Core rules001 / 129
Obesity: succinylcholine on total body weight in every source; rocuronium and vecuronium on lean weight; cisatracurium and propofol infusions disputed
In obesity, succinylcholine is the one drug every source doses on total weight. Rocuronium and vecuronium go on lean or ideal weight; cisatracurium is disputed.
WhyObesity raises plasma cholinesterase activity and expands extracellular fluid, so succinylcholine needs total-weight dosing for dependable paralysis. Rocuronium on total weight delays recovery, so it and vecuronium use lean weight. Sources diverge: Miller doses cisatracurium and midazolam on total weight, while Faust puts other relaxants on lean weight; textbooks scale the propofol induction bolus to lean weight but infusions to total weight. UK obesity guidelines place only succinylcholine on total weight, propofol infusions on adjusted weight. Without succinylcholine, textbooks point to midazolam or a propofol infusion; guidelines to none.
The trapDexmedetomidine, total weight in one text. Dexmedetomidine tempts because Barash's obesity table does place it on total body weight. It remains the wrong pick because only one text does so, much as only Miller puts cisatracurium on total weight while Barash and guidelines put it on lean. Succinylcholine is the one drug all sources agree on.
EvidenceBarash: succinylcholine on total weight, as pseudocholinesterase and extracellular fluid rise; rocuronium on lean. Miller: propofol, vecuronium and rocuronium on ideal weight; midazolam, succinylcholine, cisatracurium and fentanyl on total; boluses on lean mass, infusions total. Faust: succinylcholine total, other relaxants lean.
Sources: Barash 9eMiller 10eFaust
Clues · tap one to see the answerObese patient: which neuromuscular blocker do every source agree should be dosed on total body weight?
Succinylcholine.
In obesity, rocuronium and vecuronium are dosed on which weight, and why not total weight for rocuronium?
Lean or ideal weight; total weight delays recovery.
Common misconception That all relaxants follow succinylcholine onto total weight
Report a problem with entry 1: Obesity: succinylcholine on total body weight in every source; rocuronium and vecuronium on lean weight; cisatracurium and propofol infusions disputed
Core rules002 / 129
Remifentanil in the elderly: halve the bolus, cut the infusion to about a third
In older patients, the remifentanil bolus is about half the young-adult dose, and the infusion rate is about one-third that of a young adult.
WhyWith age the brain becomes more sensitive to remifentanil. This pharmacodynamic change causes most of the lower requirement, and changes in drug handling play only a minor part. General texts give an overall reduction of at least 50%. Stoelting separates it by dose type: a bolus needs about half the young-adult dose, while a running infusion needs a rate of about one-third that of a young adult. So treat 50% as the smallest cut, and reduce the maintenance infusion further than the bolus.
The trapHalving the infusion rate like the bolus dose. Half is easy to remember because it is the bolus figure and the overall 'at least 50%' figure. For an infusion, though, the books go further, to a rate of about one-third that of young adults. Halving the infusion would still overdose an older patient.
EvidenceStoelting advises roughly half the bolus and about one-third of the infusion rate in older patients. Miller's says the lower need comes mainly from greater sensitivity, and gives an overall dose reduction of at least 50%.
Sources: Stoelting 8eMiller 10e
Clues · tap one to see the answerAn 82-year-old needs a remifentanil bolus at induction. How should it compare with a young adult's bolus?
About half the young-adult bolus.
Is cutting a 78-year-old's remifentanil maintenance to 50% of the usual adult rate sufficient?
No; aim for roughly a third of what a young adult receives.
Common misconception That halving the infusion rate is enough in older patients
Report a problem with entry 2: Remifentanil in the elderly: halve the bolus, cut the infusion to about a third
Core rules003 / 129
Cisatracurium needs no dose change in the elderly: organ-independent Hofmann elimination
Give older patients the usual cisatracurium dose; breakdown is organ-independent, so clearance and recovery are unchanged. Expect slightly slower onset.
WhyAgeing slows the clearance of drugs that depend on hepatic blood flow or renal excretion, so vecuronium and fentanyl have longer-lasting effects in older patients. Cisatracurium is eliminated mainly through Hofmann degradation, which is independent of both organs, so its clearance is unchanged. Its elimination half-life is slightly longer, but this reflects only a modestly larger volume of distribution and does not delay recovery. Onset is slower because the drug takes longer to reach its site of action. If onset is slow, wait longer rather than giving a larger dose.
The trapVecuronium needs dose change in elderly patients. Vecuronium is tempting because it is also an intermediate-acting non-depolarising relaxant, so the two seem interchangeable. But it relies on organ excretion. In older patients, slower excretion makes its half-life and action longer, so its dosing needs adjusting.
EvidenceOlder patients clear cisatracurium as fast as younger ones; its slightly longer half-life reflects a modestly larger distribution volume, and recovery is unchanged, with only onset slower. By contrast, slower excretion prolongs vecuronium, and fentanyl clearance falls because it depends on liver blood flow.
Sources: Barash 9eMiller 10e
Clues · tap one to see the answerA frail 85-year-old is to receive cisatracurium. Should the dose be cut for age?
No; give the usual dose, as Hofmann elimination is organ-independent.
Cisatracurium onset seems slow in a 79-year-old. Should you give a further dose?
No; wait longer. Onset is slower but recovery is unchanged.
Report a problem with entry 3: Cisatracurium needs no dose change in the elderly: organ-independent Hofmann elimination
Core rules004 / 129
Cerebral palsy: lower MAC; relaxant recovery often prolonged (Stoelting), though anticonvulsant-treated patients may resist non-depolarisers (Faust, Mayo)
In cerebral palsy, relaxant recovery and volatile emergence both run long; give less volatile and titrate relaxant doses to monitored neuromuscular function.
WhyStoelting states that children with cerebral palsy need less volatile agent, wake slowly, and recover slowly from neuromuscular block, so a prolonged relaxant effect is the expected default. Faust adds a branch: patients on chronic anticonvulsants may resist non-depolarisers, without the hyperkalaemic response to succinylcholine. So the condition itself slows recovery, while anticonvulsant therapy can raise the dose needed; the net requirement is unpredictable. Give relaxant in small increments to monitored effect and confirm full recovery before extubation, remembering that larger doses in resistant patients also raise residual-block risk.
The trapKetamine causes delayed emergence in cerebral palsy. Ketamine's tempting because a large intramuscular dose can markedly delay emergence, but that delay is dose- and route-dependent in any child, not specific to cerebral palsy. It is also proconvulsant, so best avoided in seizure-prone patients. Cerebral palsy-specific prolongation affects relaxant recovery and volatile emergence.
EvidenceStoelting: cerebral palsy lowers volatile requirement, emergence is often delayed, and relaxants need caution because block recovery is usually prolonged. Miller also records a lower MAC. Faust notes resistance to non-depolarisers in anticonvulsant-treated conditions including cerebral palsy, without succinylcholine hyperkalaemia.
Sources: Stoelting 8eFaustMiller 10e
Clues · tap one to see the answerA 9-year-old with cerebral palsy has sevoflurane anaesthesia. How does his volatile need compare with other children?
Lower; less volatile is needed and emergence is slower.
A teenager with cerebral palsy on long-term anticonvulsants needs a non-depolariser. How should you give it?
Small increments titrated to monitoring; requirement is unpredictable.
Report a problem with entry 4: Cerebral palsy: lower MAC; relaxant recovery often prolonged (Stoelting), though anticonvulsant-treated patients may resist non-depolarisers (Faust, Mayo)
Core rules005 / 129
Ageing raises brain sensitivity to propofol and midazolam; for etomidate the books differ (Barash unchanged, Stoelting increased)
In the elderly, reduce propofol and midazolam doses partly because the brain is more sensitive. Etomidate's brain sensitivity is disputed, so choose propofol.
WhyOlder patients need less hypnotic for two separate reasons. The first is pharmacokinetic: a smaller central compartment and slower redistribution mean a bolus reaches higher effect-site levels. The second is pharmacodynamic: the ageing brain responds more to the same concentration. For propofol, Miller describes sensitivity that rises with concentration, and Barash lists raised brain sensitivity. Stoelting attributes midazolam's large elderly dose cut mainly to pharmacodynamics. The sources split on etomidate: Barash lists unchanged brain sensitivity, while Stoelting reports increased sensitivity. Propofol is the agent both sources agree on.
The trapEtomidate sensitivity unchanged with age. Etomidate is tempting because its elderly bolus is cut substantially and it is the classic induction agent for frail patients. But Barash lists its brain sensitivity as unchanged, which makes the dose cut kinetic in that source. Only Stoelting reports increased sensitivity. Propofol's increased sensitivity is not disputed.
EvidenceBarash notes, by some accounts, raised propofol brain sensitivity in older patients but unchanged thiopental and etomidate sensitivity, though both need lower doses. Miller: older patients' EEG and blood pressure propofol sensitivity rises with concentration. Stoelting: older patients are markedly more midazolam-sensitive, mainly pharmacodynamically.
Sources: Miller 10eBarash 9eStoelting 8e
Clues · tap one to see the answerApart from kinetic changes, why does a 75-year-old need less propofol for induction?
The ageing brain is more sensitive to propofol.
Which induction agent has a disputed change in brain sensitivity with age, making it the less certain pick?
Etomidate; only propofol's raised sensitivity is agreed.
Common misconception That etomidate's raised brain sensitivity in old age is undisputed
Report a problem with entry 5: Ageing raises brain sensitivity to propofol and midazolam; for etomidate the books differ (Barash unchanged, Stoelting increased)
Core rules006 / 129
Ageing: cardiac output, lean mass, body water and clearance fall while fat rises
In older patients, only body fat rises. Cardiac output, GFR, liver blood flow, body water, lean mass and albumin all fall.
WhyWith age, muscle and water compartments shrink while adipose tissue grows. Water-soluble drugs therefore spread through a smaller volume, and lipid-soluble drugs spread through a larger reservoir. Serum albumin falls, so less drug is bound and more circulates free. Cardiac output, renal filtration, hepatic perfusion and liver enzyme activity all decline. Drugs are cleared more slowly, and their effects last longer.
The trapBody fat decreases with age. Lean mass, water and most organ functions decline with age, so someone may assume fat falls too. It does the opposite: the proportion of body fat rises as lean tissue is lost. That is why lipid-soluble drugs have a larger volume of distribution in older patients.
EvidenceAgeing lowers total body water, lean body mass and serum albumin, and raises total body fat. It also reduces cardiac output, glomerular filtration and hepatic blood flow and enzyme activity. Together these slow the elimination of neuromuscular blocking drugs.
Sources: Barash 9eMiller 10e
Clues · tap one to see the answerBetween the ages of 30 and 80, which body compartment increases?
Body fat; lean mass, water and organ blood flows fall.
Why does a lipid-soluble drug have a larger distribution volume in an 85-year-old woman?
Her proportion of body fat has risen with age.
Common misconception That body fat falls along with lean mass in old age
Report a problem with entry 6: Ageing: cardiac output, lean mass, body water and clearance fall while fat rises
Core rules007 / 129
Rocuronium in end-stage renal disease: clearance falls by about a third (mainly biliary, 10-25% renal), so its effect can be prolonged
Rocuronium lasts longer in renal failure because reduced renal excretion lowers clearance, but it is mainly cleared in bile, so prolongation is modest.
WhyThe liver takes up most rocuronium, which leaves in bile. The kidney handles only 10%-25%. In renal failure, losing that share still cuts plasma clearance by about 33% to 39%, so plasma levels fall more slowly and recovery from block is delayed. Volume of distribution barely changes, and there is no active metabolite to accumulate. Because most of the drug bypasses the kidney, the block lasts only somewhat longer. Drugs relying mainly on the kidney are affected far more.
The trapKidney is main elimination route for rocuronium. This looks right because the block lasts longer in renal failure, so the kidney seems to be the main exit. It is not: bile carries most of the drug. The block is prolonged because the smaller renal share is lost and clearance falls, not because the kidney dominates.
EvidenceIn renal failure, rocuronium clearance falls by 33% to 39%. Volume of distribution is unchanged or slightly raised, and humans form no active metabolites. Elimination is mainly hepatic and biliary, with 10%-25% renal. Renal disease is expected to slow its excretion.
Sources: Miller 10eMayo reviewStoelting 8e
Clues · tap one to see the answerA patient on haemodialysis receives rocuronium. What happens to the duration of block, and why?
Modestly longer; the renal share of clearance is lost.
Which route removes most rocuronium from the body?
Biliary excretion; the kidney handles only 10%-25%.
Common misconception That the kidney is rocuronium's main route of excretion
Report a problem with entry 7: Rocuronium in end-stage renal disease: clearance falls by about a third (mainly biliary, 10-25% renal), so its effect can be prolonged
Core rules008 / 129
Remifentanil clearance is fastest in infants
Remifentanil is an exception to slow clearance in the young: neonates and infants clear it fastest, faster than older children, so choose the youngest group.
WhyMost drugs are cleared by the liver and kidneys. These organs are immature early in life, so the youngest patients usually clear drugs slowly. Remifentanil is different because non-specific esterases in plasma and tissues break it down, and these do not depend on the liver or kidneys maturing. Infants also have a larger volume of distribution than older children. Immature organs therefore do not slow its elimination, and clearance is fastest in the youngest patients. Its kinetics also vary unusually little between patients at this age.
The trapAdults clear remifentanil fastest. Adults are tempting because their liver and kidneys are fully mature, and for most drugs that means the fastest clearance. It fails because blood and tissue esterases break remifentanil down, not those organs. Mature organs therefore give adults no advantage, and the youngest patients clear it fastest.
EvidenceMiller states that, unlike most drugs, remifentanil is cleared faster by neonates than older children, attributed to breakdown by non-specific plasma and tissue esterases and a larger volume of distribution. Immature liver and kidney function does not alter its kinetics.
Sources: Miller 10e
Clues · tap one to see the answerWhich group clears remifentanil fastest: infants, school-age children or adults?
Neonates and infants.
Common misconception That mature adult organs give the fastest remifentanil clearance
Why do immature liver and kidneys not slow remifentanil clearance in a 2-month-old?
Plasma and tissue esterases break it down, independent of organ maturity.
Report a problem with entry 8: Remifentanil clearance is fastest in infants