Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T13:30:07.396Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Remifentanil and fentanyl during anaesthesia for major abdominal and gynaecological surgery. An open, comparative study of safety and efficacy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 August 2006

J. R. Sneyd
Affiliation:
Department of Anaesthesia, Derriford Hospital, Plymouth, PL6 8DH, Devon, UK
F. Camu
Affiliation:
Academisch Ziekenhuis, Vrije Universitiet Brussel, Laarbeeklaan 101, 1090 Brussels, Belgium
A. Doenicke
Affiliation:
Ludwig-Maximillian-Universitat Pettenkoferstrasse 8a, 80369 Munich, Germany
C. Mann
Affiliation:
Hˆpital de Bicetre, 78 Rue de General Leclerc, Le Kremlin-Bicetre, 94275 France
O. Holgersen
Affiliation:
Vest Agder Sentralsykehus, Kristiansand N-4604, Norway
J. H. J. H. Helmers
Affiliation:
Algemeen Christelijk Ziekenhuis Eemland, Utrechtsweg 160, Amersfoort, 3818ES, the Netherlands
L. Appelgren
Affiliation:
Anaesthetic Department, Sahlgrens Hospital, Goteborg S-413 45, Sweden
D. Noronha
Affiliation:
Medical Statistics, GlaxoWellcome Research & Development, Greenford Road, Greenford, Middlesex UB6 0HE, UK
B. K. Upadhyaya
Affiliation:
CV, CC and Anaesthesia Clinical Development, GlaxoWellcome Research & Development, Greenford Road, Greenford, Middlesex UB6 0HE, UK
Get access

Abstract

Background and objective This open, multicentre study compared the efficacy and safety of remifentanil with fentanyl during balanced anaesthesia with 0.8% isoflurane (end-tidal concentration) for major abdominal and gynaecological surgery, and the efficacy and safety of remifentanil for pain management in the immediate postoperative period.

Methods Two-hundred and eighty-six patients were randomized to receive remifentanil 1 μg kg−1 followed by 0.2 μg kg−1 min−1 (n = 98), remifentanil 2 μg kg−1 followed by 0.4 μg kg−1 min−1 (n = 91) or fentanyl 3 μg kg−1 (n = 97) at induction. Thereafter, the study opioids and isoflurane were titrated to effect during the operation.

Results Compared with fentanyl, remifentanil 2 μg kg−1 followed by 0.4 μg kg −1 min−1 reduced the incidence of response to tracheal intubation (30% vs. 13%, P < 0.01), skin incision (33% vs. 4%, P < 0.001) and skin closure (11% vs. 3%, P< 0.05), respectively. Patients receiving remifentanil 1 μg kg−1 followed by 0.2 μg kg −1 min−1 had fewer responses to skin incision than the fentanyl group (12% vs. 33%, P< 0.001), but the incidences of response to tracheal intubation and skin closure were similar. Significantly fewer patients in both remifentanil groups had ≥ 1 responses to surgical stress intraoperatively compared with fentanyl (68% and 48% vs. 87%, P < 0.003). The mean isoflurane concentrations required were less in both remifentanil groups compared with the fentanyl group (0.1%, P = 0.05). In remifentanil-treated patients, continuation of the infusion at 0.1 μg kg−1 min−1 with titration increments of ± 0.025 μg kg−1 min−1 was effective for the management of immediate postoperative pain prior to transfer to morphine analgesia. However, a high proportion of patients experienced at least moderate pain whilst the titration took place.

Conclusions Anaesthesia combining isoflurane with a continuous infusion of remifentanil was significantly more effective than fentanyl at blunting responses to surgical stimuli. Significantly fewer patients responded to tracheal intubation with remifentanil at 0.4 μg kg−1min−1, supporting the use of a higher initial infusion rate before intubation. Both remifentanil and fentanyl were well-tolerated, with reported adverse events typical of μ-opioid agonists.

Type
Original Article
Copyright
2001 European Society of Anaesthesiology

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)