Albanna Walid, Weiss Miriam, Conzen Catharina, Clusmann Hans, Schneider Toni, Reinsch Martin, Müller Marguerite, Wiesmann Martin, Höllig Anke, Schubert Gerrit Alexander
Department of Neurosurgery, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.
Department of Neurophysiology, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
World Neurosurg. 2017 Jun;102:459-465. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2017.03.062. Epub 2017 Mar 23.
Oral nimodipine is an established prophylactic agent for cerebral vasospasm after subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH). In highly selected cases, intra-arterial (IA) or intravenous (IV) application of nimodipine may be considered; however, the optimum dosage and modality of application remain a matter of debate. The purpose of this investigation is analysis of nimodipine concentration in serum, cerebrospinal fluid, and cerebral microdialysate in the context of currently effective dose and route of application (oral, IA, IV).
We prospectively collected 156 samples from 37 patients treated for aneurysmal SAH from May 2014 to July 2015. Treatment groups were stratified according to modality of application and low-dose or high-dose treatment. At time of sampling, current dose and modality of application effectively sustained cerebral perfusion as documented by common diagnostics. Samples were analyzed for nimodipine concentration via high-performance liquid chromatography and tandem mass spectrometry.
In most cases (94.3%), nimodipine remained below the limit of quantification (0.5 ng/mL) within the brain (microdialysis, cerebrospinal fluid), even during targeted, local application (IA nimodipine). The median serum concentration for all treatment groups was 17.3 ng/mL. Modality of application (oral, IA, IV) was not associated with significant differences in serum concentrations (P = 0.712), even after stratification for dosage (P = 0.371), implying a comparable systemic distribution, if not efficacy.
Nimodipine does not accumulate sufficiently within the target organ for treatment monitoring. Comparable systemic concentrations can be observed irrespective of application modality and dosing. Future studies will clarify the role of efficacy-driven treatment algorithms, in which lowest dose and least invasive mode of application still effective should be identified.
口服尼莫地平是一种已确立的蛛网膜下腔出血(SAH)后脑血管痉挛预防药物。在经过严格筛选的病例中,可考虑动脉内(IA)或静脉内(IV)应用尼莫地平;然而,最佳剂量和应用方式仍存在争议。本研究的目的是在当前有效的剂量和应用途径(口服、IA、IV)背景下,分析血清、脑脊液和脑微透析液中的尼莫地平浓度。
我们前瞻性地收集了2014年5月至2015年7月期间37例动脉瘤性SAH患者的156份样本。治疗组根据应用方式和低剂量或高剂量治疗进行分层。在采样时,如常规诊断所记录,当前剂量和应用方式有效地维持了脑灌注。通过高效液相色谱和串联质谱分析样本中的尼莫地平浓度。
在大多数情况下(94.3%),即使在靶向局部应用(IA尼莫地平)期间,尼莫地平在脑内(微透析、脑脊液)仍低于定量限(0.5 ng/mL)。所有治疗组的血清浓度中位数为17.3 ng/mL。应用方式(口服、IA、IV)与血清浓度的显著差异无关(P = 0.712),即使在按剂量分层后(P = 0.371),这意味着即使疗效不同,全身分布也具有可比性。
尼莫地平在靶器官内积累不足,无法用于治疗监测。无论应用方式和剂量如何,均可观察到相当的全身浓度。未来的研究将阐明疗效驱动的治疗算法的作用,其中应确定仍有效的最低剂量和侵入性最小的应用方式。