Daniel Katz MD , Jia Song MS , Matthew Carangelo PharmD , Timothy Bergsma PhD , Roy Winston MD , Ruth Landau MD
{"title":"分娩硬膜外镇痛后使用脂质体布比卡因进行腹横肌平面阻滞以进行产内剖宫产的模拟布比卡因药代动力学研究","authors":"Daniel Katz MD , Jia Song MS , Matthew Carangelo PharmD , Timothy Bergsma PhD , Roy Winston MD , Ruth Landau MD","doi":"10.1016/j.jclinane.2024.111589","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Study Objective</h3><p>To simulate bupivacaine pharmacokinetics in scenarios of labor epidural analgesia (LEA) extended for intrapartum cesarean delivery (CD) with epidural or intrathecal boluses, followed by transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block with liposomal bupivacaine (LB) for postcesarean analgesia.</p></div><div><h3>Design</h3><p>Bupivacaine plasma concentrations were simulated using a 2-compartment distribution model fit to previous study data.</p></div><div><h3>Setting</h3><p>Virtual pharmacokinetic simulations.</p></div><div><h3>Patients</h3><p>Virtual individuals (1000, each scenario) had uniform weight (80 kg) but varying absorption parameters.</p></div><div><h3>Interventions</h3><p>The 6 scenarios varied in LEA infusion duration (6 or 24 h), local anesthetic used for bolus to extend LEA (epidural lidocaine or intrathecal bupivacaine), TAP block regimen, and time between bolus and TAP block.</p></div><div><h3>Measurements</h3><p>Scenario outcomes included geometric mean (GM) peak bupivacaine plasma concentration (C<sub>max</sub>) with 95% prediction interval (PI), median (range) C<sub>max</sub>, and number of virtual individuals (per 1000) with C<sub>max</sub> reaching estimated toxicity thresholds (neurotoxicity: 2000 μg/L; cardiotoxicity: 4000 μg/L).</p></div><div><h3>Main Results</h3><p>In simulated scenarios of LEA infusion for 24 h with an epidural bolus of lidocaine 400 mg for CD followed 1 h later by TAP block, the GM C<sub>max</sub> for the scenarios with TAP blocks including either LB 266 mg plus bupivacaine hydrochloride 52 mg or bupivacaine hydrochloride 104 mg was 1860 (95% PI, 1107–3124) and 1851 (95% PI, 1085–3157) μg/L, respectively. Among 1000 virtual individuals for each scenario, 404 and 401 had C<sub>max</sub> reaching 2000 μg/L, respectively; 1 and 0 had C<sub>max</sub> reaching 4000 μg/L, respectively. For other scenarios, GM C<sub>max</sub> remained <1000 μg/L.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Across 6 different simulations of TAP blocks for intrapartum CD analgesia, LEA with bupivacaine (with or without boluses for extension and including a conservative modeling of lidocaine without epinephrine), followed by TAP block with LB and/or bupivacaine hydrochloride 0, 1, or 2 h after CD, is unlikely to result in bupivacaine plasma concentrations reaching local anesthetic systemic toxicity thresholds in healthy patients.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":15506,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Anesthesia","volume":"99 ","pages":"Article 111589"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0952818024002186/pdfft?md5=f1d5494a994edd8d9960ef488f753444&pid=1-s2.0-S0952818024002186-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Simulated bupivacaine pharmacokinetics after labor epidural analgesia followed by transversus abdominis plane block with liposomal bupivacaine for intrapartum cesarean delivery\",\"authors\":\"Daniel Katz MD , Jia Song MS , Matthew Carangelo PharmD , Timothy Bergsma PhD , Roy Winston MD , Ruth Landau MD\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jclinane.2024.111589\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Study Objective</h3><p>To simulate bupivacaine pharmacokinetics in scenarios of labor epidural analgesia (LEA) extended for intrapartum cesarean delivery (CD) with epidural or intrathecal boluses, followed by transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block with liposomal bupivacaine (LB) for postcesarean analgesia.</p></div><div><h3>Design</h3><p>Bupivacaine plasma concentrations were simulated using a 2-compartment distribution model fit to previous study data.</p></div><div><h3>Setting</h3><p>Virtual pharmacokinetic simulations.</p></div><div><h3>Patients</h3><p>Virtual individuals (1000, each scenario) had uniform weight (80 kg) but varying absorption parameters.</p></div><div><h3>Interventions</h3><p>The 6 scenarios varied in LEA infusion duration (6 or 24 h), local anesthetic used for bolus to extend LEA (epidural lidocaine or intrathecal bupivacaine), TAP block regimen, and time between bolus and TAP block.</p></div><div><h3>Measurements</h3><p>Scenario outcomes included geometric mean (GM) peak bupivacaine plasma concentration (C<sub>max</sub>) with 95% prediction interval (PI), median (range) C<sub>max</sub>, and number of virtual individuals (per 1000) with C<sub>max</sub> reaching estimated toxicity thresholds (neurotoxicity: 2000 μg/L; cardiotoxicity: 4000 μg/L).</p></div><div><h3>Main Results</h3><p>In simulated scenarios of LEA infusion for 24 h with an epidural bolus of lidocaine 400 mg for CD followed 1 h later by TAP block, the GM C<sub>max</sub> for the scenarios with TAP blocks including either LB 266 mg plus bupivacaine hydrochloride 52 mg or bupivacaine hydrochloride 104 mg was 1860 (95% PI, 1107–3124) and 1851 (95% PI, 1085–3157) μg/L, respectively. Among 1000 virtual individuals for each scenario, 404 and 401 had C<sub>max</sub> reaching 2000 μg/L, respectively; 1 and 0 had C<sub>max</sub> reaching 4000 μg/L, respectively. For other scenarios, GM C<sub>max</sub> remained <1000 μg/L.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Across 6 different simulations of TAP blocks for intrapartum CD analgesia, LEA with bupivacaine (with or without boluses for extension and including a conservative modeling of lidocaine without epinephrine), followed by TAP block with LB and/or bupivacaine hydrochloride 0, 1, or 2 h after CD, is unlikely to result in bupivacaine plasma concentrations reaching local anesthetic systemic toxicity thresholds in healthy patients.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15506,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Clinical Anesthesia\",\"volume\":\"99 \",\"pages\":\"Article 111589\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0952818024002186/pdfft?md5=f1d5494a994edd8d9960ef488f753444&pid=1-s2.0-S0952818024002186-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Clinical Anesthesia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0952818024002186\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Anesthesia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0952818024002186","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Simulated bupivacaine pharmacokinetics after labor epidural analgesia followed by transversus abdominis plane block with liposomal bupivacaine for intrapartum cesarean delivery
Study Objective
To simulate bupivacaine pharmacokinetics in scenarios of labor epidural analgesia (LEA) extended for intrapartum cesarean delivery (CD) with epidural or intrathecal boluses, followed by transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block with liposomal bupivacaine (LB) for postcesarean analgesia.
Design
Bupivacaine plasma concentrations were simulated using a 2-compartment distribution model fit to previous study data.
Setting
Virtual pharmacokinetic simulations.
Patients
Virtual individuals (1000, each scenario) had uniform weight (80 kg) but varying absorption parameters.
Interventions
The 6 scenarios varied in LEA infusion duration (6 or 24 h), local anesthetic used for bolus to extend LEA (epidural lidocaine or intrathecal bupivacaine), TAP block regimen, and time between bolus and TAP block.
Measurements
Scenario outcomes included geometric mean (GM) peak bupivacaine plasma concentration (Cmax) with 95% prediction interval (PI), median (range) Cmax, and number of virtual individuals (per 1000) with Cmax reaching estimated toxicity thresholds (neurotoxicity: 2000 μg/L; cardiotoxicity: 4000 μg/L).
Main Results
In simulated scenarios of LEA infusion for 24 h with an epidural bolus of lidocaine 400 mg for CD followed 1 h later by TAP block, the GM Cmax for the scenarios with TAP blocks including either LB 266 mg plus bupivacaine hydrochloride 52 mg or bupivacaine hydrochloride 104 mg was 1860 (95% PI, 1107–3124) and 1851 (95% PI, 1085–3157) μg/L, respectively. Among 1000 virtual individuals for each scenario, 404 and 401 had Cmax reaching 2000 μg/L, respectively; 1 and 0 had Cmax reaching 4000 μg/L, respectively. For other scenarios, GM Cmax remained <1000 μg/L.
Conclusions
Across 6 different simulations of TAP blocks for intrapartum CD analgesia, LEA with bupivacaine (with or without boluses for extension and including a conservative modeling of lidocaine without epinephrine), followed by TAP block with LB and/or bupivacaine hydrochloride 0, 1, or 2 h after CD, is unlikely to result in bupivacaine plasma concentrations reaching local anesthetic systemic toxicity thresholds in healthy patients.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Clinical Anesthesia (JCA) addresses all aspects of anesthesia practice, including anesthetic administration, pharmacokinetics, preoperative and postoperative considerations, coexisting disease and other complicating factors, cost issues, and similar concerns anesthesiologists contend with daily. Exceptionally high standards of presentation and accuracy are maintained.
The core of the journal is original contributions on subjects relevant to clinical practice, and rigorously peer-reviewed. Highly respected international experts have joined together to form the Editorial Board, sharing their years of experience and clinical expertise. Specialized section editors cover the various subspecialties within the field. To keep your practical clinical skills current, the journal bridges the gap between the laboratory and the clinical practice of anesthesiology and critical care to clarify how new insights can improve daily practice.