Isoflurane dosage for equivalent intraoperative electroencephalographic suppression in patients with and without epidural blockade

The Relationship between Calculated Effect-site Sevoflurane Levels and Awakening from Anaesthesia

We have previously described a system that displays real-time estimates of effect-site sevoflurane concentrations. Estimates of effect-site levels should be similar to minimum alveolar concentration (MAC) values, which are determined after allowing time for equilibrium. This study aimed to determine estimated effect-site sevoflurane concentrations at awakening from routine anaesthesia and to compare this with published estimates of MAC-awake. If these values were similar, this would validate our approach to the calculation of effect-site concentration. Sixty-five patients undergoing a variety of surgical procedures were observed. Prior to disconnection from the breathing circuit, forward estimates of effect-site sevoflurane were recorded. Patients were observed in the postanaesthesiacare unit and the time at which they responded to comm and wasrecorded. Age-adjusted effect-site sevoflurane at the time of awakeningwas determined. Correlation with patient, surgical and anaestheticfactors includingage, gender, ASA status and intraoperative opioid usage were explored. Mean age-adjusted calculated effect-site concentration at awakening was 0.59 (SD 0.27) vol%. This value is within the range of values determined for MAC-awake of sevoflurane. There was no correlation with any of the demographic or anaesthetic factors, but patients undergoing major surgery woke at a significantly lower mean sevoflurane level. These results support the use of effect-site sevoflurane concentration to guide administration of anaesthesia.

Epidural local anaesthetics versus opioid-based analgesic regimens for postoperative gastrointestinal paralysis, vomiting and pain after abdominal surgery

BACKGROUND

Gastrointestinal paralysis, nausea and vomiting and pain are major clinical problems following abdominal surgery. Anaesthetic and analgesic techniques that reduce pain and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), while preventing or reducing postoperative ileus, may reduce postoperative morbidity, duration of hospitalization and hospital costs. This review was first published in 2001 and was updated by new review authors in 2016.

OBJECTIVES

To compare effects of postoperative epidural analgesia with local anaesthetics versus postoperative systemic or epidural opioids in terms of return of gastrointestinal transit, postoperative pain control, postoperative vomiting, incidence of anastomotic leak, length of hospital stay and costs after abdominal surgery.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified trials by conducting computerized searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2014, Issue 12), MEDLINE (from 1950 to December 2014) and EMBASE (from 1974 to December 2014) and by checking the reference lists of trials retained. When we reran the search in February 2016, we added 16 potential new studies of interest to the list of 'Studies awaiting classification' and will incorporate these studies into formal review findings during the next review update.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel randomized controlled trials comparing effects of postoperative epidural local anaesthetic versus regimens based on systemic or epidural opioids.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We rated the quality of studies by using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool. Two review authors independently extracted data and judged the quality of evidence according to the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation Working Group) scale.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 128 trials with 8754 participants in the review, and 94 trials with 5846 participants in the analysis. Trials included in the review were funded as follows: charity (n = 19), departmental resources (n = 8), governmental sources (n = 15) and industry (in part or in total) (n = 15). The source of funding was not specified for the other studies.Results of 22 trials including 1138 participants show that an epidural containing a local anaesthetic will decrease the time required for return of gastrointestinal transit as measured by time to first flatus after an abdominal surgery (standardized mean difference (SMD) -1.28, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.71 to -0.86; high quality of evidence; equivalent to 17.5 hours). The effect is proportionate to the concentration of local anaesthetic used. A total of 28 trials including 1559 participants reported a decrease in time to first faeces (stool) (SMD -0.67, 95% CI -0.86 to -0.47; low quality of evidence; equivalent to 22 hours). Thirty-five trials including 2731 participants found that pain on movement at 24 hours after surgery was also reduced (SMD -0.89, 95% CI -1.08 to -0.70; moderate quality of evidence; equivalent to 2.5 on scale from 0 to 10). From findings of 22 trials including 1154 participants we did not find a difference in the incidence of vomiting within 24 hours (risk ratio (RR) 0.84, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.23; low quality of evidence). From investigators in 17 trials including 848 participants we did not find a difference in the incidence of gastrointestinal anastomotic leak (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.32; low quality of evidence). Researchers in 30 trials including 2598 participants noted that epidural analgesia reduced length of hospital stay for an open surgery (SMD -0.20, 95% CI -0.35 to -0.04; very low quality of evidence; equivalent to one day). Data on costs were very limited.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

An epidural containing a local anaesthetic, with or without the addition of an opioid, accelerates the return of gastrointestinal transit (high quality of evidence). An epidural containing a local anaesthetic with an opioid decreases pain after abdominal surgery (moderate quality of evidence). We did not find a difference in the incidence of vomiting or anastomotic leak (low quality of evidence). For open surgery, an epidural containing a local anaesthetic would reduce the length of hospital stay (very low quality of evidence).

Using EEG to monitor anesthesia drug effects during surgery

The use of processed electroencephalography (EEG) using a simple frontal lead system has been made available for assessing the impact of anesthetic medications during surgery. This review discusses the basic principles behind these devices. The foundations of anesthesia monitoring rest on the observations of Guedel with ether that the depth of anesthesia relates to the cortical, brainstem and spinal effects of the anesthetic agents. Anesthesiologists strive to have a patient who is immobile, is unconscious, is hemodynamically stable and who has no intraoperative awareness or recall. These anesthetic management principles apply today, despite the absence of ether from the available anesthetic medications. The use of the EEG as a supplement to the usual monitoring techniques rests on the observation that anesthetic medications all alter the synaptic function which produces the EEG. Frontal EEG can be viewed as a surrogate for the drug effects on the entire central nervous system (CNS). Using mathematical processing techniques, commercial EEG devices create an index usually between 0 and 100 to characterize this drug effect. Critical aspects of memory formation occur in the frontal lobes making EEG monitoring in this area a possible method to assess risk of recall. Integration of processed EEG monitoring into anesthetic management is evolving and its ability to characterize all of the anesthetic effects on the CNS (in particular awareness and recall) and improve decision making is under study.

Bispectral index does not correlate with observer assessment of alertness and sedation scores during 0.5% bupivacaine epidural anesthesia with nitrous oxide sedation

The bispectral index (BIS) has been used as a measure of the degree of sedation and level of hypnosis for IV hypnotics and sedatives, potent volatile anesthetics. We evaluated the effect of increasing concentrations of nitrous oxide (N2O) on BIS and compared it with the Observer's Assessment of Alertness and Sedation (OAA/S) scale in patients undergoing regional anesthesia. We studied 48 unpremedicated, ASA physical status I-II adult patients scheduled for lower extremity surgery under lumbar epidural anesthesia. N2O was given in oxygen to achieve measured end-tidal concentrations of 33%, 50%, and 67% N2O by a tight-fitting facemask, and each N2O concentration was maintained for 20 min. Paired measurements of BIS and OAA/S scores were obtained just before each increase in N2O concentration. Forty of the 48 subjects completed the study. Increasing N(2)O concentrations produced no changes in BIS despite a significant decrease in OAA/S scores at 50% and 67% N2O concentrations. The prediction probability for BIS and OAA/S calculated by Somers' d(x.y) were 0.60 and 0.84, respectively. Anesthesiologists should be aware that the BIS monitor may not be sensitive enough to provide an adequate measure of the depth of sedation and hypnosis when using N2O alone for sedation. It may be better to monitor sedation clinically (e.g., with the OAA/S scale) to determine the dose requirement and the adequacy of depth of sedation and hypnosis.

A comparison of the SNAP II™ and BIS XP™ indices during sevoflurane and nitrous oxide anaesthesia at 1 and 1.5 MAC and at awakening

BACKGROUND

Monitoring level of consciousness during anaesthesia, with the ability to predict the intentional or unintentional return to consciousness, is desirable. The purpose of this study was to compare two processed electroencephalographic depth of anaesthesia monitors (SNAP II and BIS XP) during sevoflurane and sevoflurane/nitrous oxide anaesthesia.

METHODS

In total, 42 subjects received an interscalene block, followed by general anaesthesia with sevoflurane or sevoflurane/nitrous oxide. The indices were recorded at baseline, at 1.5 and 1.0 minimum alveolar concentration (MAC) equivalents, and during emergence.

RESULTS

The SNAP and BIS indices decreased from baseline at 1.5 and 1.0 MAC equivalents, but there was no difference within groups between subjects who received nitrous oxide and those who did not. The SNAP index returned to baseline by 1 min before awakening and was higher than baseline at eye opening, but the BIS index remained below baseline at awakening. There was a bias of -1 (95% CI: -3 to 1) between the SNAP and BIS at baseline; this increased to 21 (95% CI: 19-23) during maintenance of anaesthesia and was 6 (95% CI: 4-8) at awakening.

CONCLUSIONS

The SNAP index tracks loss of consciousness and emergence from sevoflurane and sevoflurane/nitrous oxide anaesthesia. There is significant bias between the SNAP and BIS indices and therefore, the indices are not interchangeable. The SNAP index returns to baseline before awakening, whereas the BIS index remains below baseline at awakening, suggesting that the SNAP index may be more sensitive to unintentional awareness.

Emergence from propofol anesthesia in a nonagenarian at a Bispectral Index of 52

In this case report, we describe a nonagenarian patient who could respond completely to verbal commands at a Bispectral Index (BIS) value of 52 after epidural lidocaine and IV propofol anesthesia. Measured blood lidocaine and propofol concentrations were 0.69 microg/mL and 0.74 microg/mL, respectively. Intraoperative awareness even in the recommended BIS range of 40-60 remains possible.