OBJECTIVES: (i) To evaluate the pupillary response to alfentanil as a surrogate measure of alfentanil pharmacokinetics in cirrhotic patients and to compare the data observed in cirrhotic patients with those found in healthy volunteers (historical control group); and (ii) to compare this test with other liver function tests in cirrhotic patients. METHODS: Six patients with mild cirrhosis (Child-Pugh grade A) and six patients with moderate cirrhosis (Child-Pugh grade B) were studied after a single 15 microg/kg bolus of alfentanil. Alfentanil plasma concentrations were measured by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry, and pupillary responses were measured with a Pupilscan II pupillometer. Alfentanil pharmacokinetics (plasma concentration, area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity [AUC(infinity(p))] and from time zero to 2 hours [AUC(2(p))], apparent volume of distribution at steady state, clearance and terminal elimination half-life [t((1/2)(p))]) and miosis pseudo-kinetic parameters [AUC(infinity)((miosis)), AUC(2)((miosis)), t((1/2))((miosis))] were determined using a noncompartmental analysis method. In six patients (three Child-Pugh grade A and three Child-Pugh grade B), antipyrine (measure of liver intrinsic activity) and D-sorbitol (measure of liver blood flow) tests were performed. RESULTS: A significant correlation was found between the alfentanil AUC(infinity(p)) and AUC(infinity)((miosis)) (r = 0.6, p < 0.05) in cirrhotic patients. This correlation was even more significant if AUC determinations were limited to the first 2 hours after alfentanil administration (r = 0.9, p < 0.01). Statistically significant differences in pharmacokinetics and miosis pseudo-kinetic parameters were observed between cirrhotic patients and healthy volunteers from our previous experiment (historical control group). The correlations were significant between alfentanil clearance and antipyrine clearance (n = 6, r = 0.9, p < 0.05), alfentanil clearance and steady-state hepatic blood clearance [CL(H(b))] measured by the D-sorbitol test (n = 6, r = 0.9, p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Alfentanil pharmacokinetic parameters were correlated with miosis pseudo-kinetic parameters in cirrhotic patients. There was a significant decrease in pharmacokinetics and miosis pseudo-kinetics in cirrhotic patients compared with volunteers from the historical control group. Alfentanil-induced miosis has the advantage of being noninvasive and can be limited to miosis measurements during the first 2 hours after alfentanil administration in cirrhotic patients. We thus propose to substitute the AUC(2(miosis)) for alfentanil pharmacokinetics in cirrhosis.
OBJECTIVES: (i) To evaluate the pupillary response to alfentanil as a surrogate measure of alfentanil pharmacokinetics in cirrhotic patients and to compare the data observed in cirrhotic patients with those found in healthy volunteers (historical control group); and (ii) to compare this test with other liver function tests in cirrhotic patients. METHODS: Six patients with mild cirrhosis (Child-Pugh grade A) and six patients with moderate cirrhosis (Child-Pugh grade B) were studied after a single 15 microg/kg bolus of alfentanil. Alfentanil plasma concentrations were measured by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry, and pupillary responses were measured with a Pupilscan II pupillometer. Alfentanil pharmacokinetics (plasma concentration, area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity [AUC(infinity(p))] and from time zero to 2 hours [AUC(2(p))], apparent volume of distribution at steady state, clearance and terminal elimination half-life [t((1/2)(p))]) and miosis pseudo-kinetic parameters [AUC(infinity)((miosis)), AUC(2)((miosis)), t((1/2))((miosis))] were determined using a noncompartmental analysis method. In six patients (three Child-Pugh grade A and three Child-Pugh grade B), antipyrine (measure of liver intrinsic activity) and D-sorbitol (measure of liver blood flow) tests were performed. RESULTS: A significant correlation was found between the alfentanil AUC(infinity(p)) and AUC(infinity)((miosis)) (r = 0.6, p < 0.05) in cirrhotic patients. This correlation was even more significant if AUC determinations were limited to the first 2 hours after alfentanil administration (r = 0.9, p < 0.01). Statistically significant differences in pharmacokinetics and miosis pseudo-kinetic parameters were observed between cirrhotic patients and healthy volunteers from our previous experiment (historical control group). The correlations were significant between alfentanil clearance and antipyrine clearance (n = 6, r = 0.9, p < 0.05), alfentanil clearance and steady-state hepatic blood clearance [CL(H(b))] measured by the D-sorbitol test (n = 6, r = 0.9, p < 0.05). CONCLUSION:Alfentanil pharmacokinetic parameters were correlated with miosis pseudo-kinetic parameters in cirrhotic patients. There was a significant decrease in pharmacokinetics and miosis pseudo-kinetics in cirrhotic patients compared with volunteers from the historical control group. Alfentanil-induced miosis has the advantage of being noninvasive and can be limited to miosis measurements during the first 2 hours after alfentanil administration in cirrhotic patients. We thus propose to substitute the AUC(2(miosis)) for alfentanil pharmacokinetics in cirrhosis.