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.

Cerebral monitoring in surgical ICU patients

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To give an overview of cerebral monitoring techniques for surgical ICU patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

As the burden of postsurgical neurological and neurocognitive complications becomes increasingly recognized, cerebral monitoring in the surgical ICU might gain a relevant role in detecting and possibly preventing adverse outcomes. However, identifying neurological alterations in surgical ICU patients, who are often sedated and mechanically ventilated, can be challenging. Various noninvasive and invasive techniques are available for cerebral monitoring, providing an assessment of cortical electrical activity, cerebral oxygenation, blood flow autoregulation, intracranial pressure, and cerebral metabolism. These techniques can be used for the diagnosis of subclinical seizures, the assessment of sedation depth and delirium, the detection of an impaired cerebral blood flow, and the diagnosis of neurosurgical complications.

SUMMARY

Cerebral monitoring can be a valuable tool in the early detection of adverse outcomes in surgical ICU patients, but the evidence is limited, and clear clinical indications are still lacking.

Effect of neuromuscular blockade on the bispectral index in critically ill patients

INTRODUCTION

It has been suggested that neuromuscular blockade (NMB) affects the capacity of bispectral index (BIS) monitoring to measure consciousness in sedated children. Our aim was to analyse the impact of NMB on BIS values in critically ill children.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective observational study of children monitored with a BIS system that received a continuous infusion of vecuronium. We analysed data on clinical, diagnostic and haemodynamic variables, sedatives, analgesics, muscle relaxants, and BIS parameters. We compared BIS parameters before the use of a muscle relaxant, during its administration, before its discontinuation and for the 24h following the end of the infusion.

RESULTS

The analysis included 35 patients (median age, 30 months). The most common diagnosis was heart disease (85%). The most frequent indication for initiation of NMB was low cardiac output (45%), followed by adaptation to mechanical ventilation (20%). Neuromuscular blockade did not produce a significant change in BIS values. We found a decrease was observed in electromyography (EMG) values at 6h (34.9±9.4 vs 31.2±7; P=.008) and 12h after initiation of NMB (34.9±9.4 vs 28.6±4.8; P =.006). We observed a small significant increase in BIS after discontinuation of NMB (from 42.7±11 to 48.4±14.5, P=.001), and 6 and 12h later (51.3±16.6; P=.015). There were no differences in the doses of sedatives or analgesics except for fentanyl, of which the dose was lowered after discontinuation of vecuronium.

CONCLUSION

Continuous NMB produces small changes on BIS values that are not clinically significant and therefore does not interfere with BIS consciousness monitoring in critically ill children.

Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Prevention and Management of Pain, Agitation/Sedation, Delirium, Immobility, and Sleep Disruption in Adult Patients in the ICU

OBJECTIVE

To update and expand the 2013 Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Management of Pain, Agitation, and Delirium in Adult Patients in the ICU.

DESIGN

Thirty-two international experts, four methodologists, and four critical illness survivors met virtually at least monthly. All section groups gathered face-to-face at annual Society of Critical Care Medicine congresses; virtual connections included those unable to attend. A formal conflict of interest policy was developed a priori and enforced throughout the process. Teleconferences and electronic discussions among subgroups and whole panel were part of the guidelines' development. A general content review was completed face-to-face by all panel members in January 2017.

METHODS

Content experts, methodologists, and ICU survivors were represented in each of the five sections of the guidelines: Pain, Agitation/sedation, Delirium, Immobility (mobilization/rehabilitation), and Sleep (disruption). Each section created Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome, and nonactionable, descriptive questions based on perceived clinical relevance. The guideline group then voted their ranking, and patients prioritized their importance. For each Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome question, sections searched the best available evidence, determined its quality, and formulated recommendations as "strong," "conditional," or "good" practice statements based on Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation principles. In addition, evidence gaps and clinical caveats were explicitly identified.

RESULTS

The Pain, Agitation/Sedation, Delirium, Immobility (mobilization/rehabilitation), and Sleep (disruption) panel issued 37 recommendations (three strong and 34 conditional), two good practice statements, and 32 ungraded, nonactionable statements. Three questions from the patient-centered prioritized question list remained without recommendation.

CONCLUSIONS

We found substantial agreement among a large, interdisciplinary cohort of international experts regarding evidence supporting recommendations, and the remaining literature gaps in the assessment, prevention, and treatment of Pain, Agitation/sedation, Delirium, Immobility (mobilization/rehabilitation), and Sleep (disruption) in critically ill adults. Highlighting this evidence and the research needs will improve Pain, Agitation/sedation, Delirium, Immobility (mobilization/rehabilitation), and Sleep (disruption) management and provide the foundation for improved outcomes and science in this vulnerable population.

Bispectral Index Can Reliably Detect Deep Sedation in Mechanically Ventilated Patients: A Prospective Multicenter Validation Study

BACKGROUND

Excessively deep sedation is prevalent in mechanically ventilated patients and often considered suboptimal. We hypothesized that the bispectral index (BIS), a quantified electroencephalogram instrument, would accurately detect deep levels of sedation.

METHODS

We prospectively enrolled 90 critically ill mechanically ventilated patients who were receiving sedation. The BIS was monitored for 24 hours and compared with the Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale (RASS) evaluated every 4 hours. Deep sedation was defined as a RASS of -3 to -5. Threshold values of baseline BIS (the lowest value before RASS assessment) and stimulated BIS (the highest value after standardized assessment) for detecting deep sedation were determined in a training set (45 patients, 262 RASS assessments). Diagnostic accuracy was then analyzed in a validation set (45 patients, 264 RASS assessments).

RESULTS

Deep sedation was only prescribed in 6 (6.7%) patients, but 76 patients (84.4%) had at least 1 episode of deep sedation. Thresholds for detecting deep sedation of 50 for baseline and 80 for stimulated BIS were identified, with respective areas under the receiver-operating characteristic curve of 0.771 (95% confidence interval, 0.714-0.828) and 0.805 (0.752-0.857). The sensitivity and specificity of baseline BIS were 94.0% and 66.5% and of stimulated BIS were 91.0% and 66.5%. When baseline and stimulated BIS were combined, the sensitivity, specificity, and clinical utility index were 85.0% (76.1%-91.1%), 85.9% (79.5%-90.7%), and 66.9% (57.8%-76.0%), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Combining baseline and stimulated BIS may help detect deep sedation in mechanically ventilated patients.

An evaluation of the validity and potential utility of facial electromyelogram Responsiveness Index for sedation monitoring in critically ill patients

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to explore the validity of a novel sedation monitoring technology based on facial electromyelography (EMG) in sedated critically ill patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The Responsiveness Index (RI) integrates the preceding 60 minutes of facial EMG data. An existing data set was used to derive traffic light cut-offs for low (red), intermediate (amber), and higher (green) states of patient arousal. The validity of these was prospectively evaluated in 30 sedated critically ill patients against hourly Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale (RASS) assessments with concealment of RI data from clinical staff.

RESULTS

With derivation data, an RI less than or equal to 35 had best discrimination for a Ramsay score of 5/6 (sensitivity, 90%; specificity, 79%). For traffic lights, we chose RI less than or equal to 20 as red, 20 to 40 as amber, and more than 40 as green. In the prospective study, RI values were red/amber for 76% of RASS -5/-4 assessments, but RI varied dynamically over time in many patients, and discordance with RASS may have resulted from the use of 1 hour of data for RI calculations. We also noted that red/amber values resulted from sleep, encephalopathy, and low levels of stimulation.

CONCLUSIONS

Responsiveness Index is not directly comparable with clinical sedation scores but is a potential continuous alert to possible deep sedation in critically ill patients.

Monitoring sedation for bronchoscopy in mechanically ventilated patients by using the Ramsay sedation scale versus auditory-evoked potentials

BACKGROUND

Appropriate sedation benefits patients by reducing the stress response, but it requires an appropriate method of assessment to adjust the dosage of sedatives. The aim of this study was to compare the difference in the sedation of mechanically ventilated patients undergoing flexible bronchoscopy (FB) monitored by auditory-evoked potentials (AEPs) or the Ramsay sedation scale (RSS).

METHODS

In a prospective, randomized, controlled study, all patients who underwent FB with propofol sedation were monitored and their sedation adjusted. During FB, one group was monitored by AEP and another group was monitored by RSS. The propofol dosage was adjusted by the nursing staff during examination to maintain the Alaris AEP index (AAI) value between 25 and 40 in the AEP group and the RSS at 5 or 6 in the RSS group. Before FB and during FB, the AAI, heart rate (HR), and mean arterial pressure (MAP) were recorded every 5 min. The percentages of time at the sedation target and the propofol dosages were calculated.

RESULTS

Nineteen patients received AEP monitoring and 18 patients received RSS monitoring. The percentage of time at the sedation target during FB was significantly higher in the AEP monitoring group (51.3%; interquartile range [IQR], 47.0-63.5%) than in the RSS group (15.4%; IQR, 9.5-23.4%), (P < 0.001). During FB, the RSS group had a significantly higher AAI (P = 0.011), HR (P < 0.001), and MAP (P < 0.001) than the AEP group.

CONCLUSIONS

In mechanically ventilated patients undergoing FB, AEP monitoring resulted in less variation in AAI, HR, and MAP, and a higher percentage of time at the sedation target than RSS monitoring.

Composite auditory evoked potentials index is not a good indicator of depth of anesthesia in propofol-fentanyl anesthesia: Randomized comparative study

Background:

The composite auditory evoked potentials index (cAAI) was considered a measure of overall balance between noxious stimulation, analgesia, and hypnosis; while bispectral index (BIS) shows only hypnosis, and auditory evoked potentials index (AAI) shows response to stimuli. The present study compared the performance of cAAI, BIS, and AAI in propofol-fentanyl anesthesia.

Materials and Methods:

Forty-five patients for abdominal surgery aged 30-65 years with ASA physical status I or II were randomly divided into three groups by an envelope method. Anesthesia was induced with midazolam, propofol, and fentanyl alongwith an epidural block. When hemodynamics were stable during surgery, propofol infusion rate was fixed at 4 mg/kg/h for 10 min, then increased to 6 mg/kg/h and kept it for 10 min. AAI (AEP version 1.4), cAAI (AEP version 1.6), or BIS (A-2000) was monitored in each 15 patients, and the performance of three indices was compared.

Results:

All three indices decreased significantly before intubation. Only the AAI increased significantly by intubation. During anesthesia except for at propofol 6 mg/kg/h, the cAAI was significantly higher than the AAI. Only the AAI was significantly lower at propofol 6 mg/kg/h than at 4 mg/kg/h. The cAAI had the largest and AAI had the smallest inter-individual variations. The cAAI was higher than the manufacturer's recommended range of general anesthesia.

Conclusion:

In propofol-fentanyl anesthesia, AAI might be better to discriminate anesthetic depth than cAAI and BIS.

Clinical practice guidelines for the management of pain, agitation, and delirium in adult patients in the intensive care unit

OBJECTIVE

To revise the "Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Sustained Use of Sedatives and Analgesics in the Critically Ill Adult" published in Critical Care Medicine in 2002.

METHODS

The American College of Critical Care Medicine assembled a 20-person, multidisciplinary, multi-institutional task force with expertise in guideline development, pain, agitation and sedation, delirium management, and associated outcomes in adult critically ill patients. The task force, divided into four subcommittees, collaborated over 6 yr in person, via teleconferences, and via electronic communication. Subcommittees were responsible for developing relevant clinical questions, using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation method (http://www.gradeworkinggroup.org) to review, evaluate, and summarize the literature, and to develop clinical statements (descriptive) and recommendations (actionable). With the help of a professional librarian and Refworks database software, they developed a Web-based electronic database of over 19,000 references extracted from eight clinical search engines, related to pain and analgesia, agitation and sedation, delirium, and related clinical outcomes in adult ICU patients. The group also used psychometric analyses to evaluate and compare pain, agitation/sedation, and delirium assessment tools. All task force members were allowed to review the literature supporting each statement and recommendation and provided feedback to the subcommittees. Group consensus was achieved for all statements and recommendations using the nominal group technique and the modified Delphi method, with anonymous voting by all task force members using E-Survey (http://www.esurvey.com). All voting was completed in December 2010. Relevant studies published after this date and prior to publication of these guidelines were referenced in the text. The quality of evidence for each statement and recommendation was ranked as high (A), moderate (B), or low/very low (C). The strength of recommendations was ranked as strong (1) or weak (2), and either in favor of (+) or against (-) an intervention. A strong recommendation (either for or against) indicated that the intervention's desirable effects either clearly outweighed its undesirable effects (risks, burdens, and costs) or it did not. For all strong recommendations, the phrase "We recommend …" is used throughout. A weak recommendation, either for or against an intervention, indicated that the trade-off between desirable and undesirable effects was less clear. For all weak recommendations, the phrase "We suggest …" is used throughout. In the absence of sufficient evidence, or when group consensus could not be achieved, no recommendation (0) was made. Consensus based on expert opinion was not used as a substitute for a lack of evidence. A consistent method for addressing potential conflict of interest was followed if task force members were coauthors of related research. The development of this guideline was independent of any industry funding.

CONCLUSION

These guidelines provide a roadmap for developing integrated, evidence-based, and patient-centered protocols for preventing and treating pain, agitation, and delirium in critically ill patients.

Sedation for critically ill or injured adults in the intensive care unit: a shifting paradigm

As most critically ill or injured patients will require some degree of sedation, the goal of this paper was to comprehensively review the literature associated with use of sedative agents in the intensive care unit (ICU). The first and selected latter portions of this article present a narrative overview of the shifting paradigm in ICU sedation practices, indications for uninterrupted or prolonged ICU sedation, and the pharmacology of sedative agents. In the second portion, we conducted a structured, although not entirely systematic, review of the available evidence associated with use of alternative sedative agents in critically ill or injured adults. Data sources for this review were derived by searching OVID MEDLINE and PubMed from their first available date until May 2012 for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs), systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses and economic evaluations. Advances in the technology of mechanical ventilation have permitted clinicians to limit the use of sedation among the critically ill through daily sedative interruptions or other means. These practices have been reported to result in improved mortality, a decreased length of ICU and hospital stay and a lower risk of drug-associated delirium. However, in some cases, prolonged or uninterrupted sedation may still be indicated, such as when patients develop intracranial hypertension following traumatic brain injury. The pharmacokinetics of sedative agents have clinical importance and may be altered by critical illness or injury, co-morbid conditions and/or drug-drug interactions. Although use of validated sedation scales to monitor depth of sedation is likely to reduce adverse events, they have no utility for patients receiving neuromuscular receptor blocking agents. Depth of sedation monitoring devices such as the Bispectral Index (BIS©) also have limitations. Among existing RCTs, no sedative agent has been reported to improve the risk of mortality among the critically ill or injured. Moreover, although propofol may be associated with a shorter time to tracheal extubation and recovery from sedation than midazolam, the risk of hypertriglyceridaemia and hypotension is higher with propofol. Despite dexmedetomidine being linked with a lower risk of drug-associated delirium than alternative sedative agents, this drug increases risk of bradycardia and hypotension. Among adults with severe traumatic brain injury, there are insufficient data to suggest that any single sedative agent decreases the risk of subsequent poor neurological outcomes or mortality. The lack of examination of confounders, including the type of healthcare system in which the investigation was conducted, is a major limitation of existing pharmacoeconomic analyses, which likely limits generalizability of their results.

Electroacupuncture reduces the dose of midazolam monitored by the bispectral index in critically ill patients with mechanical ventilation: an exploratory study

OBJECTIVE

Electroacupuncture, a modern variation on a traditional Chinese treatment, might be useful for sedation and analgesia. This study aims to investigate whether electroacupuncture can modify the dose of midazolam monitored by the bispectral index (BIS) in critically ill patients with mechanical ventilation.

METHODS

Orotracheally intubated patients undergoing mechanical ventilation were randomly assigned into three groups (groups A, B and C). All patients were given an intravenous infusion of midazolam. Patients in group A received no additional treatment. Patients in group B were given acupuncture without electrical stimulation at acupuncture points GV24 and EX-HN3 (Yintang) for 6 h simultaneously, and patients in group C were given electroacupuncture to the same points as in group B.

RESULTS

Maintaining the BIS between 60 and 80, the hourly mean one dose of midazolam within the first 6 h after sedation in group C was 0.05 (±0.02 mg/kg per hour), which was significantly lower than both group A (0.08 ± 0.03 mg/kg per hour, p<0.001) and group B (0.07 ± 0.01 mg/kg per hour, p<0.021). The doses in groups A and B showed no significant difference. Between-group comparison analysis of hepatic and renal function and severe adverse reactions all showed no significant difference between the three groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Electroacupuncture appears to reduce markedly the dose of sedative drug required in critically ill patients with mechanical ventilation monitored by BIS, without any obvious severe adverse action, and larger studies to confirm the effect are justified.

Effect of epidural neuraxial blockade-dependent sedation on the Ramsay Sedation Scale and the composite auditory evoked potentials index in surgical intensive care patients

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

Peripheral deafferentation induced by neuraxial anesthesia reduces the degree of cortical arousal. This study investigated whether epidural analgesia blockade decreased sedation, as measured by the rapidly extracted auditory evoked potentials index, A-line autoregressive index (AAI) and Ramsay Sedation Scale (RSS) in sedated surgical intensive care patients, and looked at whether this was a concentration-dependent effect of lidocaine.

METHODS

Forty patients underwent major lower abdominal surgery and received epidural analgesia in the surgical intensive care unit. Patients were continuously sedated with propofol to achieve an RSS value of 3, randomly divided into two groups, and received epidural analgesia with 10 mL of 0.5% or 1% lidocaine. Sedation was evaluated using the RSS and AAI, and analgesia was evaluated using a visual analog scale (VAS). RSS, AAI, electromyography (EMG) activity of AAI and VAS values were recorded at 5 minutes before and 30, 60 and 90 minutes after epidural lidocaine administration.

RESULTS

Epidural 0.5% lidocaine produced a reduction of AAI, EMG and VAS at 30, 60 and 90 minutes after administration. For 1% epidural lidocaine administration, AAI, EMG and VAS were also reduced at 30, 60 and 90 minutes after epidural lidocaine administration. However, there was no difference in the AAI between the two concentrations; moreover, no significant change was observed in the RSS.

CONCLUSION

Epidural lidocaine analgesia could potentiate sedation in patients evaluated by the AAI, but had no effect on the RSS. The present study suggests that the AAI could provide an objective and more precise index than the RSS in evaluation of sedation level in patients who are undergoing epidural pain management in the intensive care unit.

A comparison of SNAP II and bispectral index monitoring in patients undergoing sedation

Clinical signs and patients' verbal responses have traditionally been used to assess patients' comfort and the depth of sedation. Recently, level-of-consciousness monitors have been used to guide sedation. The SNAP II(c) is a single-lead electroencephalogram device that displays a SNAP(c) Index - a derived value based on both high and low frequency electroencephalogram signals. Much of the current clinical research on monitoring during sedation involves the bispectral index monitor. We compared simultaneous readings recorded by the SNAP II and bispectral index during sedation in 51 consecutive patients undergoing surgery. The anaesthesia team was blinded to the SNAP II and bispectal index values. Concurrent SNAP II and bispectral index readings displayed similarly-shaped trajectories during sedation, but further studies are needed to establish the routine clinical utility of both these monitors.