Effects of varying remifentanil concentrations on Analgesia Nociception Index® under propofol: an observational study

Progress in the validation of nociception monitoring in guiding intraoperative analgesic therapy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This article summarizes the current level of validation for several nociception monitors using a categorized validation process to facilitate the comparison of performance.

RECENT FINDINGS

Nociception monitors improve the detection of a shift in the nociception and antinociception balance during anesthesia, guiding perioperative analgesic therapy. A clear overview and comparison of the validation process for these monitors is missing.

RESULTS

Within a 2-year time-frame, we identified validation studies for four monitors [analgesia nociception index (ANI), nociception level monitor (NOL), surgical pleth index (SPI), and pupillometry]. We categorized these studies in one out of six mandatory validation steps: developmental studies, clinical validation studies, pharmacological validation studies, clinical utility studies, outcome improvement studies and economical evaluation studies. The current level of validation for most monitors is mainly focused on the first three categories, whereas ANI, NOL, and SPI advanced most in the availability of clinical utility studies and provide confirmation of a clinical outcome improvement. Analysis of economical value for public health effects is not yet publicly available for the studied monitors.

SUMMARY

This review proposes a stepwise structure for validation of new monitoring technology, which facilitates comparison between the level of validation of different devices and identifies the need for future research questions.

Evaluation of the effectiveness of analgesia nociception index (ANI) predictability for surgical stimuli under personal analgesic sufficiency status (PASS) measured by pre-tetanus-induced ANI: a pilot study

The Analgesia Nociception Index (ANI) is a promising monitor to evaluate the balance of nociception and anti-nociception based on heart rate variability. This prospective, interventional, monocentric pilot study aimed to verify the effectiveness of the personal analgesic sufficiency status (PASS) measured by pre-tetanus-induced ANI variation for surgical stimuli. After Ethics approval and informed consent, participants were anesthetized with sevoflurane and increased effect-site concentrations of remifentanil step by step (2, 4, 6 ng ml-1). At each concentration, a standardized tetanic stimulus was applied (5 s, 60 mA, 50 Hz) with no other noxious stimuli presented. Through all the concentrations, defined the lowest concentration when ANI ≥ 50 as the PASS after tetanic stimuli. The surgical stimulus was conducted under at least 5-min of PASS. Thirty-two participants were analyzed. ANI, systolic blood pressure (SBP), and Heart rate (HR) except the Bispectral Index (BIS) were significantly changed at 2 ng ml-1 after tetanic stimuli, only ANI and SBP were significantly altered at 4 and 6 ng ml-1. ANI could predict inadequate analgesia status (an increase in SBP or HR of more than 20% from the baseline) at 2 and 4 ng ml-1 (P = 0.044, P = 0.049, respectively), but not at 6 ng ml-1. The PASS under pre-tetanus-induced ANI identification didn't meet the analgesic needs under surgical stimuli. Further investigations are required to provide a reliable prediction of individualized analgesia by objective nociception monitors.Trial registration NCT05063461.

Pain Assessment Using the Analgesia Nociception Index (ANI) in Patients Undergoing General Anesthesia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The analgesia nociception index (ANI) has emerged as a potential measurement for objective pain assessment during general anesthesia. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the accuracy and effectiveness of ANI in assessing intra- and post-operative pain in patients undergoing general anesthesia. We conducted a comprehensive search of Ovid-MEDLINE, Ovid-EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Google Scholar, public clinical trial databases (ClinicalTrials and Clinical Research Information Service), and OpenSIGLE to identify relevant studies published prior to May 2023 and included studies that evaluated the accuracy and effectiveness of ANI for intra- or post-operative pain assessment during general anesthesia. Among the 962 studies identified, 30 met the eligibility criteria and were included in the systematic review, and 17 were included in the meta-analysis. For predicting intra-operative pain, pooled sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and area under curve of ANI were 0.81 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.79-0.83; I2 = 68.2%), 0.93 (95% CI = 0.92-0.93; I2 = 99.8%), 2.32 (95% CI = 1.33-3.30; I2 = 61.7%), and 0.77 (95% CI = 0.76-0.78; I2 = 87.4%), respectively. ANI values and changes in intra-operative hemodynamic variables showed statistically significant correlations. For predicting post-operative pain, pooled sensitivity, specificity, and DOR of ANI were 0.90 (95% CI = 0.87-0.93; I2 = 58.7%), 0.51 (95% CI = 0.49-0.52; I2 = 99.9%), and 3.38 (95% CI = 2.87-3.88; I2 = 81.2%), respectively. ANI monitoring in patients undergoing surgery under general anesthesia is a valuable measurement for predicting intra- and post-operative pain. It reduces the use of intra-operative opioids and aids in pain management throughout the perioperative period.

The validity and applications of the analgesia nociception index: a narrative review

Pain refers to the subjective, unpleasant experience that is related to illness or injury. In contrast to pain, nociception refers to the physiological neural processing of noxious stimuli, such as intra-operative surgical stimuli. One novel device, the Analgesia Nociception Index (ANI), aims to objectively measure intra-operative nociception by analyzing the heart rate variability in patients undergoing surgery. Through this method of nociceptive monitoring, the ANI device aims to provide an objective, continuous evaluation of patient comfort levels and allow anesthesiologists to better manage surgical stress and patient analgesia, perhaps with even better efficacy than current practices used to assess nociception. Additionally, ANI may have clinical application in settings outside of the operating room, such as in the intensive care unit. In this narrative review, we compiled and summarized the findings of many studies that have investigated ANI's validity and applications in different clinical settings. Currently, the literature appears mostly supportive of ANI's ability to detect nociception in both surgical and non-surgical settings. However, the ability for ANI to provide clinical benefits, such as decreased intra-operative opioid use, post-operative opioid use, and post-operative pain compared to standard practices appear controversial. Because of the wide variety of methodology, clinical settings, patient populations, and limitations in these studies, more investigation of ANI is needed before any firm conclusions can be drawn on its clinical benefits.

Peri-operative multimodal monitoring: a real need or a luxury?

The present case of a patient with several co-morbidities undergoing complex vitrectomy under peribulbar block and sedation with Target Controlled Infusion (TCI of propofol and dexmedetomidine with EEG and Analgesia Nociception Index (ANI) monitoring illustrates the benefits of multimodal monitoring to differentiate the effect of hypnotic and antinociceptive drugs.It is highlighted the delta-alpha electroencephalographic pattern showing adequate sedation, the beta arousal pattern in the EEG concommitant to decrease in the ANI translating insufficient anti-nociception.

[Nociception monitoring : Method for intraoperative opioid control?]

The intraoperative dosing of opioids is a challenge in routine anesthesia as the potential effects of intraoperative overdosing and underdosing are not completely understood. In recent years an increasing number of monitors were approved, which were developed for the detection of intraoperative nociception and therefore should enable a better control of opioid titration. The nociception monitoring devices use either continuous hemodynamic, galvanic or thermal biosignals reflecting the balance between parasympathetic and sympathetic activity, measure the pupil dilatation reflex or the nociceptive flexor reflex as a reflexive response to application of standardized nociceptive stimulation. This review article presents the currently available nociception monitors. Most of these monitoring devices detect nociceptive stimulations with higher sensitivity and specificity than changes in heart rate, blood pressure or sedation depth monitoring devices. There are only few studies on the effect of opioid titration guided by nociception monitoring and the possible postoperative benefits of these devices. All nociception monitoring techniques are subject to specific limitations either due to perioperative confounders (e.g. hypovolemia) or special accompanying medical conditions (e.g. muscle relaxation). There is an ongoing discussion about the clinical relevance of nociceptive stimulation in general anesthesia and the effect on patient outcome. Initial results for individual monitor systems show a reduction in opioid consumption and in postoperative pain level. Nevertheless, current evidence does not enable the routine use of nociception monitoring devices to be recommended as a clear beneficial effect on long-term outcome has not yet been proven.

Analgesia Nociception Index (ANI) and ephedrine: a dangerous liasion

The Analgesia Nociception Index is a dimensionless scale derived from the heart rate variability; by analyzing the heart rate variability oscillations, it reflects the activity of the sympathetic and parasympathetic nervous systems and ultimately helps to evaluate the Nociception-Antinociception balance during anesthesia and surgery. Drugs like ephedrine affect the heart rate variability inducing artifacts in the ANI readings which should be taken into account in the clinical practice and in clinical research.