Characterization of the Bispectral Index in Healthy Volunteers Receiving Inhalation Anesthetics in Combination With Opioids in a Randomized Trial.

IF 4.7 2区 医学 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Odmara L Barreto Chang, Talmage Egan, Ilan Breskin, Ivan Merlo, David MacLeod
{"title":"Characterization of the Bispectral Index in Healthy Volunteers Receiving Inhalation Anesthetics in Combination With Opioids in a Randomized Trial.","authors":"Odmara L Barreto Chang, Talmage Egan, Ilan Breskin, Ivan Merlo, David MacLeod","doi":"10.1213/ANE.0000000000008332","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Processed electroencephalogram (pEEG) monitors are commonly used in anesthesia practice. The relationship between the pEEG and clinical levels of sedation over anesthetic concentrations with and without opioids is not well understood. The purpose of this trial was to investigate the relationship between Bispectral IndexTM (BISTM), clinical measures of sedation, and inhaled anesthetics across a range of anesthetic concentrations and hypnotic states with and without intravenous opioids.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This prospective, randomized trial enrolled 211 healthy volunteers. Participants were randomized to one of five anesthetic regimens: sevoflurane, sevoflurane with remifentanil, sevoflurane with fentanyl, desflurane, or isoflurane. Target anesthetic end-tidal concentrations were increased in a stepwise fashion until a BIS index of 30 to 40 was reached. Opioids were administered by target-controlled infusion and commenced before the inhaled agent began. At each targeted end-tidal concentration, responsiveness was assessed using the Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation (MOAA/S) score and the BIS index was recorded. The MOAA/S score was used to assess participant responsiveness, with a score ≤2 considered unresponsive and a score ≥3 considered responsive. The primary outcome measure was the BIS50 for each anesthetic regimen, representing the BIS index at which 50% of participants were unresponsive. Secondary outcomes included BIS95 (representing the BIS index at which 95% of participants were unresponsive) and evaluation of the BIS index as a predictor of responsiveness. BIS50 and BIS95 were estimated using random intercept logistic regression models, and the predictive performance of BIS indices was assessed by calculating the corresponding area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>One hundred and forty-three participants were randomized to a treatment group and completed the procedure with adequate data. Mean age was 26.5 ± 6.7 years (52% male). There were no reported device-related adverse events. Across treatment groups, BIS50 ranged from 67.5 (95% confidence interval [CI], 63.6-71.4) to 76.2 (73.5-78.8), and BIS95 ranged from 49.1 (42.9-55.4) to 63.3 (59.5-67.2). Compared to the sevoflurane and isoflurane groups, the desflurane group exhibited slightly lower BIS50 and BIS95 values. The addition of opioids to sevoflurane had minimal impact on BIS50 and BIS95. The BIS index alone was a strong predictor of the level of responsiveness, with AUCs consistently close to the ideal value of 1 (≥0.95) across all treatment groups. BIS indices were highly correlated with MOAA/S scores.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These results describe the relationship between BIS levels and responsiveness for commonly used volatile anesthetics, with and without opioids, across a range of anesthetic concentrations. The results of this study should be interpreted in light of the study design which included young, healthy adult volunteers with no sustained, noxious stimulation. These findings may not be generalizable to other populations or clinical situations.</p>","PeriodicalId":7784,"journal":{"name":"Anesthesia and analgesia","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anesthesia and analgesia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1213/ANE.0000000000008332","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Processed electroencephalogram (pEEG) monitors are commonly used in anesthesia practice. The relationship between the pEEG and clinical levels of sedation over anesthetic concentrations with and without opioids is not well understood. The purpose of this trial was to investigate the relationship between Bispectral IndexTM (BISTM), clinical measures of sedation, and inhaled anesthetics across a range of anesthetic concentrations and hypnotic states with and without intravenous opioids.

Methods: This prospective, randomized trial enrolled 211 healthy volunteers. Participants were randomized to one of five anesthetic regimens: sevoflurane, sevoflurane with remifentanil, sevoflurane with fentanyl, desflurane, or isoflurane. Target anesthetic end-tidal concentrations were increased in a stepwise fashion until a BIS index of 30 to 40 was reached. Opioids were administered by target-controlled infusion and commenced before the inhaled agent began. At each targeted end-tidal concentration, responsiveness was assessed using the Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation (MOAA/S) score and the BIS index was recorded. The MOAA/S score was used to assess participant responsiveness, with a score ≤2 considered unresponsive and a score ≥3 considered responsive. The primary outcome measure was the BIS50 for each anesthetic regimen, representing the BIS index at which 50% of participants were unresponsive. Secondary outcomes included BIS95 (representing the BIS index at which 95% of participants were unresponsive) and evaluation of the BIS index as a predictor of responsiveness. BIS50 and BIS95 were estimated using random intercept logistic regression models, and the predictive performance of BIS indices was assessed by calculating the corresponding area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC).

Results: One hundred and forty-three participants were randomized to a treatment group and completed the procedure with adequate data. Mean age was 26.5 ± 6.7 years (52% male). There were no reported device-related adverse events. Across treatment groups, BIS50 ranged from 67.5 (95% confidence interval [CI], 63.6-71.4) to 76.2 (73.5-78.8), and BIS95 ranged from 49.1 (42.9-55.4) to 63.3 (59.5-67.2). Compared to the sevoflurane and isoflurane groups, the desflurane group exhibited slightly lower BIS50 and BIS95 values. The addition of opioids to sevoflurane had minimal impact on BIS50 and BIS95. The BIS index alone was a strong predictor of the level of responsiveness, with AUCs consistently close to the ideal value of 1 (≥0.95) across all treatment groups. BIS indices were highly correlated with MOAA/S scores.

Conclusions: These results describe the relationship between BIS levels and responsiveness for commonly used volatile anesthetics, with and without opioids, across a range of anesthetic concentrations. The results of this study should be interpreted in light of the study design which included young, healthy adult volunteers with no sustained, noxious stimulation. These findings may not be generalizable to other populations or clinical situations.

在一项随机试验中,接受吸入麻醉剂与阿片类药物联合使用的健康志愿者的双谱指数特征
背景:处理脑电图(pEEG)监测器在麻醉实践中被广泛使用。pEEG与临床镇静水平与麻醉浓度(含或不含阿片类药物)之间的关系尚不清楚。本试验的目的是研究双谱指数(BISTM)、镇静的临床测量和在麻醉浓度和催眠状态下静脉注射和不注射阿片类药物的吸入麻醉剂之间的关系。方法:这项前瞻性随机试验招募了211名健康志愿者。参与者被随机分配到五种麻醉方案中的一种:七氟醚、七氟醚与瑞芬太尼、七氟醚与芬太尼、地氟醚或异氟醚。靶麻醉剂潮末浓度逐步增加,直至BIS指数达到30 ~ 40。阿片类药物通过靶控输注给药,并在开始吸入药物之前开始给药。在每个目标潮末浓度,使用改进的观察者警觉/镇静评估(MOAA/S)评分评估反应性,并记录BIS指数。MOAA/S评分用于评估参与者的反应性,得分≤2分为无反应,得分≥3分为有反应。主要结局指标是每个麻醉方案的BIS50,代表50%参与者无反应的BIS指数。次要结果包括BIS95(表示95%的参与者无反应的BIS指数)和评估BIS指数作为反应性的预测因子。采用随机截距logistic回归模型估计BIS50和BIS95,通过计算相应的受试者工作特征曲线下面积(AUC)评估BIS指标的预测性能。结果:143名参与者被随机分配到一个治疗组,并完成了足够的数据。平均年龄26.5±6.7岁,男性占52%。没有器械相关不良事件的报道。在各治疗组中,BIS50范围为67.5(95%可信区间[CI], 63.6-71.4)至76.2 (73.5-78.8),BIS95范围为49.1(42.9-55.4)至63.3(59.5-67.2)。与七氟烷和异氟烷基团相比,地氟烷基团的BIS50和BIS95值略低。在七氟醚中加入阿片类药物对BIS50和BIS95的影响最小。单独BIS指数是反应性水平的一个强有力的预测指标,所有治疗组的auc始终接近理想值1(≥0.95)。BIS指数与MOAA/S评分高度相关。结论:这些结果描述了在麻醉浓度范围内,BIS水平与常用挥发性麻醉剂(含或不含阿片类药物)的反应性之间的关系。这项研究的结果应该根据研究设计来解释,该研究包括年轻、健康的成年志愿者,没有持续的有害刺激。这些发现可能不能推广到其他人群或临床情况。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Anesthesia and analgesia
Anesthesia and analgesia 医学-麻醉学
CiteScore
9.90
自引率
7.00%
发文量
817
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Anesthesia & Analgesia exists for the benefit of patients under the care of health care professionals engaged in the disciplines broadly related to anesthesiology, perioperative medicine, critical care medicine, and pain medicine. The Journal furthers the care of these patients by reporting the fundamental advances in the science of these clinical disciplines and by documenting the clinical, laboratory, and administrative advances that guide therapy. Anesthesia & Analgesia seeks a balance between definitive clinical and management investigations and outstanding basic scientific reports. The Journal welcomes original manuscripts containing rigorous design and analysis, even if unusual in their approach.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书