbound drug at steady state [Vuss] = 290 +/- 32 L), were larger (P < 0.0001) than those of S(+)-mepivacaine (CL = 0.35 +/- 0.06 L/min; Vss = 57 +/- 7 L; CLu = 1.43 +/- 0.24 L/ min; Vuss = 232 +/- 30 L). The terminal half-life (t1/2,Z) and mean residence time (MRT) of R(-)-mepivacaine (t1/2,Z = 113 +/- 17 min; MRT = 131 +/- 15 min) were shorter than those of S(+)-mepivacaine (t1/2,Z = 123 +/- 20 min, P < 0.02; MRT = 165 +/- 24 min, P < 0.0001). This study demonstrated a marked difference in the pharmacokinetics of the enantiomers of mepivacaine. The stereoselectivity can be partially explained by a difference in the plasma protein binding of the enantiomers.

Epidural vs. intravenous infusion of alfentanil in the management of postoperative pain following laparotomies.

BACKGROUND: This study was designed to compare the efficacy of epidural vs. intravenous administration of alfentanil for treatment of postoperative pain. METHODS: Twenty patients were randomly allocated to one of the two study groups to receive either an epidural bolus dose (0.75 mg) followed by an epidural infusion (0.36 mg/h) (EPI group) or an intravenous infusion (0.36 mg/h) of alfentanil (IV group) for 24 h. These dose regimens were chosen such that equivalent and subanalgesic plasma concentrations of alfentanil were obtained. PCA-morphine was available to both groups. Morphine consumption, pain scores measured on a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and the number of demands were used as variables to evaluate the efficacy of the postoperative analgesic therapy. In addition, plasma concentrations of alfentanil were measured. RESULTS: The mean plasma concentrations of alfentanil were similar and < 20 ng/ml in both groups. Total morphine consumption (EPI: 40 mg, i.v.: 43 mg), pain scores (time when the VAS-score > 3.0: EPI: median 215 min; i.v.: median 215 min) and number of valid demands (EPI: median 25; i.v.: median 34) did not differ between the groups. CONCLUSION: Compared to intravenous infusion of alfentanil epidural infusion resulting in the same plasma concentrations is not more effective in relieving postoperative pain. In view of this observation we were not able to demonstrate a spinal mechanism of alfentanil.

High-performance liquid chromatographic assay of mepivacaine enantiomers in human plasma in the nanogram per milliliter range.

A method enabling quantification of R-(-)- and S-(+)-mepivacaine in human plasma in the low nanogram per milliliter range is described. The procedure involves extraction from plasma with diethyl ether, centrifugation, back-extraction into an acidified aqueous solution, washing with a mixture of pentane and isoamylalcohol, alkalinisation, followed by extraction with a mixture of n-pentane and isoamylalcohol. After evaporation of the organic phase, the residue is redissolved in the mobile phase used for the HPLC analysis, which consists of a 6.8:93.2 (v/v) isopropanol-sodium hydrogenphosphate buffer solution with the pH adjusted to 6.8 using phosphoric acid. The HPLC method has been described previously. Separation of the enantiomers is achieved with an alpha 1-AGP column and the UV detection wavelength is 210 nm. The minimal detectable concentration is ca. 3 ng/ml and the lower limit of quantification is 5 ng/ml for each enantiomer. For both enantiomers r is > 0.9995 over the plasma enantiomeric concentration range of 10.5-1053 ng/ml.