Irwin M G, Jones R D, Visram A R, Kenny G N
Department of Anaesthesiology, University of Hong Kong.
Anaesthesia. 1996 May;51(5):427-30. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.1996.tb07784.x.
We have compared the opioid effects of a patient-demand, target-controlled infusion of alfentanil (n = 10), with patient-controlled bolus administration of morphine (n = 10) following major spinal surgery in Chinese patients aged from 11 to 67 years. The same general anaesthesia regimen was used in all patients. One group of patients were given intra-operative morphine analgesia followed by postoperative intravenous morphine patient-controlled analgesia, while the other group received an intra-operative target-controlled infusion of alfentanil. Following surgery, the alfentanil group were given control of a handset and were able to increase the target alfentanil plasma level in 5 ng.ml-1 increments with a 2-min lockout interval. If analgesia was not demanded within a 15-min period, the computer reduced the target concentration by 5 ng.ml-1. All patients had continuous pulse oximetry monitoring and hourly recording of pain, sedation, nausea scores and respiratory rate. Patients receiving alfentanil had the target concentration noted hourly and four blood samples taken during the first 24 h for measurement of plasma alfentanil concentrations by high performance liquid chromatography. The alfentanil infusion system was equally effective as an analgesic technique when compared with morphine patient-controlled analgesia. There were no hypoxaemic episodes (oxygen saturation < 94%), no difference in sedation scores and the incidence of nausea (30%) was the same in both groups. There was a significantly (p < 0.001) lower respiratory rate in the alfentanil group compared with patients receiving morphine at, clinically assessed, equianalgesia. The predicted plasma alfentanil concentrations increased rapidly from about 30 ng.ml-1 during the first 4 h to around 100 ng.ml-1 at the end of the 24-h study period. The precision of the target-controlled infusion system was 75.4% and the mean prediction error (bias) 58.1%, suggesting an underestimation of the measured alfentanil concentrations by the alfentanil infusion system in these Chinese patients.
