Double-blinded, randomized controlled trial comparing real versus placebo acupuncture to improve tolerance of diagnostic esophagogastroduodenoscopy without sedation: a study protocol

Background Sedation prior to performance of diagnostic esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGDE) is widespread and increases patient comfort. But 98% of all serious adverse events during EGDEs are ascribed to sedation. The S3 guideline for sedation procedures in gastrointestinal endoscopy published in 2008 in Germany increases patient safety by standardization. These new regulations increase costs because of the need for more personnel and a prolonged discharge procedure after examinations with sedation. Many patients have difficulties to meet the discharge criteria regulated by the S3 guideline, e.g. the call for a second person to escort them home, to resign from driving and working for the rest of the day, resulting in a refusal of sedation. Therefore, we would like to examine if an acupuncture during elective, diagnostic EGDEs could increase the comfort of patients refusing systemic sedation. Methods/Design A single-center, double blinded, placebo controlled superiority trial to compare the success rates of elective, diagnostic EGDEs with real and placebo acupuncture. All patients aged 18 years or older scheduled for elective, diagnostic EGDE who refuse a systemic sedation are eligible. 354 patients will be randomized. The primary endpoint is the rate of successful EGDEs with the randomized technique. Intervention: Real or placebo acupuncture before and during EGDE. Duration of study: Approximately 24 months. Discussion Organisation/Responsibility The ACUPEND - Trial will be conducted in accordance with the protocol and in compliance with the moral, ethical, and scientific principles governing clinical research as set out in the Declaration of Helsinki (1989) and Good Clinical Practice (GCP). The Interdisciplinary Endoscopy Center (IEZ) of the University Hospital Heidelberg is responsible for design and conduct of the trial, including randomization and documentation of patients' data. Data management and statistical analysis will be performed by the independent Institute for Medical Biometry and Informatics (IMBI) and the Center of Clinical Trials (KSC) at the Department of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, University of Heidelberg.

Dexmedetomidine vs midazolam or propofol for sedation during prolonged mechanical ventilation: two randomized controlled trials

Long-term sedation with midazolam or propofol in intensive care units (ICUs) has serious adverse effects. Dexmedetomidine, an α(2)-agonist available for ICU sedation, may reduce the duration of mechanical ventilation and enhance patient comfort.

Hypertriglyceridemia: a potential side effect of propofol sedation in critical illness

Hypertriglyceridemia (hyperTG) is common among intensive care unit (ICU) patients, but knowledge about hyperTG risk factors is scarce. The present study aims to identify risk factors favoring its development in patients requiring prolonged ICU treatment.

The effects of dexmedetomidine/remifentanil and midazolam/remifentanil on auditory-evoked potentials and electroencephalogram at light-to-moderate sedation levels in healthy subjects

Avoidance of excessively deep sedation levels is problematic in intensive care patients. Electrophysiologic monitoring may offer an approach to solving this problem. Since electroencephalogram (EEG) responses to different sedation regimens vary, we assessed electrophysiologic responses to two sedative drug regimens in 10 healthy volunteers. Dexmedetomidine/remifentanil (dex/remi group) and midazolam/remifentanil (mida/remi group) were infused 7 days apart. Each combination of medications was given at stepwise intervals to reach Ramsay scores (RS) 2, 3, and 4. Resting EEG, bispectral index (BIS), and the N100 amplitudes of long-latency auditory-evoked potentials (ERP) were recorded at each level of sedation. During dex/remi, resting EEG was characterized by a recurrent high-power low-frequency pattern which became more pronounced at deeper levels of sedation. BIS Index decreased uniformly in only the dex/remi group (from 94 +/- 3 at baseline to 58 +/- 14 at RS 4) compared to the mida/remi group (from 94 +/- 2 to 76 +/- 10; P = 0.029 between groups). The ERP amplitudes decreased from 5.3 +/- 1.3 at baseline to 0.4 +/- 1.1 at RS 4 (P = 0.003) in only the mida/remi group. We conclude that ERPs in volunteers sedated with dex/remi, in contrast to mida/remi, indicate a cortical response to acoustic stimuli, even when sedation reaches deeper levels. Consequently, ERP can monitor sedation with midazolam but not with dexmedetomidine. The reverse is true for BIS.

Sedation and weaning from mechanical ventilation: effects of process optimization outside a clinical trial

PURPOSE: We studied the effects of reorganization and changes in the care process, including use of protocols for sedation and weaning from mechanical ventilation, on the use of sedative and analgesic drugs and on length of respiratory support and stay in the intensive care unit (ICU). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three cohorts of 100 mechanically ventilated ICU patients, admitted in 1999 (baseline), 2000 (implementation I, after a change in ICU organization and in diagnostic and therapeutic approaches), and 2001 (implementation II, after introduction of protocols for weaning from mechanical ventilation and sedation), were studied retrospectively. RESULTS: Simplified Acute Physiology Score II (SAPS II), diagnostic groups, and number of organ failures were similar in all groups. Data are reported as median (interquartile range).Time on mechanical ventilation decreased from 18 (7-41) (baseline) to 12 (7-27) hours (implementation II) (P = .046), an effect which was entirely attributable to noninvasive ventilation, and length of ICU stay decreased in survivors from 37 (21-71) to 25 (19-63) hours (P = .049). The amount of morphine (P = .001) and midazolam (P = .050) decreased, whereas the amount of propofol (P = .052) and fentanyl increased (P = .001). Total Therapeutic Intervention Scoring System-28 (TISS-28) per patient decreased from 137 (99-272) to 113 (87-256) points (P = .009). Intensive care unit mortality was 19% (baseline), 8% (implementation I), and 7% (implementation II) (P = .020). CONCLUSIONS: Changes in organizational and care processes were associated with an altered pattern of sedative and analgesic drug prescription, a decrease in length of (noninvasive) respiratory support and length of stay in survivors, and decreases in resource use as measured by TISS-28 and mortality.

Visual and quantitative electroencephalographic analysis of healthy young and adult cats under medetomidine sedation

A study was designed to investigate the effect of medetomidine sedation on quantitative electroencephalography (q-EEG) in healthy young and adult cats to determine objective guidelines for diagnostic EEG recordings and interpretation. Preliminary visual examination of EEG recordings revealed high-voltage low-frequency background activity. Spindles, k-complexes and vertex sharp transients characteristic of sleep or sedation were superimposed on a low background activity. Neither paroxysmal activity nor EEG burst-suppression were observed. The spectral analysis of q-EEG included four parameters, namely, relative power (%), and mean, median and peak frequency (Hz) of all four frequency bands (delta, theta, alpha and beta). The findings showed a prevalence of slow delta and theta rhythms as opposed to fast alpha and beta rhythms in both young (group A) and adult (group B) cats. A posterior gradient was reported for the theta band and an anterior gradient for the alpha and beta bands in both groups, respectively. The relative power value in group B compared to group A was significantly higher for theta, alpha and beta bands, and lower for the delta band. The mean and median frequency values in group B was significantly higher for delta, theta and beta bands and lower for the alpha band. The study has shown that a medetomidine sedation protocol for feline EEG may offer a method for investigating bio-electrical cortical activity. The use of q-EEG analysis showed a decrease in high frequency bands and increased activity of the low frequency band in healthy cats under medetomidine sedation.

Entropy and bispectral index for assessment of sedation, analgesia and the effects of unpleasant stimuli in critically ill patients: an observational study

INTRODUCTION: Sedative and analgesic drugs are frequently used in critically ill patients. Their overuse may prolong mechanical ventilation and length of stay in the intensive care unit. Guidelines recommend use of sedation protocols that include sedation scores and trials of sedation cessation to minimize drug use. We evaluated processed electroencephalography (response and state entropy and bispectral index) as an adjunct to monitoring effects of commonly used sedative and analgesic drugs and intratracheal suctioning. METHODS: Electrodes for monitoring bispectral index and entropy were placed on the foreheads of 44 critically ill patients requiring mechanical ventilation and who previously had no brain dysfunction. Sedation was targeted individually using the Ramsay Sedation Scale, recorded every 2 hours or more frequently. Use of and indications for sedative and analgesic drugs and intratracheal suctioning were recorded manually and using a camera. At the end of the study, processed electroencephalographical and haemodynamic variables collected before and after each drug application and tracheal suctioning were analyzed. Ramsay score was used for comparison with processed electroencephalography when assessed within 15 minutes of an intervention. RESULTS: The indications for boli of sedative drugs exhibited statistically significant, albeit clinically irrelevant, differences in terms of their association with processed electroencephalographical parameters. Electroencephalographical variables decreased significantly after bolus, but a specific pattern in electroencephalographical variables before drug administration was not identified. The same was true for opiate administration. At both 30 minutes and 2 minutes before intratracheal suctioning, there was no difference in electroencephalographical or clinical signs in patients who had or had not received drugs 10 minutes before suctioning. Among patients who received drugs, electroencephalographical parameters returned to baseline more rapidly. In those cases in which Ramsay score was assessed before the event, processed electroencephalography exhibited high variation. CONCLUSIONS: Unpleasant or painful stimuli and sedative and analgesic drugs are associated with significant changes in processed electroencephalographical parameters. However, clinical indications for drug administration were not reflected by these electroencephalographical parameters, and barely by sedation level before drug administration or tracheal suction. This precludes incorporation of entropy and bispectral index as target variables for sedation and analgesia protocols in critically ill patients.

Dexmedetomidine versus propofol/midazolam for long-term sedation during mechanical ventilation

PURPOSE: To compare dexmedetomidine (DEX) with standard care (SC, either propofol or midazolam) for long-term sedation in terms of maintaining target sedation and length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay. METHODS: A pilot, phase III, double-blind multicenter study in randomized medical and surgical patients (n = 85) within the first 72 h of ICU stay with an expected ICU stay of >or=48 h and sedation need for >or=24 h after randomization. Patients were assigned to either DEX (sedation stops. RESULTS: Non-inferiority of DEX versus SC was not confirmed. Target Richmond agitation-sedation score (RASS) was reached a median of 64% (DEX) and 63% (SC) of the sedation time (ns). The length of ICU stay was similar in DEX and SC. Patients with RASS target 0-3 (DEX 78%, SC 80%) were at target sedation 74% (DEX) and 64% (SC) of the time (ns), whereas those with RASS target -4 or less reached the target 42% (DEX) and 62% (SC) of the time (P = .006). Post hoc analyses suggested shorter duration of mechanical ventilation for DEX (P = 0.025). CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study suggests that in long-term sedation, DEX is comparable to SC in maintaining sedation targets of RASS 0 to -3 but not suitable for deep sedation (RASS -4 or less). DEX had no effect on length of ICU stay. Its effects on other relevant clinical outcomes, such as duration of mechanical ventilation, should be tested further.

Anesthesia or sedation for gastroenterologic endoscopies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Because propofol is the sedative preferred by gastroenterologists, we focus this review on gastroenterologist-directed propofol sedation, provide simulations of the respiratory depressant effect of different dosing protocols and give a perspective on future developments in computer-assisted sedation techniques. RECENT FINDINGS: Propofol use by nonanesthesiologists remains a contraindication in the package insert of propofol in most countries. Sedation guidelines produced by the American Society of Gastroenterology partially contradict those produced by the American Society of Anesthesiologists for sedation by nonanesthesiologists, whereas the German guidelines were developed with anesthesiologists involved. The use of fospropofol, recently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for sedation, is considered an alternative to propofol by some gastroenterologists. Methodological errors in earlier pharmacological studies have to be solved before widespread use of fospropofol is justified, however. Our simulations show that dosing protocols with small boluses administered at reasonable intervals induce less respiratory depression than large boluses. Interindividual variability of propofol-induced respiratory depression is illustrated by different pharmacokinetic and dynamic parameter sets used in the simulation. Two computer-assisted propofol infusion systems are currently being investigated. They not only incorporate the target effect but also the side effects, which may limit respiratory depression. SUMMARY: Propofol use by gastroenterologists may be well tolerated if appropriate patient selection, staff training, monitoring and low-dose sedation protocols are applied.

Auditory event-related potentials, bispectral index, and entropy for the discrimination of different levels of sedation in intensive care unit patients

BACKGROUND: Sedation protocols, including the use of sedation scales and regular sedation stops, help to reduce the length of mechanical ventilation and intensive care unit stay. Because clinical assessment of depth of sedation is labor-intensive, performed only intermittently, and interferes with sedation and sleep, processed electrophysiological signals from the brain have gained interest as surrogates. We hypothesized that auditory event-related potentials (ERPs), Bispectral Index (BIS), and Entropy can discriminate among clinically relevant sedation levels. METHODS: We studied 10 patients after elective thoracic or abdominal surgery with general anesthesia. Electroencephalogram, BIS, state entropy (SE), response entropy (RE), and ERPs were recorded immediately after surgery in the intensive care unit at Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS) scores of -5 (very deep sedation), -4 (deep sedation), -3 to -1 (moderate sedation), and 0 (awake) during decreasing target-controlled sedation with propofol and remifentanil. Reference measurements for baseline levels were performed before or several days after the operation. RESULTS: At baseline, RASS -5, RASS -4, RASS -3 to -1, and RASS 0, BIS was 94 [4] (median, IQR), 47 [15], 68 [9], 75 [10], and 88 [6]; SE was 87 [3], 46 [10], 60 [22], 74 [21], and 87 [5]; and RE was 97 [4], 48 [9], 71 [25], 81 [18], and 96 [3], respectively (all P < 0.05, Friedman Test). Both BIS and Entropy had high variabilities. When ERP N100 amplitudes were considered alone, ERPs did not differ significantly among sedation levels. Nevertheless, discriminant ERP analysis including two parameters of principal component analysis revealed a prediction probability PK value of 0.89 for differentiating deep sedation, moderate sedation, and awake state. The corresponding PK for RE, SE, and BIS was 0.88, 0.89, and 0.85, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Neither ERPs nor BIS or Entropy can replace clinical sedation assessment with standard scoring systems. Discrimination among very deep, deep to moderate, and no sedation after general anesthesia can be provided by ERPs and processed electroencephalograms, with similar P(K)s. The high inter- and intraindividual variability of Entropy and BIS precludes defining a target range of values to predict the sedation level in critically ill patients using these parameters. The variability of ERPs is unknown.

Intra- and inter-individual variation of BIS-index and Entropy during controlled sedation with midazolam/remifentanil and dexmedetomidine/remifentanil in healthy volunteers: an interventional study

INTRODUCTION: We studied intra-individual and inter-individual variability of two online sedation monitors, BIS and Entropy, in volunteers under sedation. METHODS: Ten healthy volunteers were sedated in a stepwise manner with doses of either midazolam and remifentanil or dexmedetomidine and remifentanil. One week later the procedure was repeated with the remaining drug combination. The doses were adjusted to achieve three different sedation levels (Ramsay Scores 2, 3 and 4) and controlled by a computer-driven drug-delivery system to maintain stable plasma concentrations of the drugs. At each level of sedation, BIS and Entropy (response entropy and state entropy) values were recorded for 20 minutes. Baseline recordings were obtained before the sedative medications were administered. RESULTS: Both inter-individual and intra-individual variability increased as the sedation level deepened. Entropy values showed greater variability than BIS(R) values, and the variability was greater during dexmedetomidine/remifentanil sedation than during midazolam/remifentanil sedation. CONCLUSIONS: The large intra-individual and inter-individual variability of BIS and Entropy values in sedated volunteers makes the determination of sedation levels by processed electroencephalogram (EEG) variables impossible. Reports in the literature which draw conclusions based on processed EEG variables obtained from sedated intensive care unit (ICU) patients may be inaccurate due to this variability. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Nr. NCT00641563.

Effect of sedation level on the prevalence of delirium when assessed with CAM-ICU and ICDSC

Purpose We hypothesized that reduced arousability (Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale, RASS, scores −2 to −3) for any reason during delirium assessment increases the apparent prevalence of delirium in intensive care patients. To test this hypothesis, we assessed delirium using the Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit (CAM-ICU) and Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist (ICDSC) in intensive care patients during sedation stops, and related the findings to the level of sedation, as assessed with RASS score. Methods We assessed delirium in 80 patients with ICU stay longer than 48 h using CAM-ICU and ICDSC during daily sedation stops. Sedation was assessed using RASS. The effect of including patients with a RASS of −2 and −3 during sedation stop (“light to moderate sedation”, eye contact less than 10 s or not at all, respectively) on prevalence of delirium was analyzed. Results A total of 467 patient days were assessed. The proportion of CAM-ICU-positive evaluations decreased from 53 to 31 % (p < 0.001) if assessments from patients at RASS −2/−3 (22 % of all assessments) were excluded. Similarly, the number of positive ICDSC results decreased from 51 to 29 % (p < 0.001). Conclusions Sedation per se can result in positive items of both CAM-ICU and ICDSC, and therefore in a diagnosis of delirium. Consequently, apparent prevalence of delirium is dependent on how a depressed level of consciousness after sedation stop is interpreted (delirium vs persisting sedation). We suggest that any reports on delirium using these assessment tools should be stratified for a sedation score during the assessment.