• Yun Kuang, Ran-Ran Zhang, Qi Pei, Hong-Yi Tan, Cheng-Xian Guo, Jie Huang, Yu-Xia Xiang, Wen Ouyang, Kai-Ming Duan, Sai-Ying Wang, and Guo-Ping Yang.
• Int J Clin Pharm Th. 2015 Dec 1;53(12):1005-14.

ObjectiveThe application of dexmedetomidine in patient sedation is generally accepted, though its clinical application is limited because of the lack of information detailing the specific properties among diverse populations of patients. The aim of this study was to compare the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics of dexmedetomidine between elderly and young patients during spinal anesthesia.Methods34 subjects (elderly group: n = 15; young group: n = 19) with spinal anesthesia were enrolled in the present study following the inclusion/exclusion criteria detailed below. All subjects received intravenous infusion of dexmedetomidine with a loading dose of 0.5 µg x kg⁻¹ for 10 minutes and a maintenance dose of 0.5 µg x kg⁻¹ x h⁻¹ for 50 minutes. Plasma concentrations of dexmedetomidine were detected by the HPLC-MS/MS method and pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated using WinNolin software.ResultsThere was no significant difference between the elderly and young subjects in major pharmacokinetic parameters. There was a marked gender difference in the Cmax (peak plasma concentration) and tmax (time to reach Cmax) between genders in elderly subjects, though in this cohort the other pharmacokinetic parameters were not significantly different. In the young subjects there were no noteworthy variations between genders in pharmacokinetic parameters. There was no significant difference between the two groups in BISAUC(0-t) (the area under the bispectral index-time curve from time 0 to t hours), BISmin (the minimum value of the bispectral index after drug delivery), and or tmin-BIS (bispectral index for the minimum value of time). SBP (systolic blood pressure), DBP (diastolic blood pressure), HR (heart rate), and SpO₂(pulse oxygen saturation) developed substantive differences in a time-dependent manner, but there were no statistically significant differences in these four indicators in the time*group at three time points (1 hour, 2 hours, and 3 hours after drug administration); while SBP was significantly different between the groups, this differential declined in a time-dependent manner, and there were no significant attendant differences in the D-value. The observed values and D-values of DBP and HR were similar in the groups, but the observed value and D-value of SpO₂did differ. There were 14 drug-related adverse events in the young group, and 26 drug-related adverse events in the elderly group, a 46% differential. The percentage of patients who requiring intervention during surgery was 68.75% (11/16) in the elderly group and 36.84% (7/19) in the young group, with no significant difference between the two groups once age was factored in (p = 0.06). None of the pharmacodynamic indices, however, correlated with the key pharmacokinetic parameters (Cmax, AUC(0→t), AUC(0→∞)) of dexmedetomidine.ConclusionsThe clearance of dexmedetomidine in elderly patients showed a declining trend compared to young patients. Interventions in the elderly group were more frequent than in the young group, and the elderly group showed significant adverse effects. It is suggested that elderly patients who use dexmedetomidine may benefit from a different dose. However, further research with a larger population size is required to confirm these findings.

15 keywords...

hide…