A Randomized Pilot Study Assessing if SEDLine Monitoring During Induction of Surgical Patients is Associated With Reduced Dosage of Administered Induction Agents.

IF 1.1 Q3 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Martin Krause, Albert Nguyen, Orestes O'Brien, Swapnil Khoche, Ulrich Schmidt
{"title":"A Randomized Pilot Study Assessing if SEDLine Monitoring During Induction of Surgical Patients is Associated With Reduced Dosage of Administered Induction Agents.","authors":"Martin Krause,&nbsp;Albert Nguyen,&nbsp;Orestes O'Brien,&nbsp;Swapnil Khoche,&nbsp;Ulrich Schmidt","doi":"10.1177/10892532221130660","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><i>Background</i>. Intubations, especially in emergent settings, carry a high risk of hemodynamic instability with potentially catastrophic outcomes. Weight-based dosing of induction drugs can be inappropriately high for elective or emergent intubations and lead to hemodynamic instability. We hypothesized that monitoring the patient state index of SEDLine monitors (Masimo, Irvine, CA) would decrease the dose of induction drugs in the operating room during elective intubations.<i>Methods</i>. In this randomized study, SEDLine monitoring was provided to the intervention group but not to the control group during the induction of anesthesia in the operating room. Anesthesia providers in the intervention group were advised to titrate induction drugs to a Patient State Index of <50 before proceeding with intubation. The primary outcome was the induction dose of propofol and etomidate per kilogram normalized to propofol dose equivalents. Secondary outcomes included supplemental doses of ketamine, midazolam, fentanyl, phenylephrine, and ephedrine per kg, time from induction to intubation, administration of additional propofol or vasopressors after induction, mean arterial pressure <b>≥</b> or <65 mmHg, and lowest mean arterial pressure post-induction.<i>Results</i>. We found no significant difference in propofol equivalents between groups (<i>P</i> = .41). Using a SEDLine decreased the odds that a patient would require vasopressors during induction (odds ratio of .39 [95% confidence interval, .15-.98]).<i>Conclusion</i>. SEDLine monitoring during induction did not decrease dosing of the induction drugs etomidate and propofol but decreased the odds of receiving vasopressors. Further studies are warranted to assess the utility of processed electroencephalography in emergent intubations outside of the operating room.</p>","PeriodicalId":46500,"journal":{"name":"Seminars in Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Seminars in Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10892532221130660","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/10/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background. Intubations, especially in emergent settings, carry a high risk of hemodynamic instability with potentially catastrophic outcomes. Weight-based dosing of induction drugs can be inappropriately high for elective or emergent intubations and lead to hemodynamic instability. We hypothesized that monitoring the patient state index of SEDLine monitors (Masimo, Irvine, CA) would decrease the dose of induction drugs in the operating room during elective intubations.Methods. In this randomized study, SEDLine monitoring was provided to the intervention group but not to the control group during the induction of anesthesia in the operating room. Anesthesia providers in the intervention group were advised to titrate induction drugs to a Patient State Index of <50 before proceeding with intubation. The primary outcome was the induction dose of propofol and etomidate per kilogram normalized to propofol dose equivalents. Secondary outcomes included supplemental doses of ketamine, midazolam, fentanyl, phenylephrine, and ephedrine per kg, time from induction to intubation, administration of additional propofol or vasopressors after induction, mean arterial pressure or <65 mmHg, and lowest mean arterial pressure post-induction.Results. We found no significant difference in propofol equivalents between groups (P = .41). Using a SEDLine decreased the odds that a patient would require vasopressors during induction (odds ratio of .39 [95% confidence interval, .15-.98]).Conclusion. SEDLine monitoring during induction did not decrease dosing of the induction drugs etomidate and propofol but decreased the odds of receiving vasopressors. Further studies are warranted to assess the utility of processed electroencephalography in emergent intubations outside of the operating room.

一项评估外科患者诱导过程中SEDLine监测是否与诱导药物剂量减少相关的随机试验研究。
背景。插管,特别是在紧急情况下,具有血液动力学不稳定的高风险,可能导致灾难性的后果。择期或紧急插管时,以体重为基础的诱导药物剂量可能过高,导致血流动力学不稳定。我们假设监测SEDLine监护仪(Masimo, Irvine, CA)的患者状态指数将减少择期插管时手术室中诱导药物的剂量。在本随机化研究中,干预组在手术室诱导麻醉时进行SEDLine监测,对照组不进行SEDLine监测。建议干预组的麻醉提供者滴定诱导药物至患者状态指数≥或结果。我们发现各组间异丙酚当量无显著差异(P = 0.41)。使用SEDLine降低了患者在诱导过程中需要血管加压药物的几率(优势比为0.39[95%可信区间,0.15 - 0.98])。在诱导过程中监测SEDLine并没有减少诱导药物依托咪酯和异丙酚的剂量,但降低了接受血管加压药物的几率。进一步的研究需要评估处理脑电图在手术室外紧急插管中的效用。
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
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
14.30%
发文量
31
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信