Search

Objectives: To estimate the optimum dosing regimen and delivery system for remifentanil, a new opioid, using computer simulations based on information from pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic models available for fentanyl, alfentanil and remifentanil, as well as from clinical trials of fentanyl and alfentanil., Patients and Methods: We estimated the site concentration ranges likely to be needed to blunt response to anesthetic or surgical stimuli and to recover from spontaneous ventilation. Dosing guidelines for remifentanil, fentanyl and alfentanil were estimated for three methods of administration (bolus, bolus + variable continuous infusion or constant continuous infusion). To that end, the time course of opioid concentration was simulated for hypothetical balanced anesthesia lasting 60 min. We then studied the number of boluses, the number of infusion rate steps, time taken to reach the terapeutic threshold, and time from turning off the infusion until reaching a concentration compatible with spontaneous ventilation., Results: The estimated "effect site" concentration ranges for remifentanil were 6 to 10 ng.ml-1 during intubation; 4 to 6 ng.ml-1 during cutaneous incision; 4 to 7 ng.ml-1 for maintenance; and less than 2.5 ng.ml-1 for recovery of spontaneous ventilation. Simulated bolus administration indicated that 21 boluses of remifentanil, 4 boluses of fentanyl and 7 boluses of alfentanil were needed during one hour. The therapeutic threshold was reached within the first minute with remifentanil, within 2 minutes with fentanyl and within 1 min with alfentanil. Time until recovery of spontaneous ventilation was 7 min with remifentanil, 22 min with fentanyl and 14 min with alfentanil. In the simulation of bolus plus variable infusion, the initial bolus of remifentanil was 100 micrograms, the infusion rate for induction and maintenance was 25 micrograms.min-1 and the maintenance rate was 15 micrograms.min-1. The initial bolus of fentanyl was 300 micrograms, the infusion rate for induction and maintenance was 5 micrograms.min-1. The initial bolus of alfentanil was 2,000 micrograms, the infusion rate for induction was 200 micrograms.min-1 and the maintenance rates were 75 and 25 micrograms.min-1. The therapeutic threshold was reached in 1 min with remifentanil, in 2 min with fentanyl and within 1 min with alfentanil. Spontaneous ventilation was recovered 4 min after turning off the infusion of remifentanil, 4 min afterwards with fentanyl and 6 min afterwards with alfentanil. The simulated constant infusion rate for remifentanil of 15 micrograms.min1 (8 micrograms.min-1 for fentanyl and 75 micrograms.min-1 for alfentanil) allowed the therapeutic threshold to be reached in 10 min with remifentanil, in 22 min with fentanyl and in 17 min with alfentanil. Recovery of spontaneous ventilation occurred 5 min after closure of the infusion pump with remifentanil (24 min with fentanyl and 17 min with alfentanil)., Conclusions: Information from pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic models allows us to establish the effect site concentration ranges for remifentanil and determine the ideal administration technique for this drug. The simulation also allows us to compare the properties of remifentanil to those of other common opioids such as fentanyl and alfentanil. The results are fairly consistent with clinical evidence, demonstrating the power of pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic models for rationally establishing opioid dosing guidelines.