Back to Search Start Over

Comparison of the Efficacy and Safety of a Pharmacokinetic Model-Based Dosing Scheme Versus a Conventional Fentanyl Dosing Regimen For Patient-Controlled Analgesia Immediately Following Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Prostatectomy

Authors :
Jai-Hyun Hwang
Youn-Ju Kwon
Seung Min Park
Hyeong-Seok Lim
Ji-Hyun Chin
Jung-Min Yi
Young-Kug Kim
Seok-Joon Jin
Source :
Medicine
Publication Year :
2016
Publisher :
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health), 2016.

Abstract

Conventional, intravenous, patient-controlled analgesia, which is only administered by demand bolus without basal continuous infusion, is closely associated with inappropriate analgesia. Pharmacokinetic model-based dosing schemes can quantitatively describe the time course of drug effects and achieve optimal drug therapy. We compared the efficacy and safety of a conventional dosing regimen for intravenous patient-controlled analgesia that was administered by demand bolus without basal continuous infusion (group A) versus a pharmacokinetic model-based dosing scheme performed by decreasing the dosage of basal continuous infusion according to the model-based simulation used to achieve a targeted concentration (group B) following robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. In total, 70 patients were analyzed: 34 patients in group A and 36 patients in group B. The postoperative opioid requirements, pain scores assessed by the visual analog scale, and adverse events (eg, nausea, vomiting, pruritis, respiratory depression, desaturation, sedation, confusion, and urinary retention) were compared on admission to the postanesthesia care unit and at 0.5, 1, 4, 24, and 48 h after surgery between the 2 groups. All patients were kept for close observation in the postanesthesia care unit for 1 h, and then transferred to the general ward. The fentanyl requirements in the postanesthesia care unit for groups A and B were 110.0 ± 46.4 μg and 77.5 ± 35.3 μg, respectively. The pain scores assessed by visual analog scale at 0.5, 1, 4, and 24 h after surgery in group B were significantly lower than in group A (all P

Details

ISSN :
00257974
Volume :
95
Database :
OpenAIRE
Journal :
Medicine
Accession number :
edsair.doi.dedup.....8c4de264f008de77089595df0deeff16