Comparison of Bispectral Index (BIS) and Patient State Index (PSI) as objective measures of sedation and analgesia in critically ill/injured patients

Critically ill and injured patients require pain relief and sedation to reduce the body's stress response and to facilitate painful diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. Presently, the level of sedation and analgesia is guided by the use of clinical scores which can be unreliable. There is therefore, a need for an objective measure of sedation and analgesia. The Bispectral Index (BIS) and Patient State Index (PSI) were recently introduced into clinical practice as objective measures of the depth of analgesia and sedation. ^ Aim. To compare the different measures of sedation and analgesia (BIS and PSI) to the standard and commonly used modified Ramsay Score (MRS) and determine if the monitors can be used interchangeably. ^ Methods. MRS, BIS and PSI values were obtained in 50 postoperative cardiac surgery patients requiring analgesia and sedation from June to December 2004. The MRS, BIS and PSI values were assessed hourly for up to 6-h by a single observer. ^ The relationship between BIS and PSI values were explored using scatter plots and correlation between MRS, BIS and PSI was determined using Spearman's correlation coefficient. Intra-class correlation (ICC) was used to determine the inter-rater reliability of MRS, BIS and PSI. Kappa statistics was used to further evaluate the agreement between BIS and PSI at light, moderate and deep levels of sedation. ^ Results. There was a positive correlation between BIS and PSI values (Rho = 0.731, p<0.001). Intra-class correlation between BIS and PSI was 0.58, MRS and BIS 0.43 and MRS and PSI 0.27. Using Kappa statistics, agreement between MRS and BIS was 0.35 (95% CI: 0.27–0.43) and for MRS and PSI was 0.21 (95% CI: 0.15–0.28). The kappa statistic for BIS and PSI was 0.45 (95% CI: 0.37–0.52). Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves constructed to detect undersedation indicated an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.91 (95% CI = 0.87 to 0.94) for the BIS and 0.84 (95% CI = 0.79 to 0.88) for the PSI. For detection of oversedation, AUC for the BIS was 0.89 (95% CI = 0.84 to 0.92) and 0.80 (95% CI = 0.75 to 0.85) for the PSI. ^ Conclusions. There is a statistically significant positive correlation between the BIS and PSI but poor correlation and poor test agreement between the MRS and BIS as well as MRS and PSI. Both the BIS and PSI demonstrated a high level of prediction for undersedation and oversedation; however, the BIS and PSI can not be considered interchangeable monitors of sedation. ^

Why does low dose morphine augment fentanyl analgesia?

Opioids dominate the field of pain management because of their ability to provide analgesia in many medical circumstances. However, side effects including respiratory depression, constipation, tolerance, physical dependence, and the risk of addiction limit their clinical utility. Fear of these side effects results in the under-treatment of acute pain. For many years, research has focused on ways to improve the therapeutic index (the ratio of desirable analgesic effects to undesirable side effects) of opioids. One strategy, combining opioid agonists that bind to different opioid receptor types, may prove successful.^ We discovered that subcutaneous co-administration of a moderately analgesic dose of the mu-opioid receptor (MOR) selective agonist fentanyl (20μg/kg) with subanalgesic doses of the less MOR-specific agonist morphine (100ng/kg-100μg/kg), augmented acute fentanyl analgesia in rats. Parallel [35S]GTPγS binding studies using naïve rat substantia gelatinosa membrane treated with fentanyl (4μM) and morphine (1nM-1pM) demonstrated a 2-fold increase in total G-protein activation. This correlation between morphine-induced augmentation of fentanyl analgesia and G-protein activation led to our proposal that interactions between MORs and DORs underlie opioid-induced augmentation. We discovered that morphine-induced augmentation of fentanyl analgesia and G-protein activity was mediated by DORs. Adding the DOR-selective antagonist naltrindole (200ng/kg, 40nM) at doses that did not alter the analgesic or G-protein activation of fentanyl, blocked increases in analgesia and G-protein activation induced by fentanyl/morphine combinations. Equivalent doses of the MOR-selective antagonist cyprodime (20ng/kg, 4nM) did not block augmentation. Substitution of the DOR-selective agonist SNC80 for morphine yielded similar results, further supporting our conclusion that interactions between MORs and DORs are responsible for morphine-induced augmentation of fentanyl analgesia and G-protein activation. Confocal microscopy of rat substantia gelatinosa showed that changes in the rate of opioid receptor internalization did not account for these effects.^ In conclusion, fentanyl analgesia augmentation by subanalgesic morphine is mediated by increased G-protein activation resulting from functional interactions between MORs and DORs, not changes in MOR internalization. Additional animal and clinical studies are needed to determine whether side effect incidence changes following opioid co-administration. If side effect incidence decreases or remains unchanged, these findings could have important implications for clinical pain treatment. ^

Comparative efficacy of 2 topical anesthetics for the placement of orthodontic temporary anchorage devices.

This study compared the effectiveness of topical benzocaine 20% versus a combination of lidocaine, tetracaine, and phenylephrine in providing sufficient analgesia for the placement of orthodontic temporary anchorage devices (TADs). The 2 topical anesthetics were tested against each other bilaterally using a randomized, double-blind, crossover design. The agents were left in place for the amount of time prescribed by the manufacturer. The TAD was then placed, and each subject rated the degree of pain on a Heft-Parker visual analogue scale. A pulse oximeter was used to record the preoperative and postoperative pulse rates. Statistically significant differences in perceived pain (P < .05) and success rate (P < .01) between drugs were seen, but no significant difference in pulse rate change between the topical anesthetics was observed (P > .05). It was concluded that when the efficacy of topical benzocaine and of a combination product was compared as the sole anesthetic to facilitate acceptable pain control for placement of orthodontic temporary anchorage devices, the combination product was considerably more efficacious.

A case-control study of hepatitis C virus and its interaction with hepatitis B virus on the development of hepatocellular carcinoma in the USA

Objective. The aim of this study was to assess the independent risk of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in the development of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The independent risk of hepatitis B virus (HBV), its interaction with hepatitis C virus and the association with other risk factors were examined.^ Methods. A hospital-based case-control study was conducted between January 1994 and December 1995. We enrolled 115 pathologically confirmed HCC patients and 230 nonliver cancer controls, who were matched by age ($\pm$5 years), gender, and year of diagnosis. Both cases and controls were recruited from The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center at Houston. The risk factors were collected through personal interviews and blood samples were tested for HCV and HBV markers. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed through conditional logistic regression.^ The prevalence of anti-HCV positive is 25.2% in HCC cases compared to 3.0% in controls. The univariate analysis showed that anti-HCV, HBsAg, alcohol drinking and cigarette smoking were significantly associated with HCC, however, family history of cancer, occupational chemical exposure, and use of oral contraceptive were not. Multivariate analysis revealed a matched odds ratio (OR) of 10.1 (95% CI 3.7-27.4) for anti-HCV, and an OR of 11.9 (95% CI 2.5-57.5) for HBsAg. However, dual infection of HCV and HBV had only a thirteen times increase in the risk of HCC, OR = 13.9 (95% CI 1.3-150.6). The estimated population attributable risk percent was 23.4% for HCV, 12.6% for HBV, and 5.3% for both viruses. Ever alcohol drinkers was positively associated with HCC, especially among daily drinkers, matched OR was 5.7 (95% CI 2.1-15.6). However, there was no significant increase in the risk of HCC among smokers as compared to nonsmokers. The mean age of HCC patients was significantly younger among the HBV(+) group and among the HCV(+)/HBV(+) group, when compared to the group of HCC patients with no viral markers. The association between past histories of blood transfusion, acupuncture, tattoo and IVDU was highly significant among the HCV(+) group and the HBV(+)/HCV(+) group, as compared to HCC patients with no viral markers. Forty percent of the HCC patients were pathologically or clinically diagnosed with liver cirrhosis. Anti-HCV(+) (OR = 3.6 95% CI 1.5-8.9) and alcohol drinking (OR = 2.7 95% CI 1.1-6.7), but not HBsAg, are the major risk factors for liver cirrhosis in HCC patients.^ Conclusion. Both hepatitis B virus and hepatitis C virus were independent risk factors for HCC. There was not enough evidence to determine the interaction between both viruses. Only daily alcoholic drinkers showed increasing risk for HCC development, as compared to nondrinkers. ^

AN ASCENDING SEROTONERGIC PAIN MODULATION SYSTEM

This dissertation describes an ascending serotonergic pain modulation system projecting from the dorsal raphe (DR) nucleus of the midbrain to the parafascicularis (PF) nucleus of the thalamus. Previous studies by other investigators have led to the hypothesis that the DR would modulate responses to noxious stimuli in the PF by using 5HT. These other studies have shown that the DR contains serotonergic (5HT) cell bodies which project to many areas of the forebrain including the PF, that the PF is involved in pain perception, that electrical stimulation of the DR causes analgesia, and 5HT is necessary for this type of analgesia. One theory of the mechanisms of an endogenous pain modulation system is that brainstem nuclei have a decsending projection to the spinal cord to inhibit responses to noxious input at this level. The present study tests the hypothesis that there is also an ascending pain modulation pathway from the brainstem to the thalamus.^ To test this hypothesis, several types of experiments were performed on anesthetised rats. The major results of the experiments are as follows: (1) Three types of spontaneously active PF neurons were found: slow units firing at 1-10 spikes/sec, bursting units firing 2-5 times in 10-20 msec, pattern repeating every 1-2 sec, and fast units firing at 15-40 spikes/sec. The first two groups showed similar results to the treatments and were analysed together. The fast firing units did not respond to any of the treatments. (2) Noxious stimuli primarily increased neuronal firing rates in the PF, where as DR stimulation primarily decreased neuronal activity. DR stimulation applied simultaneously with noxious stimuli decreased the responses to the noxious stimuli as recorded in the PF units. (3) Microiontophoretically applied 5HT in the PF decreased spontaneous activity in the PF in a dose dependent manner and decreases responses to noxious stimuli in the PF. (4) Reduction of brain 5HT by 5,7 dihydroxytryptamine, a potent 5HT neurotoxin, caused PF units to be hypersensitive to both noxious and non noxious stimuli, reversed the effects of DR stimulation so that DR stimulation increased single units activity in the PF, and prolonged and intensified the depressant action of microiontophoretically applied 5HT. The results of this study are consistent with the hypothesis that the DR uses 5HT in a direct ascending pathway to the PF to modulate pain in the thalamus. ^

Studies on behavioral regulations of morphine tolerance in rats

Opioids remain the drugs of choice in chronic pain treatment, but opioid tolerance, defined as a decrease in analgesic effect after prolonged or repeated use, dramatically limits their clinical utility. Opioid tolerance has classically been studied by implanting spinal catheters in animals for drug administration. This procedure has significant morbidity and mortality, as well as causing an inflammatory response which decreases the potency of opioid analgesia and possibly affects tolerance development. Therefore, we developed and validated a new method, intermittent lumbar puncture (Dautzenberg et al.), for the study of opioid analgesia and tolerance. Using this method, opioid tolerance was reliably induced without detectable morbidity. The dose of morphine needed to induce analgesia and tolerance using this method was about 100-fold lower than that required when using an intrathecal catheter. Only slight inflammation was found at the injection site, dissipated within seven mm. ^ DAMGO, an opioid μ receptor agonist, has been reported to inhibit morphine tolerance, but results from different studies are inconclusive. We evaluated the effect of DAMGO on morphine tolerance using our newly-developed ILP method, as well as other intrathecal catheter paradigms. We found that co-administration of sub-analgesic DAMGO with morphine using ILP did not inhibit morphine tolerance, but instead blocked the analgesic effects of morphine. Tolerance to morphine still developed. Tolerance to morphine can only be blocked by sub-analgesic dose of DAMGO when administered in a lumbar catheter, but not in cervical catheter settings. ^ Finally, we evaluated the effects of Gabapentin (GBP) on analgesia and morphine tolerance. We demonstrated that GBP enhanced analgesia mediated by both subanalgesic and analgesic doses of morphine although GBP itself was not analgesic. GBP increased potency and efficacy of morphine. GBP inhibited the expression, but not the development, of morphine tolerance. GBP blocked tolerance to analgesic morphine but not to subanalgesic morphine. GBP reversed the expression of morphine tolerance even after tolerance was established. These studies may begin to provide new insights into mechanisms of morphine tolerance development and improve clinical chronic pain management. ^