{"title":"一种综合分析苯二氮卓类药物、阿片类药物和异丙酚在胃肠道内镜镇静中的相互作用和剂量选择的新方法。","authors":"Jing-Yang Liou, Hsin-Yi Wang, I-Ting Kuo, Mei-Yung Tsou, Weng-Kuei Chang, Chien-Kun Ting","doi":"10.1213/ANE.0000000000007263","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The aim of this study was to explore a new method for determining optimal dosing regimens for combinations of propofol, midazolam, and an opioid to achieve rapid on- and off-set of deep sedation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We simulated 16 published dosing regimens using a well-validated pharmacodynamic model. The study was divided into 2 parts. First, the regimen that best provided deep sedation and rapid recovery was selected. A deep sedation-time area-under-the-curve (AUC) method was used to compare published dosing regimens; a higher AUC indicated better sedation and faster recovery. Second, subgroup analysis of the best-performing dosing regimen was undertaken better to understand how each drug affected patient recovery.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The AUC method identified a combination of midazolam 1 mg, alfentanil 500 µg, and propofol target infusion effect-site concentration (Ce) 2 µg mL -1 as the optimal regimen ( P < .01). Propofol correlated with high probability of sedation and increased AUC (R 2 = 0.53), whereas midazolam had a significant impact on time to return of consciousness (R 2 = 0.86). Subgroup analysis indicated that regimens consisting of a fixed dose of alfentanil and either 5 µg mL -1 Ce propofol, or 1 mg midazolam with 3-5 µg mL -1 Ce of propofol, or 2 mg midazolam with 2 µg mL -1 Ce propofol provided adequate sedation and rapid recovery. Midazolam >3 mg greatly prolonged recovery.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study used a clinically relevant method and model simulation to determine suitable sedation regimens for use in gastrointestinal endoscopy. A balanced propofol, midazolam, and an opioid should be used. The AUC method was capable of providing objective assessments for model selection.</p>","PeriodicalId":7784,"journal":{"name":"Anesthesia and analgesia","volume":" ","pages":"1168-1177"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A New Method for Comprehensive Analysis of Benzodiazepine, Opioid, and Propofol Interactions and Dose Selection Rationales in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Sedation.\",\"authors\":\"Jing-Yang Liou, Hsin-Yi Wang, I-Ting Kuo, Mei-Yung Tsou, Weng-Kuei Chang, Chien-Kun Ting\",\"doi\":\"10.1213/ANE.0000000000007263\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The aim of this study was to explore a new method for determining optimal dosing regimens for combinations of propofol, midazolam, and an opioid to achieve rapid on- and off-set of deep sedation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We simulated 16 published dosing regimens using a well-validated pharmacodynamic model. The study was divided into 2 parts. First, the regimen that best provided deep sedation and rapid recovery was selected. A deep sedation-time area-under-the-curve (AUC) method was used to compare published dosing regimens; a higher AUC indicated better sedation and faster recovery. Second, subgroup analysis of the best-performing dosing regimen was undertaken better to understand how each drug affected patient recovery.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The AUC method identified a combination of midazolam 1 mg, alfentanil 500 µg, and propofol target infusion effect-site concentration (Ce) 2 µg mL -1 as the optimal regimen ( P < .01). Propofol correlated with high probability of sedation and increased AUC (R 2 = 0.53), whereas midazolam had a significant impact on time to return of consciousness (R 2 = 0.86). Subgroup analysis indicated that regimens consisting of a fixed dose of alfentanil and either 5 µg mL -1 Ce propofol, or 1 mg midazolam with 3-5 µg mL -1 Ce of propofol, or 2 mg midazolam with 2 µg mL -1 Ce propofol provided adequate sedation and rapid recovery. Midazolam >3 mg greatly prolonged recovery.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study used a clinically relevant method and model simulation to determine suitable sedation regimens for use in gastrointestinal endoscopy. A balanced propofol, midazolam, and an opioid should be used. The AUC method was capable of providing objective assessments for model selection.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7784,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Anesthesia and analgesia\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1168-1177\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Anesthesia and analgesia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1213/ANE.0000000000007263\",\"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":"Anesthesia and analgesia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1213/ANE.0000000000007263","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
A New Method for Comprehensive Analysis of Benzodiazepine, Opioid, and Propofol Interactions and Dose Selection Rationales in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Sedation.
Background: The aim of this study was to explore a new method for determining optimal dosing regimens for combinations of propofol, midazolam, and an opioid to achieve rapid on- and off-set of deep sedation.
Methods: We simulated 16 published dosing regimens using a well-validated pharmacodynamic model. The study was divided into 2 parts. First, the regimen that best provided deep sedation and rapid recovery was selected. A deep sedation-time area-under-the-curve (AUC) method was used to compare published dosing regimens; a higher AUC indicated better sedation and faster recovery. Second, subgroup analysis of the best-performing dosing regimen was undertaken better to understand how each drug affected patient recovery.
Results: The AUC method identified a combination of midazolam 1 mg, alfentanil 500 µg, and propofol target infusion effect-site concentration (Ce) 2 µg mL -1 as the optimal regimen ( P < .01). Propofol correlated with high probability of sedation and increased AUC (R 2 = 0.53), whereas midazolam had a significant impact on time to return of consciousness (R 2 = 0.86). Subgroup analysis indicated that regimens consisting of a fixed dose of alfentanil and either 5 µg mL -1 Ce propofol, or 1 mg midazolam with 3-5 µg mL -1 Ce of propofol, or 2 mg midazolam with 2 µg mL -1 Ce propofol provided adequate sedation and rapid recovery. Midazolam >3 mg greatly prolonged recovery.
Conclusions: This study used a clinically relevant method and model simulation to determine suitable sedation regimens for use in gastrointestinal endoscopy. A balanced propofol, midazolam, and an opioid should be used. The AUC method was capable of providing objective assessments for model selection.
期刊介绍:
Anesthesia & Analgesia exists for the benefit of patients under the care of health care professionals engaged in the disciplines broadly related to anesthesiology, perioperative medicine, critical care medicine, and pain medicine. The Journal furthers the care of these patients by reporting the fundamental advances in the science of these clinical disciplines and by documenting the clinical, laboratory, and administrative advances that guide therapy. Anesthesia & Analgesia seeks a balance between definitive clinical and management investigations and outstanding basic scientific reports. The Journal welcomes original manuscripts containing rigorous design and analysis, even if unusual in their approach.