| JOURNAL HOME | CME HOME | THIS MONTH | PAST ISSUES | ETOC | COLLECTIONS |
| AUTHORS | REVIEWERS | EDITORIAL BOARD | FEEDBACK | RSS | HELP |
| ||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
*Outcomes ResearchTM Institute, University of Louisville; and Departments of Anesthesiology & Perioperative Medicine, and Pharmacology and Toxicology, University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky
Address correspondence and reprint requests to Daniel I. Sessler, MD, Outcomes Research Institute, 501 East Broadway, Suite 210, Louisville, KY 40202. Address e-mail to sessler{at}louisville.edu. On the worldwide web: www.or.org.
 |
Abstract |
|---|
 Top Abstract IntroductionMethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
|
Introduction |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
Induction of therapeutic hypothermia in patients having acute myocardial infarction or stroke may be compromised because tiny reductions in core temperature trigger aggressive thermoregulatory defenses (4). The major autonomic thermoregulatory responses in humans are sweating, vasoconstriction, and shivering. Each response is characterized by a threshold, which is defined as the triggering core temperature.
Dopamine is among the most important thermoregulatory neurotransmitters, and it is well established that increasing preoptic dopamine concentrations provokes hypothermia in mammals (5). Although doxapram stimulates release of dopamine from carotid bodies in rats (6), it has central effects (7) that are probably, at least in part, similarly mediated. As might thus be expected, doxapram is a useful treatment for postanesthetic shivering (8). Doxapram produces a dose-dependent and substantial reduction in the shivering threshold in rabbits (9). The magnitude of this inhibition, if similar in humans, would be clinically important. Equally important is whether doxapram reduces the shivering threshold from its normal value near 35.5°C (10) to approximately 34°C, which may provide protection against cerebral or myocardial ischemia. We thus tested the hypotheses that doxapram comparably reduces the sweating, vasoconstriction, and shivering thresholds—and that the reduction is clinically important (i.e., approximately 1°C).
|
Methods |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
The volunteers fasted 8 h before each study day. They dressed minimally and rested supine on a standard operating room table. Ambient temperature was maintained near 21°C. Each volunteer was studied on two randomly assigned days: 1) control—no drug, and 2) doxapram hydrochloride (A. H. Robins, Inc.) at a target plasma concentration of 4 µg/mL.
Doxapram was infused using a modification of the simplified infusion regimen of Clements et al. (11), which was stated to produce a constant plasma concentration of 2 µg/mL. In this case with an objective of 4 µg/mL, the infusion rates were doubled under the assumption of linear pharmacokinetics. Specifically, doxapram was infused at a rate of 6 mg · min–1 · 70 kg–1 for the first 15 min; at a rate of 4 mg · min–1 · 70 kg–1 for the next 15 min; at a rate of 3 mg · min–1 · 70 kg–1 for the next 30 min; at a rate of 2 mg · min–1 · 70 kg–1 for the next hour, and subsequently, at a rate of 1 mg · min–1 · 70 kg–1. The infusion was started 15 min before starting thermal manipulation to allow establishment of steady-state plasma drug concentration; the infusion was continued until shivering was detected.
Core temperature was recorded from the tympanic membrane using Mon-a-therm thermocouples (Mallinckrodt Anesthesiology Products, Inc., St. Louis, MO). Mean skin-surface temperature and cutaneous heat transfer were calculated from measurements at 15 area-weighted sites. Temperatures were recorded at 1-min intervals from thermocouples connected to calibrated Iso-Thermex® thermometers having an accuracy of 0.1°C and a precision of 0.01°C (Columbus Instruments, Corp., Columbus, OH).
Sweating was continuously quantified on the left upper chest using a ventilated capsule (4). We considered a sweating rate >40 g · m–2 · h–1 for at least 5 min to be significant (12). Absolute right middle fingertip bloodflow was quantified using venous-occlusion volume plethysmography at 5-min intervals (13). The vasoconstriction threshold was determined post hoc by an observer blinded to treatment and core temperature.
As in previous similar studies (12), we used systemic oxygen consumption to quantify shivering. A DeltaTrac metabolic monitor (SensorMedics Corp., Yorba Linda, CA) was used in canopy mode. Initiation of shivering threshold was determined post hoc by an observer blinded to treatment and core temperature. End-tidal Pco2 was sampled from a catheter inserted into one nostril; gas removed from the catheter was returned to the canopy of the metabolic monitor.
Heart rate, end-tidal Pco2, and oxyhemoglobin saturation (Spo2) were measured continuously using pulse oximetry, and arterial blood pressure was determined oscillometrically at 5-min intervals at the left ankle.
Sedation was evaluated by using the responsiveness component of the Observer’s Assessment of Alertness/Sedation (OAA/S) score (Table 1) (14) at several times: before starting drug administration, before thermal manipulation started, and at each threshold. An investigator blinded to core temperature and treatment evaluated sedation. Blood for doxapram analysis was sampled from the central catheter before drug administration (blank sample) and at each threshold. Blood was centrifuged, and the plasma was removed and stored at –40°C for up to 2 mo. The plasma samples were then transferred to another freezer and stored for up to 1 wk until analysis. Doxapram and its metabolites are stable when stored 
–20°C.
|
Doxapram concentrations were determined in triplicate by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry using the technique of selected ion monitoring (GC/MS-SIM). Reference doxapram hydrochloride was obtained from USP (U. S. Pharmacopeia, Rockville, MD). The method used solid phase extraction columns (Strata-X; Phenomenex, Torrance, CA) to extract doxapram from plasma along with internal standard (diazepam) to compensate the drug loss during extraction and GC/MS processes. Doxapram and diazepam were separated by gas chromatography according to their different GC retention times (7.0, 5.4 min, respectively) in a capillary column (DB5; Agilent, Palo Alto, CA) that was temperature programmed from 150° to 290°C at 32°/min. The drugs were then detected by MS using SIM of characteristic ions (doxapram m/z 100, 378; diazepam m/z 256, 283) after electron ionization. Quantification used standard responses measured by ion peak area ratios versus amounts of analyte/internal standard. Responses were linear across the doxapram plasma concentration range of 0.25–5 µg/mL. Limits of detection and quantification were <0.25 µg/mL. Sample replicates were assayed on different occasions. The intra-assay coefficient of variation (CV) was 8.8%, whereas inter-assay CV was 21%.
Nausea and vomiting incidence and severity were recorded by blinded observers before commencement of drug administration, before thermal manipulation started, and at each threshold during each study. Nausea and vomiting incidence and severity were reported by the volunteer using a 4-point scale: 1 = none, 2 = mild, 3 = moderate, or 4 = severe.
Because doxapram is a potent drug to cause panic (15), we scored the severity of panic attack symptoms by presence or absence of seven selected items of Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM)-IV-TR diagnostic criteria for panic attack (Table 2) (16). These were assessed at the same times as the OAA/S score. The total number of the symptoms present at each time was used for statistical analysis.
|
The cutaneous contribution to the thermoregulatory responses—sweating (17), vasoconstriction, and shivering—is linear (18). We thus used measured skin and core temperatures in degrees Celsius at each threshold to calculate the core-temperature threshold that would have been observed had skin been maintained at a single designated temperature. For this purpose, we used Equation 1, which corrects core temperature for cutaneous temperature, providing response thresholds that would have been observed at a designated core temperature:
|
|
We have previously described the derivation and validation of this equation (12). We used a ß of 0.1 for sweating (17) and a ß of 0.2 for vasoconstriction and shivering (18). The designated skin temperature was set at 34°C, a typical intraoperative value.
We determined that a sample size of 9 would detect a 0.6°C difference in shivering thresholds between control and drug days with 89% power. Based on a similar study conducted with the same design in our laboratory with another drug (unpublished observation), we assumed that the difference in shivering thresholds on the 2 study days would have a standard deviation of 0.495 and correlation of 0.55.
Oxygen consumption and calculated respiratory quotient (RQ) were averaged during baseline (before commencement of drug infusion), during the cooling phase before shivering, and during shivering, respectively. The averaged values were then compared with two-way ANOVA (two factors; drug, period) and post hoc Bonferroni/Dunn tests.
After confirming that sedation, nausea severity, and panic symptoms were similar at baseline on each study day, the difference in the scores at each measurement time (baseline, prewarming, sweating threshold, vasoconstriction threshold, and shivering threshold) between the drug day and the control day within each volunteer were compared with Kruskal-Wallis tests. The incidence of nausea and combined nausea and vomiting was compared by 
2 analyses. For the combined nausea and vomiting analysis, any score for nausea or vomiting exceeding "none" was considered positive.
Ambient temperature, humidity, mean arterial blood pressure, heart rate, Spo2, and end-tidal Pco2 on each study day were averaged within each volunteer across the warming and cooling periods; the resulting values were then averaged among volunteers. Results for each study day were compared using paired t-tests. Plasma concentrations of doxapram at each threshold were compared using one-way ANOVA. All results are presented as means ± sd or range, as appropriate; P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
|
Results |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
|
Oxygen consumption was not significantly influenced by doxapram (P = 0.293), and it was similar between baseline and cooling phases. But it was significantly increased during shivering compared with both baseline and the cooling phase (P < 0.001). RQ was not significantly influenced by doxapram (P = 0.195), nor by the periods of the study (P = 0.458) (Table 4).
|
None of the study participants was sedated at baseline on either study day (OAA/S score of 5 for all volunteers), and no sedation was observed during the study. None of the volunteers was nauseated at the start of the study (nausea severity score of 1) on either study day. Additionally, as with sedation, no significant nausea was observed during the study. None of the volunteers experienced panic at baseline on either study day (panic symptom score total of 0). Panic symptoms during doxapram infusion were not significantly different from those of the control day (P = 0.06).
On the doxapram day, plasma concentrations of doxapram were similar at the sweating, vasoconstriction, and shivering thresholds with plasma concentrations of 2.4 ± 0.8 [1.4–3.5], 2.5 ± 0.9 [1.4–3.6], and 2.6 ± 1.1 [1.3–4.8] µg/mL; (mean ± sd [range]) for each threshold, respectively (P = 0.930). The sweating thresholds were similar on the doxapram (37.3° ± 0.4°C) and control (37.5° ± 0.4°C) days (P = 0.290; Table 5). The vasoconstriction thresholds were also similar on the doxapram (36.4 ± 0.5°C; Table 5) and on the control (36.8° ± 0.7°C) day (P = 0.110). In contrast, doxapram reduced the shivering threshold by 0.5° ± 0.4°C from 36.2° ± 0.5°C on the control day to 35.7° ± 0.7°C on the doxapram day (P = 0.012; Fig. 1).
|
|
|
Discussion |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
Doxapram increased Spo2 (98% ± 1% versus 97% ± 1%) and reduced end-tidal Pco2 (36 ± 2 versus 38 ± 2 mm Hg), presumably as a consequence of doxapram’s well known ability to improve tidal volume and augment respiratory rate (21). The increased mean arterial blood pressure on the doxapram day (102 ± 6 versus 89 ± 10 mm Hg) doubtless resulted from the established pressor effect of doxapram (21). Despite being statistically significant, these small respiratory and hemodynamic effects, which were not accompanied by increases in metabolic rates, were of little clinical consequence and unlikely to cause adverse effects even in victims of stroke or myocardial infarction.
A target plasma concentration of 4 µg/mL was chosen, because it seems to be the maximal therapeutic concentration that does not evoke serious side effects. A slightly larger plasma concentration of >5 µg/mL increases the risk of side effects (22). Our measured plasma concentration was within the range (1.5–3.0 µg/mL) that effectively increases the minute ventilation (23).
Although we used a published infusion protocol, the average plasma concentration at each threshold was considerably less than the targeted concentration of 4 µg/mL in all but one patient. We are unable to determine in the present study whether the differences between target and actual plasma levels resulted from differences in drug disposition, clearance, or nonlinear pharmacokinetic effects caused by dosage scaling. Assuming a steady-state plasma concentration was achieved before shivering occurred, the total plasma clearance calculated from our data was 12.9 ± 5 [range 5.8–21.5] mL · kg–1 · min–1, a value larger than that reported by Clements et al. (11). However, Jamali et al. (24) found that 4 of 17 neonates had much larger clearance rates of doxapram (19.0–29.2 mL · kg–1 · min–1) than the others. They suggested that the disposition kinetics of doxapram has a binominal distribution. If any of our participants were rapid metabolizers of doxapram, their increased clearance rates could have profoundly reduced the actual mean plasma concentration of the group.
In summary, doxapram at a measured plasma concentration of approximately 2.5 µg/mL reduced the shivering threshold significantly, but only by 0.5°C. This reduction explains the drug’s efficacy for treatment of postoperative shivering. However, a reduction of only 0.5°C is unlikely to markedly facilitate induction of therapeutic hypothermia as a sole drug.
We thank Gilbert Haugh, MS, and Nancy Alsip, PhD, for their statistical and editorial contributions, respectively (both from the University of Louisville).
|
Footnotes |
|---|
GC’s current address is Department of Anesthesiology, Oklahoma University Health Sciences Center.
Accepted for publication April 25, 2005.
|
References |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  R. Komatsu, M. Orhan-Sungur, J. In, T. Podranski, T. Bouillon, R. Lauber, S. Rohrbach, and D. Sessler Ondansetron does not reduce the shivering threshold in healthy volunteers Br. J. Anaesth., June 1, 2006; 96(6): 732 - 737. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
