Background Several experimental pain models have been used to measure opioid effects in humans. The aim of the current study was to compare the qualities of five frequently used experimental pain tests to measure opioid effects. Methods The increase of electrical, heat, and pressure pain tolerance and the decrease of ice-water and ischemic pain perception was determined at baseline and at four different plasma concentrations of alfentanil (n = 7) administered as target controlled infusion or placebo (n = 7). A linear mixed-effects modeling (NONMEM) was performed to detect drug, placebo, and time effect as well as interindividual and intraindividual variation of effect. Results Only the electrical, ice-water, and pressure pain tests are sensitive to assess a concentration-response curve of alfentanil. At a plasma alfentanil concentration of 100 ng/ml, the increase in pain tolerance compared with baseline was 42.0% for electrical pain, 22.2% for pressure pain, and 21.7% for ice-water pain. The slope of the linear concentration-response curve had an interindividual coefficient of variation of 58.3% in electrical pain, 35.6% in pressure pain, and 60.0% in ice-water pain. The residual error including intraindividual variation at an alfentanil concentration of 100 ng/ml was 19.4% for electrical pain, 6.1% for pressure pain, and 13.0% for ice-water pain. Electrical pain was affected by a significant placebo effect, and pressure pain was affected by a significant time effect. Conclusion Electrical, pressure, and ice-water pain, but not ischemic and heat pain, provide significant concentration-response curves in the clinically relevant range of 200 ng/ml alfentanil or lower. The power to detect a clinically relevant shift of the curve is similar in the three tests. The appropriate test(s) for pharmacodynamic studies should be chosen according to the investigated drug(s) and the study design.

Background The authors applied an optimization model (direct search) to find the optimal combination of bupivacaine dose, fentanyl dose, clonidine dose, and infusion rate for continuous postoperative epidural analgesia. Methods One hundred ninety patients undergoing 48-h thoracic epidural analgesia after major abdominal surgery were studied. Combinations of the variables of bupivacaine dose, fentanyl dose, clonidine dose, and infusion rate were investigated to optimize the analgesic effect (monitored by verbal descriptor pain score) under restrictions dictated by the incidence and severity of side effects. Six combinations were empirically chosen and investigated. Then a stepwise optimization model was applied to determine subsequent combinations until no decrease in the pain score after three consecutive steps was obtained. Results Twenty combinations were analyzed. The optimization procedure led to a reduction in the incidence of side effects and in the mean pain scores. The three best combinations of bupivacaine dose (mg/h), fentanyl dose (microg/h), clonidine dose (microg/h), and infusion rate (ml/h) were: 9-21-5-7, 8-30-0-9, and 13-25-0-9, respectively. Conclusions Given the variables investigated, the aforementioned combinations may be the optimal ones to provide postoperative analgesia after major abdominal surgery. Using the direct search method, the enormous number of possible combinations of a therapeutic strategy can be reduced to a small number of potentially useful ones. This is accomplished using a scientific rather than an arbitrary procedure.

Background It is not known whether epidural epinephrine has an analgesic effect per se. The segmental distribution of clonidine epidural analgesia and its effects on temporal summation and different types of noxious stimuli are unknown. The aim of this study was to clarify these issues. Methods Fifteen healthy volunteers received epidurally (L2-L3 or L3-L4) 20 ml of either epinephrine, 100 microg, in saline; clonidine, 8 microg/kg, in saline; or saline, 0.9%, alone, on three different days in a randomized, double-blind, cross-over fashion. Pain rating after electrical stimulation, pinprick, and cold perception were recorded on the dermatomes S1, L4, L1, T9, T6, T1, and forehead. Pressure pain tolerance threshold was recorded at S1, T6, and ear. Pain thresholds to single and repeated (temporal summation) electrical stimulation of the sural nerve were determined. Results Epinephrine significantly reduced sensitivity to pinprick at L1-L4-S1. Clonidine significantly decreased pain rating after electrical stimulation at L1-L4 and sensitivity to pinprick and cold at L1-L4-S1, increased pressure pain tolerance threshold at S1, and increased thresholds after single and repeated stimulation of the sural nerve. Conclusions Epidural epinephrine and clonidine produce segmental hypoalgesia. Clonidine bolus should be administered at a spinal level corresponding to the painful area. Clonidine inhibits temporal summation elicited by repeated electrical stimulation and may therefore attenuate spinal cord hyperexcitability.