Pharmacokinetics of fentanyl, alfentanil, and sufentanil in isoflurane-anesthetized cats

The aim of this study was to compare the pharmacokinetics of fentanyl, alfentanil, and sufentanil in isoflurane‐anesthetized cats. Six adult cats were used. Anesthesia was induced and maintained with isoflurane in oxygen. End‐tidal isoflurane concentration was set at 2% and adjusted as required due...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inJournal of veterinary pharmacology and therapeutics Vol. 37; no. 1; pp. 13 - 17
Main Authors Pypendop, B. H., Brosnan, R. J., Majewski-Tiedeken, C. R., Stanley, S. D., Ilkiw, J. E.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published England Blackwell Publishing Ltd 01.02.2014
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:The aim of this study was to compare the pharmacokinetics of fentanyl, alfentanil, and sufentanil in isoflurane‐anesthetized cats. Six adult cats were used. Anesthesia was induced and maintained with isoflurane in oxygen. End‐tidal isoflurane concentration was set at 2% and adjusted as required due to spontaneous movement. Fentanyl (10 μg/kg), alfentanil (100 μg/kg), or sufentanil (1 μg/kg) was administered intravenously as a bolus, on separate days. Blood samples were collected immediately before and for 8 h following drug administration. Plasma drug concentration was determined using liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry. Compartment models were fitted to concentration–time data. A 3‐compartment model best fitted the concentration–time data for all drugs, except for 1 cat in the sufentanil group (excluded from analysis). The volume of the central compartment and the volume of distribution at steady‐state (L/kg) [mean ± SEM (range)], the clearance (mL/min/kg) [harmonic mean ± pseudo‐SD (range)], and the terminal half‐life (min) [median (range)] were 0.25 ± 0.04 (0.09–0.34), 2.18 ± 0.16 (1.79–2.83), 18.6 ± 5.0 (15–29.8), and 151 (115–211) for fentanyl; 0.10 ± 0.01 (0.07–0.14), 0.89 ± 0.16 (0.68–1.83), 11.6 ± 2.6 (9.2–15.8), and 144 (118–501) for alfentanil; and 0.06 ± 0.01 (0.04–0.10), 0.77 ± 0.07 (0.63–0.99), 17.6 ± 4.3 (13.9–24.3), and 54 (46–76) for sufentanil. Differences in clearance and volume of distribution result in similar terminal half‐lives for fentanyl and alfentanil, longer than for sufentanil.
Bibliography:ArticleID:JVP12047
ark:/67375/WNG-72M4409J-M
istex:5944EC00F1BBD6D1C0A8386B373D6D9702CFB12B
ObjectType-Article-2
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-1
content type line 23
ISSN:0140-7783
1365-2885
DOI:10.1111/jvp.12047