BIS monitoring versus clinical assessment for sedation in mechanically ventilated adults in the intensive care unit and its impact on clinical outcomes and resource utilization

Comparing Bispectral Index Monitoring vs Clinical Assessment for Deep Sedation in the ICU: Effects on Delirium Reduction and Sedative Drug Doses-A Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

Sedative overdoses pose a risk of delirium among patients in the ICU, with potential mitigation through the use of a processed EEG monitor (the bispectral index [BIS]) to guide depth of sedation.

RESEARCH QUESTION

Can BIS-guided deep sedation (Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale RASS score, -4 or -5) reduce sedative dosage and increase delirium-free and coma-free (DFCF) days?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

A randomized controlled trial was conducted in a tertiary mixed ICU, enrolling patients requiring deep sedation for > 8 h. Patients were assigned randomly to either the clinical assessment (CA) or BIS groups (BIS range, 40-60). Both groups used a BIS sensor, whereas the CA group's screen remained covered. After deep sedation, BIS sensors were removed, and delirium was assessed twice daily by researchers masked to the randomization. The primary outcome was the number of DFCF days within 14 days after deep sedation. Additionally, we compared doses of sedative drugs and BIS values during deep sedation.

RESULTS

Ninety-nine patients were included in the study. We found no significant difference in DFCF days (P = .1) between CA and BIS arms, but propofol doses were significantly lower in the BIS group (CA group, 1.77 mg/kg/h [95% CI, 1.60-1.93] vs BIS group, 1.44 mg/kg/h [95% CI, 1.04-1.83]; P = .03). During deep sedation, the CA group spent 46% of the total hours (95% CI, 35%-57%) with BIS values of < 40, whereas the BIS group spent 32% (95% CI, 25%-40%; P = .03). Subgroup analysis focusing on patients sedated for > 24 h revealed an increase in DFCF days in the BIS group (CA group: median, 1 day [interquartile range (IQR), 0-9 days] vs BIS group: median, 8 days [IQR, 0-13 days]; P = .04).

INTERPRETATION

BIS-guided deep sedation did not improve DFCF days, but did reduce sedative drug use. In patients requiring sedation for > 24 h, it showed an improvement in DFCF days.

TRIAL REGISTRY

ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT03840577; URL: www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov.

Noninvasive monitoring technologies to identify discomfort and distressing symptoms in persons with limited communication at the end of life: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Discomfort and distressing symptoms are common at the end of life, while people in this stage are often no longer able to express themselves. Technologies may aid clinicians in detecting and treating these symptoms to improve end-of-life care. This review provides an overview of noninvasive monitoring technologies that may be applied to persons with limited communication at the end of life to identify discomfort.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed in nine databases, and experts were consulted. Manuscripts were included if they were written in English, Dutch, German, French, Japanese or Chinese, if the monitoring technology measured discomfort or distressing symptoms, was noninvasive, could be continuously administered for 4 hours and was potentially applicable for bed-ridden people. The screening was performed by two researchers independently. Information about the technology, its clinimetrics (validity, reliability, sensitivity, specificity, responsiveness), acceptability, and feasibility were extracted.

RESULTS

Of the 3,414 identified manuscripts, 229 met the eligibility criteria. A variety of monitoring technologies were identified, including actigraphy, brain activity monitoring, electrocardiography, electrodermal activity monitoring, surface electromyography, incontinence sensors, multimodal systems, and noncontact monitoring systems. The main indicators of discomfort monitored by these technologies were sleep, level of consciousness, risk of pressure ulcers, urinary incontinence, agitation, and pain. For the end-of-life phase, brain activity monitors could be helpful and acceptable to monitor the level of consciousness during palliative sedation. However, no manuscripts have reported on the clinimetrics, feasibility, and acceptability of the other technologies for the end-of-life phase.

CONCLUSIONS

Noninvasive monitoring technologies are available to measure common symptoms at the end of life. Future research should evaluate the quality of evidence provided by existing studies and investigate the feasibility, acceptability, and usefulness of these technologies in the end-of-life setting. Guidelines for studies on healthcare technologies should be better implemented and further developed.

Consistency analysis of consciousness index and bispectral index in monitoring the depth of sevoflurane anesthesia in laparoscopic surgery

Background

The Index of Consciousness (IoC) is a new monitoring index of anesthesia depth reflecting the state of consciousness of the brain independently developed by China. The research on monitoring the depth of anesthesia mainly focuses on propofol, and bispectral index (BIS) is a sensitive and accurate objective index to evaluate the state of consciousness at home and abroad. This study mainly analyzed the effect of IoC on monitoring the depth of sevoflurane anesthesia and the consistency and accuracy with BIS when monitoring sevoflurane maintenance anesthesia.

Objective

To investigate the monitoring value of the Index of Consciousness (IoC) for the depth of sevoflurane anesthesia in laparoscopic surgery.

Methods

The study population consisted of 108 patients who experienced elective whole-body anesthesia procedures within the timeframe of April 2020 to June 2023 at our hospital. Throughout the anesthesia process, which encompassed induction and maintenance using inhaled sevoflurane, all patients were diligently monitored for both the Bispectral Index (BIS) and the Index of Consciousness (IoC). We conducted an analysis to assess the correlation between IoC and BIS throughout the anesthesia induction process and from the maintenance phase to the regaining of consciousness. To evaluate the predictive accuracy of IoC and BIS for the onset of unconsciousness during induction and the return of consciousness during emergence, we employed receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis.

Results

The mean difference between BIS and IoC, spanning from the pre-anesthesia induction phase to the completion of propofol induction, was 1.3 (95% Limits of Agreement [-53.4 to 56.0]). Similarly, during the interval from the initiation of sevoflurane inhalation to the point of consciousness restoration, the average difference between BIS and IoC was 0.3 (95% LOA [-10.8 to 11.4]). No statistically significant disparities were observed in the data acquired from the two measurement methodologies during both the anesthesia induction process and the journey from maintenance to the regaining of consciousness (P > 0.05). The outcomes of the ROC curve analysis disclosed that the areas under the curve (AUC) for prognosticating the occurrence of loss of consciousness were 0.967 (95% CI [0.935-0.999]) for BIS and 0.959 (95% CI [0.924-0.993]) for IoC, with optimal threshold values set at 81 (sensitivity: 88.10%, specificity: 92.16%) and 77 (sensitivity: 79.55%, specificity: 95.45%) correspondingly. For the prediction of recovery of consciousness, the AUCs were 0.995 (95% CI [0.987-1.000]) for BIS and 0.963 (95% CI [0.916-1.000]) for IoC, each associated with optimal cutoff values of 76 (sensitivity: 92.86%, specificity: 100.00%) and 72 (sensitivity: 86.36%, specificity: 100.00%) respectively.

Conclusion

The monitoring of sevoflurane anesthesia maintenance using IoC demonstrates a level of comparability to BIS, and its alignment with BIS during the maintenance phase of sevoflurane anesthesia is robust. IoC displays promising potential for effectively monitoring the depth of anesthesia.

Early processed electroencephalography for the monitoring of deeply sedated mechanically ventilated critically ill patients

BACKGROUND

Deep sedation may be indicated in the intensive care unit (ICU) for the management of acute organ failure, but leads to sedative-induced delirium. Whether processed electroencephalography (p-EEG) is useful in this setting is unclear.

METHODS

We conducted a single-centre observational study of non-neurological ICU patients sedated according to a standardized guideline of deep sedation (Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale [RASS] between -5 and -4) during the acute phase of respiratory and/or cardio-circulatory failure. The SedLine (Masimo Incorporated, Irvine, California) was used to monitor the Patient State Index (PSI) (ranging from 0 to 100, <25 = very deep sedation and >50 = light sedation to full awareness) during the first 72 h of care. Delirium was assessed with the Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit (CAM-ICU).

RESULTS

The median duration of PSI monitoring was 43 h. Patients spent 49% in median of the total PSI monitoring duration with a PSI <25. Patients with delirium (n = 41/97, 42%) spent a higher percentage of total monitored time with PSI <25 (median 67% [19-91] vs. 47% [12.2-78.9]) in non-delirious patients (p .047). After adjusting for the cumulative dose of analgesia and sedation, increased time spent with PSI <25 was associated with higher delirium (odds ratio 1.014; 95% CI 1.001-1.027, p = .036).

CONCLUSIONS

A clinical protocol of deep sedation targeted to RASS at the acute ICU phase may be associated with prolonged EEG suppression and increased delirium. Whether PSI-targeted sedation may help reducing sedative dose and delirium deserves further clinical investigation.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Patients requiring deep sedation are at high risk of being over-sedated and developing delirium despite the application of an evidence-based sedation guideline. Development of early objective measures are essential to improve sedation management in these critically ill patients.

Sedation for adult ICU patients: A narrative review including a retrospective study of our own data

The optimization of patients' treatment in the intensive care unit (ICU) needs a lot of information and literature analysis. Many changes have been made in the last years to help evaluate sedated patients by scores to help take care of them. Patients were completely sedated and had continuous intravenous analgesia and neuromuscular blockades. These three drug classes were the main drugs used for intubated patients in the ICU. During these last 20 years, ICU management went from fully sedated to awake, calm, and nonagitated patients, using less sedatives and choosing other drugs to decrease the risks of delirium during or after the ICU stay. Thus, the usefulness of these three drug classes has been challenged. The analgesic drugs used were primarily opioids but the use of other drugs instead is increasing to lessen or wean the use of opioids. In severe acute respiratory distress syndrome patients, neuromuscular blocking agents have been used frequently to block spontaneous respiration for 48 hours or more; however, this has recently been abolished. Optimizing a patient's comfort during hemodynamic or respiratory extracorporeal support is essential to reduce toxicity and secondary complications.

Validation of the patient State Index for monitoring sedation state in critically ill patients: a prospective observational study

PURPOSE

The Patient State Index (PSI) is a newly introduced electroencephalogram-based tool for objective and continuous monitoring of sedation levels of patients under general anesthesia. This study investigated the potential correlation between the PSI and the Richmond Agitation‒Sedation Scale (RASS) score in intensive care unit (ICU) patients and established the utility of the PSI in assessing sedation levels.

METHODS

In this prospective observational study, PSI values were continuously monitored via SedLine® (Masimo, Irvine, CA, USA); the RASS score was recorded every 2 h for patients on mechanical ventilation. Physicians and nurses were blinded to the PSI values. Overall, 382 PSI and RASS score sets were recorded for 50 patients.

RESULTS

The PSI score correlated positively with RASS scores, and Spearman's rank correlation coefficient between the PSI and RASS was 0.79 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.75‒0.83). The PSI showed statistically significant difference among the RASS scores (Kruskal‒Wallis chi-square test: 242, df = 6, P < 2.2-e16). The PSI threshold for distinguishing light (RASS score ≥ - 2) sedation from deep sedation (RASS score ≤ - 3) was 54 (95% CI: 50-65; area under the curve, 0.92 [95% CI: 0.89‒0.95]; sensitivity, 0.91 [95% CI: 0.86‒0.95]; specificity, 0.81 [95% CI: 0.77-0.86]).

CONCLUSIONS

The PSI correlated positively with RASS scores, which represented a widely used tool for assessing sedation levels, and the values were significantly different among RASS scores. Additionally, the PSI had a high sensitivity and specificity for distinguishing light from deep sedation. The PSI could be useful for assessing sedation levels in ICU patients. University Hospital Medical Information Network (UMIN000035199, December 10, 2018).

Electroencephalography spectral edge frequency and suppression rate-guided sedation in patients with COVID-19: A randomized controlled trial

Background

Sedation in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients has been identified as a major challenge. We aimed to investigate whether the use of a multiparameter electroencephalogram (EEG) protocol to guide sedation in COVID-19 patients would increase the 30-day mechanical ventilation-free days (VFD).

Methods

We conducted a double-blind randomized clinical trial. We included patients with severe pneumonia due to COVID-19 who required mechanical ventilation (MV) and deep sedation. We randomized to the control (n = 25) or multiparameter group (n = 25). Sedation in the intervention group was administered following the standard institutional protocols together with a flow chart designed to reduce the propofol administration dose if the EEG suppression rate was over 2% or the spectral edge frequency 95 (SEF95) was below 10 Hz. We performed an intention-to-treat analysis to evaluate our primary outcome (30-day VFD).

Results

There was no difference in VFD at day 30 (median: 11 [IQR 0–20] days in the control group vs. 0 [IQR 0–21] days in the BIS multiparameter group, p = 0.87). Among secondary outcomes, we documented a 17% reduction in the total adjusted propofol administered during the first 5 days of the protocol [median: 2.3 (IQR 1.9–2.8) mg/k/h in the control group vs. 1.9(IQR 1.5–2.2) mg/k/h in the MP group, p = 0.005]. This was accompanied by a higher average BIS value in the intervention group throughout the treatment period.

Conclusion

A sedation protocol guided by multivariate EEG-derived parameters did not increase the 30-day VFD. However, the intervention led to a reduction in total propofol administration.

Systematic review and meta‐analysis of the correlation between bispectral index ( BIS ) and clinical sedation scales: Toward defining the role of BIS in critically ill patients

INTRODUCTION

The bispectral index (BIS) is an attractive approach for monitoring level of consciousness in critically ill patients, particularly during paralysis, when commonly used sedation scales cannot be used.

OBJECTIVES

As a first step toward establishing the utility of BIS during paralysis, this review examines the strength of correlation between BIS and clinical sedation scales in a broad population of non-paralyzed, critically ill adults.

METHODS

We included studies evaluating the strength of correlation between concurrent assessments of BIS and Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale (RASS), Ramsay Sedation Scale (RSS), or Sedation Agitation Scale (SAS) in critically ill adult patients. Studies involving assessment of depth sedation periperative or procedural time periods, and those reporting BIS and sedation scale assessments conducted >5 min apart or while neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBA) were administered, were excluded. Data were abstracted on sedation scale, correlation coefficients, setting, patient characteristics, and BIS assessment characteristics that could impact the quality of the studies.

RESULTS

Twenty-four studies which enrolled 1235 patients met inclusion criteria. The correlation between BIS and RASS, RSS, and SAS overall was 0.68 (95% confidence interval, 0.61-0.74, Ƭ²  = 0.06 I²  = 71.26%). Subgroup analysis by sedation scale indicated that the correlation between BIS and RASS, RSS, and SAS were 0.66 (95% confidence interval 0.58-0.73, Ƭ²  = 0.01 I²  = 30.20%), 0.76 (95% confidence interval 0.69-0.82, Ƭ²  = 0.04 I²  = 67.15%), and 0.53 (95% confidence interval 0.42-0.63, Ƭ²  = 0.01 I²  = 26.59%), respectively. Factors associated with significant heterogeneity included comparator clinical sedation scale, neurologic injury, and the type of intensive care unit (ICU) population.

CONCLUSIONS

BIS demonstrated moderate to strong correlation with clinical sedation scales in adult ICU patients, providing preliminary evidence for the validity of BIS as a measure of sedation intensity when clinical scales cannot be used. Future studies should determine whether BIS monitoring is safe and effective in improving outcomes in patients receiving NMBA treatment.

Processed Electroencephalogram-Based Monitoring to Guide Sedation in Critically Ill Adult Patients: Recommendations from an International Expert Panel-Based Consensus

BACKGROUND

The use of processed electroencephalography (pEEG) for depth of sedation (DOS) monitoring is increasing in anesthesia; however, how to use of this type of monitoring for critical care adult patients within the intensive care unit (ICU) remains unclear.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary panel of international experts consisting of 21 clinicians involved in monitoring DOS in ICU patients was carefully selected on the basis of their expertise in neurocritical care and neuroanesthesiology. Panelists were assigned four domains (techniques for electroencephalography [EEG] monitoring, patient selection, use of the EEG monitors, competency, and training the principles of pEEG monitoring) from which a list of questions and statements was created to be addressed. A Delphi method based on iterative approach was used to produce the final statements. Statements were classified as highly appropriate or highly inappropriate (median rating ≥ 8), appropriate (median rating ≥ 7 but < 8), or uncertain (median rating < 7) and with a strong disagreement index (DI) (DI < 0.5) or weak DI (DI ≥ 0.5 but < 1) consensus.

RESULTS

According to the statements evaluated by the panel, frontal pEEG (which includes a continuous colored density spectrogram) has been considered adequate to monitor the level of sedation (strong consensus), and it is recommended by the panel that all sedated patients (paralyzed or nonparalyzed) unfit for clinical evaluation would benefit from DOS monitoring (strong consensus) after a specific training program has been performed by the ICU staff. To cover the gap between knowledge/rational and routine application, some barriers must be broken, including lack of knowledge, validation for prolonged sedation, standardization between monitors based on different EEG analysis algorithms, and economic issues.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence on using DOS monitors in ICU is still scarce, and further research is required to better define the benefits of using pEEG. This consensus highlights that some critically ill patients may benefit from this type of neuromonitoring.

Seeking the Light in Intensive Care Unit Sedation: The Optimal Sedation Strategy for Critically Ill Patients

The clinical approach to sedation in critically ill patients has changed dramatically over the last two decades, moving to a regimen of light or non-sedation associated with adequate analgesia to guarantee the patient’s comfort, active interaction with the environment and family, and early mobilization and assessment of delirium. Although deep sedation (DS) may still be necessary for certain clinical scenarios, it should be limited to strict indications, such as mechanically ventilated patients with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS), status epilepticus, intracranial hypertension, or those requiring target temperature management. DS, if not indicated, is associated with prolonged duration of mechanical ventilation and ICU stay, and increased mortality. Therefore, continuous monitoring of the level of sedation, especially when associated with the raw EEG data, is important to avoid unnecessary oversedation and to convert a DS strategy to light sedation as soon as possible. The approach to the management of critically ill patients is multidimensional, so targeted sedation should be considered in the context of the ABCDEF bundle, a holistic patient approach. Sedation may interfere with early mobilization and family engagement and may have an impact on delirium assessment and risk. If adequately applied, the ABCDEF bundle allows for a patient-centered, multidimensional, and multi-professional ICU care model to be achieved, with a positive impact on appropriate sedation and patient comfort, along with other important determinants of long-term patient outcomes.

Non-Pharmacological Interventions for Minimizing Physical Restraints Use in Intensive Care Units: An Umbrella Review

Background

There is a relationship between the application of physical restraints and negative physiological and psychological effects on critically ill patients. Many organizations have supported and advocated minimizing the use of physical restraints. However, it is still common practice in many countries to apply physical restraints to patients in intensive care.

Objective

This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of various non-pharmacological interventions used to minimize physical restraints in intensive care units and provide a supplement to the evidence summary for physical restraints guideline adaptation.

Methods

Based on the methodology of umbrella review, electronic databases, including Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Joanna Briggs Institute Database of Systematic Reviews and Implementation Reports, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, PsycInfo/Psyc Articles/Psychology and Behavioral Science Collection, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, SinoMed, and Wanfang Data, were searched to identify systematic reviews published from January 2016 to December 2020. Two independent reviewers undertook screening, data extraction, and quality appraisal. The methodological quality of systematic reviews was evaluated by AMSTAR 2. Evidence quality of each intervention was assessed according to GRADE. The corrected covered area was calculated as a measure of overlap.

Results

A total of 47 systematic reviews were included in the umbrella review, of which six were evaluated as high quality, five were of moderate quality, and the rest were of low or critically low quality. The corrected covered area range was from 0.0 to 0.269, which indicated that there was mild overlap between systematic reviews. The included systematic reviews evaluated various types of non-pharmacological interventions for minimizing physical restraints in intensive care units, which included multicomponent interventions involving healthcare professionals' education, family engagement/support, specific consultations and communication, rehabilitation and mobilization (rehabilitation techniques, early mobilization, inspiratory muscle training), interventions related to reducing the duration of mechanical ventilation (weaning modes or protocols, ventilator bundle or cough augmentation techniques, early tracheostomy, high-flow nasal cannula), and management of specific symptoms (delirium, agitation, pain, and sleep disturbances).

Conclusion

The number of systematic reviews related to physical restraints was limited. Multicomponent interventions involving healthcare professionals' education may be the most direct non-pharmacological intervention for minimizing physical restraints use in intensive care units. However, the quality of evidence was very low, and conclusions should be taken with caution. Policymakers should consider incorporating non-pharmacological interventions related to family engagement/support, specific consultations and communication, rehabilitation and mobilization, interventions related to reducing the duration of mechanical ventilation, and management of specific symptoms as part of the physical restraints minimization bundle. All the evidence contained in the umbrella review provides a supplement to the evidence summary for physical restraints guideline adaptation.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=242586, identifier: CRD42021242586.

Comparison of intravenous sedation using midazolam versus dexmedetomidine in elderly patients with dementia: a randomized cross-over trial

Differences between the effects of intravenous sedation with midazolam (MID) and dexmedetomidine (DEX) on the cerebral function of elderly patients with severe dementia are unclear. This study aimed to compare the effects of intravenous sedation with MID or DEX on parameters such as brain waves and cerebral blood flow (CBF). This cross-over study analyzed 12 patients with severe dementia, with each patient receiving both drug treatments. Each drug was administered until a Modified Observer’s Assessment of Alertness/Sedation (OAA/S) score of 2 was reached. Bispectral index (BIS) and normalized tissue hemoglobin index (nTHI), which reflects CBF using near-infrared spectroscopy, were measured. Mann–Whitney U, Wilcoxon signed-rank, and Friedman tests, and multiple regression analysis were performed. While a similar decline in BIS values was observed in both groups (P < 0.030), there was a significant decrease in nTHI up to 11% in the MID group (P = 0.005). In the DEX group, nTHI values did not differ from baseline. When an OAA/S score of 2 was just achieved, CBF in the MID group (− 5%) was significantly lower than in the DEX group (± 0%). In dementia patients, sedation with MID resulted in a decrease in CBF, while the CBF value was maintained during sedation with DEX.

Impact of Propofol Bolus Administration on the Nociceptive Flexion Reflex Threshold and Bispectral Index in Children—A Case Series

We analyzed the impact of propofol administration during continuous sedation and analgesia on the nociceptive flexion reflex threshold (NFRT) and Bispectral Index (BIS) in ventilated children. We examined patients who received propofol before planned endotracheal suctioning. Patients were clinically assessed using the modified Face, Legs, Activity, Cry, Consolability (mFLACC) scale and COMFORT-B (Comfort Behavior) scale. We continuously recorded the NFRT and BIS. We recorded 23 propofol administrations in eight patients with an average age of 8.6 ± 3.5 years. The median (minimum-maximum) scores for the mFLACC scale and COMFORT-B scale were 0 (0–5) and 6 (6–17), respectively, before the bolus. The administration of a weight-adjusted propofol bolus of 1.03 ± 0.31 mg/kg resulted in an increase in NFRT and burst-suppression ratio; BIS and electromyogram values decreased. Changes from baseline (95% CI) after propofol bolus administration were BIS −23.9 (−30.8 to −17.1), EMG -10.5 dB (−13.3 to −7.7), SR 14.8 % (5.6 to 24.0) and NFRT 13.6 mA (5.5 to 21.7). Further studies are needed to determine whether sedated children may benefit from objective pain and sedation monitoring with BIS and NFRT.

Sedation in the Intensive Care Unit

Purpose of Review

This narrative review illustrates literature over the last 5 years relating to sedation delivery to mechanically ventilated adult patients in intensive care units.

Recent Findings

There has been an increase in dexmedetomidine-related publications but although systematic reviews suggest dexmedetomidine reduces delirium, agitation, and length of stay, clinical trials have not supported these findings. It is likely to be useful for the managing patients with persisting agitation. Guidelines continue to recommend lightly sedating patients but considerable variation remains in clinical practice and in research trials. Protocols with no sedative infusions and morphine boluses as needed are feasible and safe, while educational interventions can decrease sedation-related adverse events.

Summary

Research trials have mainly focused on individual drugs rather than practice. Given evidence is slow to translate into practice; work is needed to understand and respond to the concerns of clinicians regarding deep sedation and agitation.

Can changes in skin impedance be used to monitor sedation after midazolam and during recovery from anesthesia?

It has been suggested that sympathetic activity, measured as changes in electrical skin impedance (SI), can be used to assess the adequacy of general anesthesia. Our prospective study investigated if measurements of skin impedance can determine levels of sedation induced by midazolam. Twenty-seven patients scheduled for arthroscopy requiring general anesthesia were served as their own control. These were blinded to the order of injections by telling them that they will be randomly administered a placebo (saline) orsedative agent. A DM 3900 multimeter was used for SI measurements. The degree of sedation was measured using the modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness and Sedation (mOAAS) scale. Resting SI values were noted, and all participants were then administered the placebo followed 5 min later by midazolam 2 mg i.v. Five min after that, patients were administered standard general anesthesia with propofol, oxygen, nitrous oxide 60 %, and isoflurane 1 MAC via a laryngeal mask, and sufentanil 5 - 10 µg. SI significantly increased after administration of midazolam and induction of anesthesia. There were no significant differences between pre-administration (baseline) and placebo and end of surgery and end of anesthesia with closed eyes. There were highly significant differences (p<0.001) between pre-administration vs. midazolam, placebo vs. midazolam, pre-administration vs. induction of anesthesia. We found slight correlation between mOAAS and SI. There were no significant changes between the end of surgery and the end of anesthesia with closed eyes, but SI significantly decreased (p<0.01) after eyes opened.

The Use of Middle Latency Auditory Evoked Potentials (MLAEP) as Methodology for Evaluating Sedation Level in Propofol-Drug Induced Sleep Endoscopy (DISE) Procedure

To analyze the middle latency auditory evoked potential index (MLAEPi), compared to the standard bispectral index (BIS), as a method for evaluating the sedation level in drug-induced sleep endoscopy (DISE). In this controlled clinical study on a sample of 99 obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) or snoring patients, we compared the MLAEPi with the BIS after propofol infusion during the standard DISE technique in order to define the MLAEPi values within the observational window of the procedure. The DISE procedure was divided into eight steps, and we collected both MLAEPi and BIS data values from the same patient in every step. The MLAEPi showed a faster response than the BIS after propofol infusion during DISE. Therefore, the clinical use of the MLAEPi in evaluating the sedation level seems to be a good alternative to the current technological standards.

Comparison of intravenous sedation using midazolam during dental treatment in elderly patients with/without dementia: a prospective, controlled clinical trial

The effects of intravenous sedation with midazolam on the cerebral function of elderly patients with severe dementia are unclear. This study aimed to evaluate its effects on parameters such as brainwaves and cerebral blood flow (CBF) and compare them between elderly individuals with dementia and without cognitive impairment. Ten patients with severe dementia and 10 without cognitive impairment were registered. The bispectral index (BIS) and normalized tissue hemoglobin index (nTHI), which reflects CBF using near-infrared spectroscopy, were measured. Midazolam was administered until a Modified Observer’s Assessment of Alertness/Sedation score of 2 was reached. The chi-squared, Mann–Whitney U, Wilcoxon signed-rank, and Friedman tests and multiple regression analysis were used for comparisons. Whereas a similar decline in BIS values was observed in both groups after midazolam administration (P < 0.018), there was a significant decrease by 9% in the nTHI of the dementia-positive group (P < 0.013). However, there was no significant difference in the nTHI between the dementia-positive and dementia-negative group according to the multiple regression analysis (P = 0.058). In the dementia-negative group, none of the measured values differed from the baseline values. In the dementia-positive group, sedation with midazolam resulted in a 9% decrease in the CBF.

Management of critically ill patients with COVID-19: suggestions and instructions from the coordination of intensive care units of Lombardy

With 63,098 confirmed cases on 17 April 2020 and 11,384 deaths, Lombardy has been the most affected region in Italy by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). To cope with this emergency, the COVID-19 Lombardy intensive care units (ICU) network was created. The network identified the need of defining a list of clinical recommendations to standardize treatment of patients with COVID-19 admitted to Intensive Care Unit (ICU). Three core topics were identified: 1) rational use of intensive care resources; 2) ventilation strategies; 3) non-ventilatory interventions. Identification of patients who may benefit from ICU treatment is challenging. Clinicians should consider baseline performance and frailty status and they should adopt disease-specific staging tools. Continuous positive airway pressure, mainly delivered through a helmet as elective method, should be considered as initial treatment for all patients with respiratory failure associated with COVID-19. In case of persisting dyspnea and/or desaturation despite 4-6 hours of noninvasive ventilation, endotracheal intubation and invasive mechanical ventilation should be considered. In the early phase, muscle relaxant use and volume-controlled ventilation is recommended. Prone position should be performed in patients with PaO<inf>2</inf>/FiO<inf>2</inf>≤100 mmHg. For patients admitted to ICU with COVID-19 interstitial pneumonia, we do not recommend empiric antibiotic therapy for community-acquired pneumonia. Consultation of an infectious disease specialist is suggested before start of any antiviral therapy. In conclusion, the COVID-19 Lombardy ICU Network identified a list of best practice statements supported by the available evidence and clinical experience or identified as panel members expert opinions for the management of critically ill patients with COVID-19.

ANI and BIS variations in supine and prone position during closed-tracheal suction in sedated and myorelaxed ICU patients with severe COVID-19: A retrospective study

The purpose of this study was to assess Analgesia/Nociception Index (ANI) and bispectral index (BIS) variations in supine and prone position during closed-tracheal suction in intensive care unit (ICU) patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia requiring myorelaxation and prone positioning. We retrospectively reviewed the data of 15 patients hospitalized in ICU for severe COVID-19 pneumonia requiring sedation, myorelaxation and prone positioning. The BIS, instant ANI (ANIi), mean ANI (ANIm), heart rate (HR), systolic blood pressure (SBP) and SpO₂ were retrieved in supine and prone position 1 min before tracheal suction then every minute from the beginning of tracheal suction during 4 min and compared using ANOVA for repeated measures (p < 0.05 considered as statistically significant). Both ANIm and ANIi decreased significantly during tracheal suction with no difference between positions, whereas BIS showed no significant variation within time and between groups. The median [Q1–Q3] ANIm value decreased from 87 [68–98] to 79 [63–09] in supine position and from 79 [63–95] to 78 [66–98] in prone position 2 min after the beginning of tracheal suction. The median [Q1–Q3] ANIi value decreased earlier 1 min after the beginning of tracheal suction from 84 [69–98] to 73 [60–90] in supine position and from 84 [60–99] to 71 [51–88] in prone position. Both HR, SBP and SpO₂ varied modestly but significantly during tracheal suction with no difference between positions. Monitoring ANI, but not BIS, may be of interest to detect noxious stimuli such as tracheal suction in ICU myorelaxed patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia requiring prone positioning.

Remifentanil-based propofol-supplemented vs. balanced sevoflurane-sufentanil anesthesia regimens on bispectral index recovery after cardiac surgery: a randomized controlled study

Background

The present study was to compare the potential impact of remifentanil-based propofol-supplemented anesthesia regimen vs. conventional sevoflurane-sufentanil balanced anesthesia on postoperative recovery of consciousness indicated by bispectral index (BIS) values in patients undergoing cardiac surgery.

Methods

Patients undergoing cardiac surgery were randomly allocated to get the remifentanil-based propofol-supplemented anesthesia employing target-controlled infusion (TCI) of remifentanil and propofol (Group-PR, n = 15) or a balanced-anesthesia employing sevoflurane-inhalation and TCI-sufentanil (Group-C, n = 19). In Group-PR, plasma concentration (Cp) of TCI-remifentanil was fixed at 20 ng/ml, and the effect-site concentration of TCI-propofol was adjusted within 0.8–2.0 μg/ml to maintain BIS value of 40–60. In Group-C, sevoflurane dosage was adjusted within 1–1.5 minimum alveolar concentration to maintain BIS of 40–60, and Cp of TCI-sufentanil was fixed at 0.4 ng/ml. The inter-group difference in the time for achieving postoperative BIS > 80 (T-BIS80) in the intensive care unit was determined as the primary outcome. The inter-group difference in the extubation time was determined as the secondary outcome.

Results

T-BIS80, was shorter in Group-PR than Group-C (121.4 ± 64.9 min vs. 182.9 ± 85.1 min, respectively; the difference of means –61.5 min; 95% CI –115.7 to –7.4 min; effect size 0.812; P = 0.027). The extubation time was shorter in Group-PR than in Group-C (434.7 ± 131.3 min vs. 946.6 ± 393.3 min, respectively, P < 0.001).

Conclusions

Compared with the conventional sevoflurane-sufentanil balanced anesthesia, the remifentanil-based propofol-supplemented anesthesia showed significantly faster postoperative conscious recovery in patients undergoing cardiac surgery.

Use of Processed Electroencephalography in the Clinical Setting

Purpose of Review

Processed electroencephalography (pEEG) is widely used in clinical practice. Few clinicians utilize the full potential of these devices. This brief review will address the improvements in patient management available from the utilization of all pEEG data.

Recent Findings

Anesthesiologists easily learn to recognize raw pEEG patterns that are consistent with an appropriate level of hypnotic effect. Power distribution within the waveform can be displayed in a visual format that identifies signatures of the principal anesthetic hypnotics. Opinion on the benefit of pEEG data in the mitigation of postoperative neurological impairment remains divided.

Summary

Looking beyond the index number can aid clinical decision making and improve confidence in the benefits of this monitoring modality.

Dexmedetomidine-assisted drug interviews: an observation in psychiatric setting

Drug-assisted interviews are an effective tool in the management of various psychiatric illnesses where psychopharmacological, as well as routine psychological interventions, do not prove beneficial. These have most commonly been done by using barbiturates and benzodiazepines that have given favourable results for a long time. However, they carry the risk of respiratory depression and difficulty in maintaining the plane of sedation where the patient is amenable to interviewing. In our experience of drug-assisted interviews with two patients we used intravenous dexmedetomidine, which is being used in anaesthesia practice for conscious sedation or sedation in the intensive care unit. We found dexmedetomidine to be superior to thiopentone in achieving a level of conscious sedation where the patients were amenable for an interview, with no significant adverse events and faster post-anaesthetic recovery.

BIS monitoring versus clinical assessment for sedation in mechanically ventilated adults in the intensive care unit and its impact on clinical outcomes and resource utilization

BACKGROUND

Patients admitted to intensive care and on mechanical ventilation, are administered sedative and analgesic drugs to improve both their comfort and interaction with the ventilator. Optimizing sedation practice may reduce mortality, improve patient comfort and reduce cost. Current practice is to use scales or scores to assess depth of sedation based on clinical criteria such as consciousness, understanding and response to commands. However these are perceived as subjective assessment tools. Bispectral index (BIS) monitors, which are based on the processing of electroencephalographic signals, may overcome the restraints of the sedation scales and provide a more reliable and consistent guidance for the titration of sedation depth.The benefits of BIS monitoring of patients under general anaesthesia for surgical procedures have already been confirmed by another Cochrane review. By undertaking a well-conducted systematic review our aim was to find out if BIS monitoring improves outcomes in mechanically ventilated adult intensive care unit (ICU) patients.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of BIS monitoring compared with clinical sedation assessment on ICU length of stay (LOS), duration of mechanical ventilation, any cause mortality, risk of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), risk of adverse events (e.g. self-extubation, unplanned disconnection of indwelling catheters), hospital LOS, amount of sedative agents used, cost, longer-term functional outcomes and quality of life as reported by authors for mechanically ventilated adults in the ICU.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, ProQuest, OpenGrey and SciSearch up to May 2017 and checked references citation searching and contacted study authors to identify additional studies. We searched trial registries, which included clinicaltrials.gov and controlled-trials.com.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomized controlled trials comparing BIS versus clinical assessment (CA) for the management of sedation in mechanically ventilated critically ill adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used Cochrane's standard methodological procedures. We undertook analysis using Revman 5.3 software.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 4245 possible studies from the initial search. Of those studies, four studies (256 participants) met the inclusion criteria. One more study is awaiting classification. Studies were, conducted in single-centre surgical and mixed medical-surgical ICUs. BIS monitor was used to assess the level of sedation in the intervention arm in all the studies. In the control arm, the sedation assessment tools for CA included the Sedation-Agitation Scale (SAS), Ramsay Sedation Scale (RSS) or subjective CA utilizing traditional clinical signs (heart rate, blood pressure, conscious level and pupillary size). Only one study was classified as low risk of bias, the other three studies were classified as high risk.There was no evidence of a difference in one study (N = 50) that measured ICU LOS (Median (Interquartile Range IQR) 8 (4 to 14) in the CA group; 12 (6 to 18) in the BIS group; low-quality evidence).There was little or no effect on the duration of mechanical ventilation (MD -0.02 days (95% CI -0.13 to 0.09; 2 studies; N = 155; I² = 0%; low-quality evidence)). Adverse events were reported in one study (N = 105) and the effects on restlessness after suction, endotracheal tube resistance, pain tolerance during sedation or delirium after extubation were uncertain due to very low-quality evidence. Clinically relevant adverse events such as self-extubation were not reported in any study. Three studies reported the amount of sedative agents used. We could not measure combined difference in the amount of sedative agents used because of different sedation protocols and sedative agents used in the studies. GRADE quality of evidence was very low. No study reported other secondary outcomes of interest for the review.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found insufficient evidence about the effects of BIS monitoring for sedation in critically ill mechanically ventilated adults on clinical outcomes or resource utilization. The findings are uncertain due to the low- and very low-quality evidence derived from a limited number of studies.