Skip to main content Accessibility help

Remifentanil vs. alfentanil infusion in non-paralysed patients: a randomized, double-blind study

  • C. R. Mortensen (a1), B. Larsen (a2) (a3), J. Å. K. Petersen (a4), P. Rotbøll (a1), J. Riis (a2), H. Thorshauge (a2), J. Engbæk (a5), S. Troelsen (a4) and J. Viby-Mogensen (a6)...



Background and objective: Remifentanil has a short duration of action and constant elimination, which allow administration of high doses, without prolonging recovery. Remifentanil has been compared to alfentanil, as part of a total intravenous anaesthetic technique, where remifentanil provided better anaesthetic conditions than alfentanil, without adverse effect on recovery. However, these results were obtained during anaesthesia involving neuromuscular blockade, which may mask both signs of insufficient anaesthesia and side-effects such as muscle rigidity. The aim of this study was to compare remifentanil with alfentanil for anaesthesia without neuromuscular blockade.

Methods: We performed a prospective, randomized, double-blind, four-centre study to compare remifentanil infusion 15 μg kg−1 h−1 and alfentanil infusion 60 μg kg−1 h−1, using a total intravenous technique for non-paralysed patients, and the laryngeal mask airway for airway management. We enrolled 192 patients, 18–65 yr of age with ASA I–II, undergoing minor surgery. The primary endpoint was the number of patients having pre-defined responses to surgical stimulation. A number of secondary criteria was evaluated to assess undesirable properties of the procedures.

Results: In the alfentanil group, 85% of patients responded to surgical stimulation, vs. 35% in the remifentanil group (P < 0.0001). No difference was found in recovery data, or in any other parameter than those related to insufficient anaesthesia.

Conclusions: The remifentanil-based technique provided significantly better anaesthetic conditions than the alfentanil-based technique in the setting of this study, without causing any significant adverse effects.


Corresponding author

Correspondence to: Christian Risby Mortensen, Department of Anaesthesia 4231, Centre of Head and Orthopaedics, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet, Blegdamsvej 9, DK-2100 Copenhagen, Denmark. E-mail:; Tel: +45 3545 8040; Fax: +45 3545 2950


Hide All


Feldman PL, James MK, Brackeen MF, et al. Design, synthesis, and pharmacological evaluation of ultrashort- to long-acting opioid analgetics. J Med Chem 1991; 34: 20022008.
James MK, Feldman PL, Schuster SV, Bilotta JM, Brackeen MF, Leighton HJ. Opioid receptor activity of GI 87084B, a novel ultrashort acting analgesic, in isolated tissues. J Pharm Exp Ther 1991; 259: 712718.
Glass PS, Hardman D, Kamiyama Y, et al. Preliminary pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of an ultrashort-acting opioid: remifentanil (GI87084B). Anesth Analg 1993; 77: 10311040.
Egan TD, Lemmens HJ, Fiset P, et al. The pharmacokinetics of the new short-acting opioid remifentanil (GI87084B) in healthy adult male volunteers. Anesthesiology 1993; 79: 881892.
Westmoreland CL, Hoke JF, Sebel PS, Hug Jr CC, Muir KT. Pharmacokinetics of remifentanil (GI87084B) and its major metabolite (GI90291) in patients undergoing elective inpatient surgery. Anesthesiology 1993; 79: 893903.
Philip BK, Scuderi PE, Chung F, et al. Remifentanil compared with alfentanil for ambulatory surgery using total intravenous anesthesia. Anesth Analg 1997: 84: 515521.
Schüttler J, Albrecht S, Breivik H, et al. A comparison of remifentanil and alfentanil in patients undergoing major abdominal surgery. Anaesthesia 1997; 52: 307317.
Nilsson L, Viby-Mogensen J, Møller JC, Fonsmark L, Østerggard D. Remifentanil vs alfentanil for direct laryngoscopy. Acta Anaesthesiol Belg 2002; 53: 213219.
Alper I, Erhan E, Ugur G, Ozyar B. Remifentanil versus alfentanil in total intravenous anaesthesia for day case surgery. Eur J Anaesth 2003; 20: 6164.
Aldrete JA, Kroulik D. A postanesthetic recovery score. Anesth Analg 1970; 49: 924933.
Coriat P, Beaussier M. Fast-tracking after coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Anesth Analg 2001; 92: 10811083.
Wuesten R, Van Aken H, Glass PS, Buerkle H. Assessment of dept of anesthesia and postoperative respiratory recovery after remifentanil- versus alfentanil-based total intravenous anesthesia in patients undergoing ear–nose–throat surgery. Anesthesiology 2001; 94: 211217.
Sneyd JR, Camu F, Doenicke A, et al. Remifentanil and fentanyl during anaesthesia for major abdominal and gynaecological surgery. An open, comparative study of safety and efficacy. Eur J Anaesth 2001; 18: 605614.
Heidvall M, Hein A, Davidson S, Jakobsson J. Cost comparison between three different general anaesthetic techniques for elective arthroscopy of the knee. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2000; 44: 157162.



Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed