Influence of a modified propofol equilibration rate constant (ke0) on the effect‐site concentration at loss and recovery of consciousness with the Marsh model. (14th September 2013)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Seo, J. H.; Goo, E. K.; Song, I. A.; Park, S. H.; Park, H. P.; Jeon, Y. T.; Hwang, J. W.
• Is Part Of: Anaesthesia. Volume 68:Number 12(2013:Dec.)
• Page Start: 1232
• Page End: 1238
• Publication Date: 2013-09-14
• Subjects: Anesthesia -- Periodicals; 617.96
• DOI: 10.1111/anae.12419
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0003-2409

Abstract

<abstract abstract-type="main" id="anae12419-abs-0001"> <title>Summary</title> <p>This study compared the predicted effect‐site concentration of propofol at loss and recovery of consciousness when using target‐controlled infusion devices with the same pharmacokinetic model (Marsh) but a different plasma effect‐site equilibration rate constant (k_e0), the Diprifusor^TM (k_e0 0.26 min⁻¹) and Base Primea™ (k_e0 1.21 min⁻¹). We studied 60 female patients undergoing minor gynaecological surgery under general anaesthesia. Although the total dose of propofol and time until loss of consciousness were comparable, the effect‐site concentration at loss of consciousness was significantly lower with the Diprifusor than with the Base Primea (1.2 (0.3) μg.ml⁻¹ vs 4.5 (0.9) μg.ml⁻¹, respectively, p &lt; 0.001). The effect‐site concentration at recovery of consciousness was significantly higher with the Diprifusor than with the Base Primea (1.8 (0.4) μg.ml⁻¹ vs 1.5 (0.2) μg.ml⁻¹, respectively, p = 0.01). In conclusion, the effect‐site concentration of propofol differs depending on the k_e0, despite the use of the same pharmacokinetic model. Therefore, the k_e0 should be considered when predicting loss and recovery of consciousness based on the effect‐site concentration of propofol.</p> </abstract>