首页> 外文期刊>British journal of anaesthesia >Pharmacokinetic parameter sets of alfentanil revisited: Optimal parameters for use in target controlled infusion and anaesthesia display systems
【24h】

Pharmacokinetic parameter sets of alfentanil revisited: Optimal parameters for use in target controlled infusion and anaesthesia display systems

机译:再次探讨了阿芬太尼的药代动力学参数集:用于靶控输注和麻醉显示系统的最佳参数

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BackgroundIn open TCI and anaesthesia display systems, the choice of pharmacokinetic (PK) parameter sets of opioids is clinically relevant. Accuracy and bias of the PK models may be affected by administration mode and the co-administered hypnotic drug. We retrospectively evaluated the performance of eight PK parameter sets for alfentanil in two data sets (infusion and bolus application).MethodsWith the dosing history from two studies in orthopaedic patients anaesthetized with propofol or inhalation anaesthetics the alfentanil plasma concentration over time was calculated with eight PK parameter sets. Median absolute performance error (MDAPE), log accuracy, median performance error (MDPE), log bias, Wobble, and Divergence were computed. Mann-Whitney rank test with Bonferroni correction was used for comparison between bolus and infusion data, repeated measures analysis of variance on ranks was used for comparison among parameter sets.ResultsThe parameters by Scott (original and weight adjusted) and Fragen had a MDAPE ≤30% and a median log accuracy <0.15 independent of the administration mode, while MDPE was within ±20% and log bias nearly within ±0.1, respectively. The sets by Maitre and Lemmens were within these limits only in the bolus data. All other parameter sets were outside these limits.ConclusionsIn healthy orthopaedic patients, the PK parameters by Scott and by Maitre were equally valid when alfentanil was given as repeated boluses. When given as infusion, the Maitre parameters were less accurate and subject to a significant bias. We cannot exclude that the difference between bolus and infusion is partially because of the different hypnotics used.
机译:背景技术在开放式TCI和麻醉显示系统中,阿片类药物的药代动力学(PK)参数集的选择与临床相关。 PK模型的准确性和偏差可能会受到给药方式和催眠药共同给药的影响。我们回顾性地评估了两个数据集(输注和推注应用)中八个芬太尼的PK参数集的效果。参数集。计算了绝对性能中位数(MDAPE),对数精度,中位数性能误差(MDPE),对数偏差,摆动和散度。使用Bonferroni校正的Mann-Whitney等级检验比较推注和输注数据,重复等级差异的重复测量分析以比较各参数集。结果Scott的参数(原始和权重已调整)和Fragen的MDAPE≤30 %和对数准确度中位数<0.15,与给药模式无关,而MDPE分别在±20%以内,对数偏差接近±0.1。 Maitre和Lemmens的集合仅在推注数据中处于这些限制之内。所有其他参数集均在这些限制范围之外。结论在健康的骨科患者中,当反复使用阿芬太尼时,Scott和Maitre的PK参数同样有效。当以输液方式给药时,maitre参数的准确性较差,并且存在明显的偏差。我们不能排除推注和输注之间的差异部分是因为使用了不同的催眠药。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号