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. ^