We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Predictive performance of the modified Marsh and Schnider models for propofol in underweight patients undergoing general anaesthesia using target-controlled infusion.
British Journal of Anaesthesia 2017 June 2
BACKGROUND: : In our preliminary study, the modified Marsh (M-Marsh) model caused an inadvertent underdosing of propofol in underweight patients. However, the predictive performance of the M-Marsh and Schnider models incorporated in commercially available target-controlled infusion (TCI) pumps was not evaluated in underweight patients.
METHODS: : Thirty underweight patients undergoing elective surgery were randomly allocated to receive propofol via TCI using the M-Marsh or Schnider models. The target effect-site concentrations (Ces) of propofol were, in order, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 2 μg ml -1 . Arterial blood samples were obtained at least 7 min after achieving each pseudo-steady-state.
RESULTS: A total of 172 plasma samples were used to determine the predictive performance of both models. The pooled median (95% confidence interval) biases and inaccuracies at a target Ce ≤ 3 μg ml -1 were -22.6 (-28.8 to -12.6) and 31.9 (24.8-36.8) for the M-Marsh model and 9.0 (1.7-16.4) and 28.5 (21.7-32.8) for the Schnider model, respectively. These values at Ce ≥ 4 μg ml -1 were -9.6 (-16.0 to -6.0) and 24.7 (21.1-27.9) for the M-Marsh model and 19.8 (12.9-25.7) and 36.2 (31.4-39.7) for the Schnider model, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: The pooled biases and inaccuracies of both models were clinically acceptable. However, the M-Marsh and Schnider models consistently produced negatively and positively biased predictions, respectively, in underweight patients. In particular, the M-Marsh model showed greater inaccuracy at target Ce ≤ 3 μg ml -1 and the Schnider model showed greater inaccuracy at target Ce ≥ 4 μg ml -1 . Therefore, it is necessary to develop a new pharmacokinetic model for propofol in underweight patients.
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: KCT0001502.
METHODS: : Thirty underweight patients undergoing elective surgery were randomly allocated to receive propofol via TCI using the M-Marsh or Schnider models. The target effect-site concentrations (Ces) of propofol were, in order, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 2 μg ml -1 . Arterial blood samples were obtained at least 7 min after achieving each pseudo-steady-state.
RESULTS: A total of 172 plasma samples were used to determine the predictive performance of both models. The pooled median (95% confidence interval) biases and inaccuracies at a target Ce ≤ 3 μg ml -1 were -22.6 (-28.8 to -12.6) and 31.9 (24.8-36.8) for the M-Marsh model and 9.0 (1.7-16.4) and 28.5 (21.7-32.8) for the Schnider model, respectively. These values at Ce ≥ 4 μg ml -1 were -9.6 (-16.0 to -6.0) and 24.7 (21.1-27.9) for the M-Marsh model and 19.8 (12.9-25.7) and 36.2 (31.4-39.7) for the Schnider model, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: The pooled biases and inaccuracies of both models were clinically acceptable. However, the M-Marsh and Schnider models consistently produced negatively and positively biased predictions, respectively, in underweight patients. In particular, the M-Marsh model showed greater inaccuracy at target Ce ≤ 3 μg ml -1 and the Schnider model showed greater inaccuracy at target Ce ≥ 4 μg ml -1 . Therefore, it is necessary to develop a new pharmacokinetic model for propofol in underweight patients.
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: KCT0001502.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app