Remi-fent 1—A pragmatic randomised controlled study to evaluate the feasibility of using remifentanil or fentanyl as sedation adjuncts in mechanically ventilated patients

Arvind Rajamani(The University of Sydney), Ashwin Subramaniam(Monash University), Brian Lung(Nepean Hospital), Kristy Masters(Nepean Hospital), Rebecca Gresham(Nepean Hospital), Christina Whitehead(Nepean Hospital), Julie Lowrey(Nepean Hospital), Ian Seppelt(The University of Sydney), Hemant Kumar(Nepean Hospital), Jayashree Kumar(Nepean Hospital), Anwar Hassan(Nepean Hospital), Sam Orde(Nepean Hospital), Pranav Arun Bharadwaj(Collaborative Research Group), Hemamalini Arvind(The University of Sydney), Stephen Huang(The University of Sydney)
Critical Care and Resuscitation
December 1, 2023
Cited by 4Open Access
Full Text

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the feasibility of conducting a prospective randomised controlled trial (pRCT) comparing remifentanil and fentanyl as adjuncts to sedate mechanically ventilated patients. Design: Single-center, open-labelled, pRCT with blinded analysis. Setting: Australian tertiary intensive care unit (ICU). Participants: or study-drug hypersensitivity. Interventions: Open-label fentanyl and remifentanil infusions per existing ICU protocols. Outcomes: Primary outcomes were feasibility of recruiting ≥1 patient/week and >90 % compliance, namely no other opioid infusion used during the study period. Secondary outcomes included complications, ICU-, ventilator- and hospital-free days, and mortality (ICU, hospital). Blinded intention-to-treat analysis was performed concealing the allocation group. Results: 208 patients were enrolled (mean 3.7 patients/week). Compliance was 80.6 %. More patients developed complications with fentanyl than remifentanil: bradycardia (n = 44 versus n = 21; p < 0.001); hypotension (n = 78 versus n = 53; p < 0.01); delirium (n = 28 versus n = 15; p = 0.001). No differences were seen in ICU (24.3 % versus 27.6 %,p = 0.60) and hospital mortalities (26.2 % versus 30.5 %; p = 0.50). Ventilator-free days were higher with remifentanil (p = 0.01). Conclusions: We demonstrated the feasibility of enrolling patients for a pRCT comparing remifentanil and fentanyl as sedation adjuncts in mechanically ventilated patients. We failed to attain the study-opioid compliance target, likely because of patients with complex sedative/analgesic requirements. Secondary outcomes suggest that remifentanil may reduce mechanical ventilation duration and decrease the incidence of complications. An adequately powered multicentric phase 2 study is required to evaluate these results.


Related Papers

No related papers found

Powered by citation graph analysis