Administration and monitoring of intravenous anesthetics

Current Opinion in Anaesthesiology

Volumn 23, Issue 6, 2010, Pages 734-740

  Sahinovic, Marko M ^a   Absalom, Anthony R ^a   Struys, Michel M R F ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER GRONINGEN   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

analgesia monitoring; closed loop; depth of anesthesia monitoring; intravenous hypnotics and opioids; target controlled infusion

Indexed keywords

DEXMEDETOMIDINE; INTRAVENOUS ANESTHETIC AGENT; MIDAZOLAM; OPIATE; PROPOFOL; REMIFENTANIL; SEVOFLURANE;

APNEA; DOSE RESPONSE; DRUG DELIVERY SYSTEM; DRUG DISTRIBUTION; DRUG DOSE TITRATION; DRUG EXCRETION; DRUG METABOLISM; DRUG POTENTIATION; HUMAN; INTRAVENOUS ANESTHESIA; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RESPIRATION DEPRESSION; REVIEW;

ANALGESIA; ANESTHESIA; ANESTHESIOLOGY; ANESTHETICS; DRUG INTERACTIONS; HUMANS; INFUSIONS, INTRAVENOUS; MONITORING, INTRAOPERATIVE;

EID: 78649469529     PISSN: 09527907     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/ACO.0b013e3283404579     Document Type: Review

References (66)

1. Struys MM, De Smet T, Mortier EP. Simulated drug administration: An emerging tool for teaching clinical pharmacology during anesthesiology training. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2008; 84:170-174.
2. Leslie K, Clavisi O, Hargrove J. Target-controlled infusion versus manuallycontrolled infusion of propofol for general anaesthesia or sedation in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2008:CD006059.
3. Chen G, Buell O, Gruenewald M, et al. A comparison between targetcontrolled and manually controlled propofol infusions in patients undergoing routine surgical procedures. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2009; 26:928-935.
4. Moerman AT, Herregods LL, De Vos MM, et al. Manual versus targetcontrolled infusion remifentanil administration in spontaneously breathing patients. Anesth Analg 2009; 108:828-834. This is one of the first publications comparing manually versus target-controlled infusion of remifentanil in spontaneously breathing patients. Remifentanil administered via TCI resulted in a decrease in propofol dosing and in a lower incidence in apnea and respiratory depression, compared to manually controlled administration of remifentanil.
5. Lallo A, Billard V, Bourgain JL. A comparison of propofol and remifentanil target-controlled infusions to facilitate fiberoptic nasotracheal intubation. Anesth Analg 2009; 108:852-857. This article describes that both propofol and remifentanil TCI is accurate to achieve fast and good intubating conditions and patient comfort during fiberoptic nasotracheal intubation. Remifentanil allows for more patient cooperation, making it safer when spontaneous ventilation is paramount.
6. Struys MM, De Smet T, Depoorter B, et al. Comparison of plasma compartment versus two methods for effect compartment-controlled target-controlled infusion for propofol. Anesthesiology 2000; 92:399-406.
7. Bejjani G, Lequeux PY, Schmartz D, et al. No evidence of memory processing during propofol-remifentanil target-controlled infusion anesthesia with bispectral index monitoring in cardiac surgery. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 2009; 23:175-181.
8. Raeder J. Opioid or propofol: What kind of drug for what kind of sedation? Manual dosing or target-controlled infusion? Anesth Analg 2009; 108:704-706.
9. Absalom AR, Mani V, De Smet T, Struys MM. Pharmacokinetic models for propofol: Defining and illuminating the devil in the detail. Br J Anaesth 2009; 103:26-37. This is an interesting review article describing how different pharmacokinetic- dynamic models for propofol can lead to different infusion characteristics, certainly in changing populations.
10. Masui K, Upton RN, Doufas AG, et al. The performance of compartmental and physiologically based recirculatory pharmacokinetic models for propofol: A comparison using bolus, continuous, and target-controlled infusion data. Anesth Analg 2009. [Epub ahead of print] This article compared the performance of various compartmental and one physiologicallybasedrecirculatorypharmacokineticmodel duringvariousinfusion regimens. It seems that the Schnider model, although still not perfect, is the recommended model to be used for TCI and advisory displays. Although more detailed, the physiologically based recirculatory pharmacokinetic model did not outperform.
11. Masui K, Kira M, Kazama T, et al. Early phase pharmacokinetics but not pharmacodynamics are influenced by propofol infusion rate. Anesthesiology 2009; 111:805-817. This study found that a combined pharmacokinetic-dynamic model consisting of a two-compartmental model with a LAG time and presystemic compartments and a sigmoidal maximum possible drug effect model accurately described the early phase pharmacology of propofol during infusion rate between 10 and 160mgkg-1 h-1. The infusion rate has an influence on kinetics, but not dynamics. Age was a covariate for LAG time.
12. Glen JB, Servin F. Evaluation of the predictive performance of four pharmacokinetic models for propofol. Br J Anaesth 2009; 102:626-632. The authors found that 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 prediction errors.
13. Anderson BJ, Hodkinson B. Are there still limitations for the use of targetcontrolled infusion in children? Curr Opin Anesthesiol 2010; 23:356-362.
14. Constant I, Rigouzzo A. Which model for propofol TCI in children. Paediatr Anaesth 2010; 20:233-239. This study compared previously published pharmacokinetic models for propofol and found that the Schnider model preformed well over the age of 5 years. However, the authors conclude that whatever is the model, a pharmacodynamic feedback such as the bispectral index may be useful to counteract the interindividual variability in the pediatric population.
15. Murphy RS, Wilcox SJ. High risk infusions: Accuracy compromised by changes in patient venous pressure. J Med Eng Technol 2009; 33:470-474.
16. Mietisch W, Fuchs P, Kamysek S, et al. Assessment of propofol concentration in human breath and blood by means of HS-SPME-GC-MS. Clin Chim Acta 2008; 395:32-37.
17. Takita A, Masui K, Kazama T. On-line monitoring of end-tidal propofol concentration in anesthetized patients. Anesthesiology 2007; 106:659-664.
18. Perl T, Carstens E, Hirn A, et al. Determination of serum propofol concentrations by breath analysis using ion mobility spectrometry. Br J Anaesth 2009; 103:822-827.
19. Grossherr M, Hengstenberg A, Meier T, et al. Propofol concentration in exhaled air and arterial plasma in mechanically ventilated patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Br J Anaesth 2009; 102:608-613.
20. Grossherr M, Hengstenberg A, Dibbelt L, et al. Blood gas partition coefficient and pulmonary extraction ratio for propofol in goats and pigs. Xenobiotica 2009; 39:782-787.
21. Myles PS, Leslie K, McNeil J, et al. Bispectral index monitoring to prevent awareness during anaesthesia: The B-Aware randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2004; 363:1757-1763.
22. Leslie K, Myles PS, Forbes A, Chan MT. The effect of bispectral index monitoring on long-term survival in the B-aware trial. Anesth Analg 2010; 110:816-822. The authors found that monitoring with BIS and absence of BIS values less than 40 for more than 5 min were associated with improved survival and reduced morbidity in patients enrolled in the B-Aware trial.
23. Nishiyama T. Cerebral state index vs. bispectral index during sevofluranenitrous oxide anaesthesia. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2009; 26:638-642.
24. Nishiyama T. Auditory evoked potentials index versus bispectral index during propofol sedation in spinal anesthesia. J Anesth 2009; 23:26-30.
25. Balci C, Karabekir HS, Kahraman F, Sivaci RG. Comparison of entropy and bispectral index during propofol and fentanyl sedation in monitored anaesthesia care. J Int Med Res 2009; 37:1336-1342.
26. Hocker J, Raitschew B, Meybohm P, et al. Differences between bispectral index and spectral entropy during xenon anaesthesia: A comparison with propofol anaesthesia. Anaesthesia 2010; 65:595-600.
27. Meybohm P, Gruenewald M, Hocker J, et al. Correlation and agreement between the bispectral index vs. state entropy during hypothermic cardiopulmonary bypass. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2010; 54:169-175.
28. Haenggi M, Ypparila-Wolters H, Buerki S, et al. Auditory event-related potentials, bispectral index, and entropy for the discrimination of different levels of sedation in intensive care unit patients. Anesth Analg 2009; 109:807-816.
29. Haenggi M, Ypparila-Wolters H, Hauser K, et al. Intra- and inter-individual variation of BIS-index and Entropy during controlled sedation with midazolam/ remifentanil and dexmedetomidine/remifentanil in healthy volunteers: An interventional study. Crit Care 2009; 13:R20.
30. Prabhakar H, Ali Z, Bithal PK, et al. EEG entropy values during isoflurane, sevoflurane and halothane anesthesia with and without nitrous oxide. J Neurosurg Anesthesiol 2009; 21:108-111.
31. Ferenets R, Vanluchene A, Lipping T, et al. Behavior of entropy/complexity measures of the electroencephalogram during propofol-induced sedation: Dose-dependent effects of remifentanil. Anesthesiology 2007; 106:696-706.
32. Lysakowski C, Elia N, Czarnetzki C, et al. Bispectral and spectral entropy indices at propofol-induced loss of consciousness in young and elderly patients. Br J Anaesth 2009; 103:387-393. This article described the influence of age on bispectral index and spectral entropies at loss of consciousness during propofol induction.
33. Kaki AM, Almarakbi WA. Does patient position influence the reading of the bispectral index monitor? Anesth Analg 2009; 109:1843-1846.
34. Storm H, Myre K, Rostrup M, et al. Skin conductance correlates with perioperative stress. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2002; 46:887-895.
35. Hanss R, Bein B, Francksen H, et al. Heart rate variability-guided prophylactic treatment of severe hypotension after subarachnoid block for elective cesarean delivery. Anesthesiology 2006; 104:635-643.
36. Seitsonen ER, Korhonen IK, van Gils MJ, et al. EEG spectral entropy, heart rate, photoplethysmography and motor responses to skin incision during sevoflurane anaesthesia. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2005; 49:284-292.
37. Luginbuhl M, Ypparila-Wolters H, Rufenacht M, et al. Heart rate variability does not discriminate between different levels of haemodynamic responsiveness during surgical anaesthesia. Br J Anaesth 2007; 98:728-736.
38. Luginbuhl M, Rufenacht M, Korhonen I, et al. Stimulation induced variability of pulse plethysmography does not discriminate responsiveness to intubation. Br J Anaesth 2006; 96:323-329.
39. Struys MM, Vanpeteghem C, Huiku M, et al. Changes in a surgical stress index in response to standardized pain stimuli during propofol remifentanil infusion. Br J Anaesth 2007; 99:359-367.
40. Gruenewald M, Meybohm P, Ilies C, et al. Influence of different remifentanil concentrations on the performance of the surgical stress index to detect a standardized painful stimulus during sevoflurane anaesthesia. Br J Anaesth 2009; 103:586-593. The authors found that the SSI response to tetanic stimulation was dependent on the remifentanil concentration.
41. Chen X, Thee C, Gruenewald M, et al. Comparison of surgical stress indexguided analgesia with standard clinical practice during routine general anesthesia: A pilot study. Anesthesiology 2010; 112:1175-1183.
42. Baars JH, Mager R, Dankert K, et al. Effects of sevoflurane and propofol on the nociceptive withdrawal reflex and on the H reflex. Anesthesiology 2009; 111:72-81. The authors found that probably because of the polysynaptic relay, the attenuation of the withdrawal reflex exceeds the attenuation of the H reflex. Sevoflurane produces a larger inhibitory effect on the H reflex than propofol, which confirms that the ventral horn is a more important target for volatile anesthetics, whereas effects of propofol on this site of action are rather limited. Their findings indirectly suggest for propofol a relatively stronger effect within the dorsal horn.
43. Von Dincklage F, Hackbarth M, Mager R, et al. Monitoring of the responsiveness to noxious stimuli during anaesthesia with propofol and remifentanil by using RIII reflex threshold and bispectral index. Br J Anaesth 2010; 104:201-208.
44. Von Dincklage F, Send K, Hackbarth M, et al. Comparison of the nociceptive flexion reflex threshold and the bispectral index as monitors of movement responses to noxious stimuli under propofol mono-anaesthesia. Br J Anaesth 2009; 102:244-250.
45. Struys MM, Vereecke H, Moerman A, et al. Ability of the bispectral index, autoregressive modelling with exogenous input-derived auditory evoked potentials, and predicted propofol concentrations to measure patient responsiveness during anesthesia with propofol and remifentanil. Anesthesiology 2003; 99:802-812.
46. Luginbühl M, Schumacher PM, Vuilleumier P, et al. Noxious stimulation response index: A novel anesthetic state index based on hypnotic-opioid interaction. Anesthesiology 2010; 112:872-880. This is the first report on the Noxious Stimulation Response Index. The authors conclude that the NSRI conveys information that better predicts the analgesic component of anesthesia than AAI, BIS, or predicted propofol or remifentanil concentrations. Prospective validation studies in the clinical setting are needed.
47. Vuyk J, Lichtenbelt BJ,Olofsen E, et al. Mixed-effects modeling of the influence of midazolam on propofol pharmacokinetics. Anesth Analg 2009; 108:1522- 1530. The authors identified the influence of midazolam on the pharmacokinetics of propofol and found that midazolam reduces the metabolic and rapid and slow distribution clearances of propofol. In addition, a reduction in mean arterial blood pressure was associated with propofol pharmacokinetic alterations that increase the blood propofol concentration.
48. Short TG, Ho TY, Minto CF, et al. Efficient trial design for eliciting a pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic model-based response surface describing the interaction between two intravenous anesthetic drugs. Anesthesiology 2002; 96:400-408.
49. Vuyk J. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interactions between opioids and propofol. J Clin Anesth 1997; 9:23S-26S.
50. Bouillon TW, Bruhn J, Radulescu L, et al. Pharmacodynamic interaction between propofol and remifentanil regarding hypnosis, tolerance of laryngoscopy, bispectral index, and electroencephalographic approximate entropy. Anesthesiology 2004; 100:1353-1372.
51. Bouillon T, Bruhn J, Radu-Radulescu L, et al. Mixed-effects modeling of the intrinsic ventilatory depressant potency of propofol in the nonsteady state. Anesthesiology 2004; 100:240-250.
52. Bouillon T, Bruhn J, Radu-Radulescu L, et al. A model of the ventilatory depressant potency of remifentanil in the nonsteady state. Anesthesiology 2003; 99:779-787.
53. Sandeep CM, Gupta DK, Johnson KB, et al. Opioid-volatile anesthetic synergy: A response surface model with remifentanil and sevoflurane as prototype. Anesthesiology 2006; 105:267-278.
54. Schumacher PM, Dossche J, Mortier EP, et al. Response surface modeling of the interaction between propofol and sevoflurane. Anesthesiology 2009; 111:790-804. The authors found that for both electroencephalographic suppression and tolerance to stimulation, the interaction of propofol and sevoflurane was identified as additive. The response surface data can be used for more rational dose finding in case of sequential and co-administration of propofol and sevoflurane.
55. Hammer GB, Sam WJ, Chen MI, et al. Determination of the pharmacodynamic interaction of propofol and dexmedetomidine during esophagogastroduodenoscopy in children. Paediatr Anaesth 2009; 19:138-144.
56. Drews FA, Syroid N, Agutter J, et al. Drug delivery as control task: Improving performance in a common anesthetic task. Human factors 2006; 48:85-94.
57. Syroid ND, Agutter J, Drews FA, et al. Development and evaluation of a graphical anesthesia drug display. Anesthesiology 2002; 96:565-575.
58. Schumacher PM, Bouillon TW, Leibundgut D, et al. Anesthesia advisory display (AAD): Real time guidance through the pharmacokinetic and interaction pharmacodynamic relationship during simultaneous administration of multiple drugs. Anesthesiology 2004; 101:A504.
59. Albert RW, Agutter JA, Syroid ND, et al. A simulation-based evaluation of a graphic cardiovascular display. Anesth Analg 2007; 105:1303-1311.
60. Puri GD, Kumar B, Aveek J. Closed-loop anaesthesia delivery system (CLADS) using bispectral index: A performance assessment study. Anaesth Intensive Care 2007; 35:357-362.
61. Agarwal J, Puri GD, Mathew PJ. Comparison of closed loop vs. manual administration of propofol using the Bispectral index in cardiac surgery. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2009; 53:390-397. The authors compared open-loop versus closed-loop administration of propofol in open heart surgery and found that the automated delivery of propofol using closedloop control was well tolerated, efficient and performed better than manual administration.
62. Hegde HV, PuriGD, Kumar B, Behera A. Bi-spectral index guided closed-loop anaesthesia delivery system (CLADS) in pheochromocytoma. J Clin Monit Comput 2009; 23:189-196.
63. De Smet T, Struys MM, Neckebroek MM, et al. The accuracy and clinical feasibility of a new bayesian-based closed-loop control system for propofol administration using the bispectral index as a controlled variable. Anesth Analg 2008; 107:1200-1210.
64. Doufas AG, Bakhshandeh M, Bjorksten AR, et al. A new system to target the effect-site during propofol sedation. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2003; 47:944-950.
65. Doufas AG, Bakhshandeh M, Bjorksten AR, et al. Automated responsiveness test (ART) predicts loss of consciousness and adverse physiologic responses during propofol conscious sedation. Anesthesiology 2001; 94: 585-592.
66. Doufas AG, Morioka N, Mahgoub AN, et al. Automated responsiveness monitor to titrate propofol sedation. Anesth Analg 2009; 109:778-786.