PURPOSE: To compare the quality of analgesia provided by a remifentanil-based analgesia regime with that provided by a fentanyl-based regime in critically ill patients. METHODS: This was a registered, prospective, two-center, randomized, triple-blind study involving adult medical and surgical patients requiring mechanical ventilation (MV) for more than 24 h. Patients were randomized to either remifentanil infusion or a fentanyl infusion for a maximum of 30 days. Sedation was provided using propofol (and/or midazolam if required). RESULTS: Primary outcome was the proportion of patients in each group maintaining a target analgesia score at all time points. Secondary outcomes included duration of MV, discharge times, and morbidity. At planned interim analysis (n = 60), 50% of remifentanil patients (n = 28) and 63% of fentanyl patients (n = 32) had maintained target analgesia scores at all time points (p = 0.44). There were no significant differences between the groups with respect to mean duration of ventilation (135 vs. 165 h, p = 0.80), duration of hospital stay, morbidity, or weaning. Interim analysis strongly suggested futility and the trial was stopped. CONCLUSIONS: The use of remifentanil-based analgesia in critically ill patients was not superior regarding the achievement and maintenance of sufficient analgesia compared with fentanyl-based analgesia.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To compare the quality of analgesia provided by a remifentanil-based analgesia regime with that provided by a fentanyl-based regime in critically illpatients. METHODS: This was a registered, prospective, two-center, randomized, triple-blind study involving adult medical and surgical patients requiring mechanical ventilation (MV) for more than 24 h. Patients were randomized to either remifentanil infusion or a fentanyl infusion for a maximum of 30 days. Sedation was provided using propofol (and/or midazolam if required). RESULTS: Primary outcome was the proportion of patients in each group maintaining a target analgesia score at all time points. Secondary outcomes included duration of MV, discharge times, and morbidity. At planned interim analysis (n = 60), 50% of remifentanilpatients (n = 28) and 63% of fentanylpatients (n = 32) had maintained target analgesia scores at all time points (p = 0.44). There were no significant differences between the groups with respect to mean duration of ventilation (135 vs. 165 h, p = 0.80), duration of hospital stay, morbidity, or weaning. Interim analysis strongly suggested futility and the trial was stopped. CONCLUSIONS: The use of remifentanil-based analgesia in critically illpatients was not superior regarding the achievement and maintenance of sufficient analgesia compared with fentanyl-based analgesia.
Authors: Pratik P Pandharipande; Brenda T Pun; Daniel L Herr; Mervyn Maze; Timothy D Girard; Russell R Miller; Ayumi K Shintani; Jennifer L Thompson; James C Jackson; Stephen A Deppen; Renee A Stiles; Robert S Dittus; Gordon R Bernard; E Wesley Ely Journal: JAMA Date: 2007-12-12 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: J K Whipple; K S Lewis; E J Quebbeman; M Wolff; M S Gottlieb; M Medicus-Bringa; K R Hartnett; M Graf; R K Ausman Journal: Pharmacotherapy Date: 1995 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 4.705
Authors: Jörg Martin; Axel Parsch; Martin Franck; Klaus D Wernecke; Matthias Fischer; Claudia Spies Journal: Crit Care Date: 2005-01-26 Impact factor: 9.097
Authors: Lars Welzing; Andre Oberthuer; Shino Junghaenel; Urs Harnischmacher; Hartmut Stützer; Bernhard Roth Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2012-03-29 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Thor W Bjelland; Ola Dale; Kjell Kaisen; Bjørn O Haugen; Stian Lydersen; Kristian Strand; Pål Klepstad Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2012-04-12 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Massimo Antonelli; Marc Bonten; Jean Chastre; Giuseppe Citerio; Giorgio Conti; J Randall Curtis; Daniel De Backer; Goran Hedenstierna; Michael Joannidis; Duncan Macrae; Jordi Mancebo; Salvatore M Maggiore; Alexandre Mebazaa; Jean-Charles Preiser; Patricia Rocco; Jean-François Timsit; Jan Wernerman; Haibo Zhang Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2012-02-14 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Giovanni Mistraletti; Elena S Mantovani; Paolo Cadringher; Barbara Cerri; Davide Corbella; Michele Umbrello; Stefania Anania; Elisa Andrighi; Serena Barello; Alessandra Di Carlo; Federica Martinetti; Paolo Formenti; Paolo Spanu; Gaetano Iapichino Journal: Trials Date: 2013-04-03 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Guillermo Bugedo; Eduardo Tobar; Marcia Aguirre; Hugo Gonzalez; Jorge Godoy; Maria Teresa Lira; Pilar Lora; Eduardo Encalada; Antonio Hernandez; Vinko Tomicic; José Castro; Juan Jara; Max Andresen; Héctor Ugarte Journal: Rev Bras Ter Intensiva Date: 2013 Jul-Sep