Volume 18, Issue 3 pp. 235-239

Clinical adaptation of a pharmacokinetic model of Propofol plasma concentrations in children

THOMAS ENGELHARDT MD, PhD, FRCA

THOMAS ENGELHARDT MD, PhD, FRCA

Department of Anaesthesia

Search for more papers by this author
ALAN J McCHEYNE MBChB, BSc, FRCA

ALAN J McCHEYNE MBChB, BSc, FRCA

Department of Anaesthesia

Search for more papers by this author
NEIL MORTON MBChB, FRCA

NEIL MORTON MBChB, FRCA

Department of Anaesthesia, Royal Hospital for Sick Children, Glasgow, Scotland

Search for more papers by this author
CENGIZ KARSLI MD, FRCPC

CENGIZ KARSLI MD, FRCPC

Department of Anaesthesia

Search for more papers by this author
IGOR LUGINBUEHL MD

IGOR LUGINBUEHL MD

Department of Anaesthesia

Search for more papers by this author
KHOSROW ADELI PhD, FCACB, DABCC

KHOSROW ADELI PhD, FCACB, DABCC

Laboratory Medicine, The Hospital for Sick Children, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Search for more papers by this author
WARREN WALSH BSc, ART

WARREN WALSH BSc, ART

Laboratory Medicine, The Hospital for Sick Children, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Search for more papers by this author
BRUNO BISSONNETTE MD, FRCPC

BRUNO BISSONNETTE MD, FRCPC

Department of Anaesthesia

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 22 January 2008
Citations: 18
Thomas Engelhardt, Department of Anaesthesia, The Hospital for Sick Children, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (email: [email protected]).

Summary

Background: A previously published pharmacokinetic simulation suggested a simple manual infusion regimen to achieve propofol plasma concentrations of 3 μg·ml−1. This study investigated if a simple variation in propofol infusion rates is able to achieve distinct propofol plasma concentrations and whether these are close to the propofol plasma concentrations predicted by the Kataria model.

Methods: With Research Ethics Board approval and written parental consent, a total of 17 healthy children requiring general anaesthesia were enrolled. Following inhalational induction of anaesthesia, a propofol bolus of 5 mg·kg−1 was given and anaesthesia maintained using an adaptation of the McFarlan continuous propofol infusion regimen to achieve three distinct depths of propofol anaesthesia. Weight and propofol infusion data were used to calculate simulated propofol concentrations using the Kataria dataset and the tiva® simulation program. The performance of the infusion regimen was assessed by calculating the median performance error, median absolute performance error, wobble, and divergence.

Results: Measured propofol concentrations were (mean ± sd) 7.15 ± 1.4, 4.3 ± 0.85, and 2.85 ± 0.53 μg·ml−1 against simulation values of 6.6, 4.1, and 2.8 μg·ml−1, respectively, at 30, 50, and 70 min using the Kataria dataset. These differences were not significant. Formal assessment of the infusion regimen’s performance was acceptable.

Conclusion: The manual propofol infusion regimen achieved three distinct depths of propofol anaesthesia. The manual infusion regimen produced higher plasma propofol concentrations than predicted during the early part of the infusion period but was more accurate for later time points.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.