Relationship between bispectral index values and volatile anesthetic concentrations during the maintenance phase of anesthesia in the B-Unaware trial

Hypnotic depth during anesthesia affects electroencephalography waveforms and electroencephalogram-derived indices, such as the bispectral index (BIS). Titrating anesthetic administration against the BIS assumes reliable relationships between BIS values, electroencephalogram waveforms, and effect site concentration, beyond loss of responsiveness. Associations among BIS, end-tidal anesthetic concentrations (ETAC), and patient characteristics were examined during anesthetic maintenance, using B-Unaware trial data.

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.

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.

Rasmussen's spectral sequences and the \germslN-concordance invariants

Combining known spectral sequences with a new spectral sequence relating reduced and unreduced slN-homology yields a relations hip between the Homflypt-homology of a knot and its slN-concordance invariants. As an application, some of the slN-concordance invariants are shown to be linearly independent.

Closed-loop control of mean arterial blood pressure during surgery with alfentanil: clinical evaluation of a novel model-based predictive controller

BACKGROUND: In contrast to hypnosis, there is no surrogate parameter for analgesia in anesthetized patients. Opioids are titrated to suppress blood pressure response to noxious stimulation. The authors evaluated a novel model predictive controller for closed-loop administration of alfentanil using mean arterial blood pressure and predicted plasma alfentanil concentration (Cp Alf) as input parameters. METHODS: The authors studied 13 healthy patients scheduled to undergo minor lumbar and cervical spine surgery. After induction with propofol, alfentanil, and mivacurium and tracheal intubation, isoflurane was titrated to maintain the Bispectral Index at 55 (+/- 5), and the alfentanil administration was switched from manual to closed-loop control. The controller adjusted the alfentanil infusion rate to maintain the mean arterial blood pressure near the set-point (70 mmHg) while minimizing the Cp Alf toward the set-point plasma alfentanil concentration (Cp Alfref) (100 ng/ml). RESULTS: Two patients were excluded because of loss of arterial pressure signal and protocol violation. The alfentanil infusion was closed-loop controlled for a mean (SD) of 98.9 (1.5)% of presurgery time and 95.5 (4.3)% of surgery time. The mean (SD) end-tidal isoflurane concentrations were 0.78 (0.1) and 0.86 (0.1) vol%, the Cp Alf values were 122 (35) and 181 (58) ng/ml, and the Bispectral Index values were 51 (9) and 52 (4) before surgery and during surgery, respectively. The mean (SD) absolute deviations of mean arterial blood pressure were 7.6 (2.6) and 10.0 (4.2) mmHg (P = 0.262), and the median performance error, median absolute performance error, and wobble were 4.2 (6.2) and 8.8 (9.4)% (P = 0.002), 7.9 (3.8) and 11.8 (6.3)% (P = 0.129), and 14.5 (8.4) and 5.7 (1.2)% (P = 0.002) before surgery and during surgery, respectively. A post hoc simulation showed that the Cp Alfref decreased the predicted Cp Alf compared with mean arterial blood pressure alone. CONCLUSION: The authors' controller has a similar set-point precision as previous hypnotic controllers and provides adequate alfentanil dosing during surgery. It may help to standardize opioid dosing in research and may be a further step toward a multiple input-multiple output controller.

Stimulation induced variability of pulse plethysmography does not discriminate responsiveness to intubation

BACKGROUND: Hypnotic depth but not haemodynamic response to painful stimulation can be measured with various EEG-based anaesthesia monitors. We evaluated the variation of pulse plethysmography amplitude induced by an electrical tetanic stimulus (PPG variation) as a potential measure for analgesia and predictor of haemodynamic responsiveness during general anaesthesia. METHODS: Ninety-five patients, ASA I or II, were randomly assigned to five groups [Group 1: bispectral index (BIS) (range) 40-50, effect site remifentanil concentration 1 ng ml(-1);Group 2: BIS 40-50, remifentanil 2 ng ml(-1); Group 3: BIS 40-50, remifentanil 4 ng ml(-1); Group 4: BIS 25-35, remifentanil 2 ng ml(-1); Group 5: BIS 55-65, remifentanil 2 ng ml(-1)]. A 60 mA tetanic stimulus was applied for 5 s on the ulnar nerve. From the digitized pulse oximeter wave recorded on a laptop computer, linear and non-linear parameters of PPG variation during the 60 s period after stimulation were computed. The haemodynamic response to subsequent orotracheal intubation was recorded. The PPG variation was compared between groups and between responders and non-responders to intubation (anova). Variables independently predicting the response were determined by logistic regression. RESULTS: The probability of a response to tracheal intubation was 0.77, 0.47, 0.05, 0.18 and 0.52 in Groups 1-5, respectively (P<0.03). The PPG variability was significantly higher in responders than in non-responders but it did not improve the prediction of the response to tracheal intubation based on BIS level and effect site remifentanil concentration. CONCLUSION: Tetanic stimulation induced PPG variation does not reflect the analgesic state in a wide clinical range of surgical anaesthesia.

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.

Intrapatient reproducibility of the BISxp monitor

BACKGROUND: The Bispectral Index (BIS) reportedly reflects anesthetic depth. It is recommended that anesthetic agents should be titrated to maintain the BIS between 40 and 60 arbitrary BIS units during anesthesia. For anesthesia providers to follow this recommendation, the monitor should be predictably affected by different anesthetic agents and have good interpatient and intrapatient reproducibility. The authors hypothesized that when two BISxp devices (Aspect Medical Systems, Newton, MA) are placed concurrently on the same patient, their readings are concordant throughout the anesthetic period. METHODS: Simultaneous BIS recordings from two BISxp monitors were obtained during anesthesia at 5-s intervals from 12 participants. RESULTS: In total 22,860 concurrent paired BIS readings were obtained. For 10.7% of the time, there were sustained periods of 30 s or greater where the readings suggested a different depth of anesthesia. For 6% of the time, there were sustained periods of 30 s or greater where the readings differed by 10 or more arbitrary BIS units. The regression coefficient (R) for the two devices was 0.65 (range, 0.35-0.92). There was zero bias between the devices, and the 95% limits of agreement ranged between -18 and +17. CONCLUSION: A conflicting anesthetic management was suggested by the simultaneous BIS readings 10.7% of the time. These results suggest that BISxp does not always provide a reproducible single number. Anesthesia providers should not rely exclusively on the BIS reading when assessing depth of anesthesia.

Response surface modeling of the interaction between propofol and sevoflurane

BACKGROUND: Propofol and sevoflurane display additivity for gamma-aminobutyric acid receptor activation, loss of consciousness, and tolerance of skin incision. Information about their interaction regarding electroencephalographic suppression is unavailable. This study examined this interaction as well as the interaction on the probability of tolerance of shake and shout and three noxious stimulations by using a response surface methodology. METHODS: Sixty patients preoperatively received different combined concentrations of propofol (0-12 microg/ml) and sevoflurane (0-3.5 vol.%) according to a crisscross design (274 concentration pairs, 3 to 6 per patient). After having reached pseudo-steady state, the authors recorded bispectral index, state and response entropy and the response to shake and shout, tetanic stimulation, laryngeal mask airway insertion, and laryngoscopy. For the analysis of the probability of tolerance by logistic regression, a Greco interaction model was used. For the separate analysis of bispectral index, state and response entropy suppression, a fractional Emax Greco model was used. All calculations were performed with NONMEM V (GloboMax LLC, Hanover, MD). RESULTS: Additivity was found for all endpoints, the Ce(50, PROP)/Ce(50, SEVO) for bispectral index suppression was 3.68 microg. ml(-1)/ 1.53 vol.%, for tolerance of shake and shout 2.34 microg . ml(-1)/ 1.03 vol.%, tetanic stimulation 5.34 microg . ml(-1)/ 2.11 vol.%, laryngeal mask airway insertion 5.92 microg. ml(-1) / 2.55 vol.%, and laryngoscopy 6.55 microg. ml(-1)/2.83 vol.%. CONCLUSION: For both electroencephalographic suppression and tolerance to stimulation, the interaction of propofol and sevoflurane was identified as additive. The response surface data can be used for more rational dose finding in case of sequential and coadministration of propofol and sevoflurane.