JOURNAL HOME CME HOME THIS MONTH PAST ISSUES ETOC COLLECTIONS
AUTHORS REVIEWERS EDITORIAL BOARD FEEDBACK RSS HELP
A&A International Anesthesia Research Society
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a colleague
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (26)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Recart, A.
Right arrow Articles by Wang, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Recart, A.
Right arrow Articles by Wang, A.
Related Collections
Right arrow Monitoring (Non-cardiac)
Right arrow Technology

Anesth Analg 2003;97:1667-1674
© 2003 International Anesthesia Research Society


TECHNOLOGY, COMPUTING, AND SIMULATION

The Effect of Cerebral Monitoring on Recovery After General Anesthesia: A Comparison of the Auditory Evoked Potential and Bispectral Index Devices with Standard Clinical Practice

Alejandro Recart, MD, Irina Gasanova, PhD MD, Paul F. White, PhD MD, Tojo Thomas, MS, Babatunde Ogunnaike, MD, Mohammed Hamza, MD, and Agnes Wang, MS

From the Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Management University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas

Address correspondence to Dr. Paul F. White, Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Management, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, 5323 Harry Hines Boulevard, Dallas, TX 75390–9068. Address email to paul.white{at}utsouthwestern.edu

The use of cerebral monitoring may improve the ability of anesthesiologists to titrate anesthetic drugs. However, there is controversy regarding the impact of the alleged anesthetic-sparing effects of cerebral monitoring on the recovery process and patient outcome. We designed this prospective double-blinded, sham-controlled study to evaluate the impact of intraoperative monitoring with the electroencephalogram bispectral index (BISTM) or auditory evoked potential (AEP) device on the usage of desflurane and the time to discharge from the recovery room, as well as on patient satisfaction with their anesthetic experience and recovery. Ninety healthy patients undergoing laparoscopic general surgery procedures using a standardized anesthetic technique were randomly assigned to one of three monitoring groups: standard clinical practice (control), BIS-guided, or AEP-guided. Both the BIS and AEP monitors were connected to all patients before induction of general anesthesia. In the control group, the anesthesiologists were not permitted to observe the BIS or AEP index values during the intraoperative period. In the BIS-guided group, the volatile anesthetic was titrated to maintain a BIS value in the range of 45–55. In the AEP-guided group, the targeted AEP index range was 15–20. The BIS and AEP indices, as well as end-tidal desflurane concentration, were recorded at 3–5 min intervals. Recovery times to awakening, tracheal extubation, fast-track score >=12, and postanesthesia care unit (PACU) discharge criteria were recorded at 1–10 min intervals. In addition, patient satisfaction with anesthesia and quality of recovery were evaluated on 100- and 18-point scales, respectively, at 24 h after surgery. The AEP- and BIS-guided groups were administered significantly smaller average end-tidal desflurane concentrations than the control group (3.8 ± 0.9 and 3.9 ± 0.6 versus 4.7 ± 1.7, respectively) (P < 0.01). Although the emergence times to eye opening, tracheal extubation, and obeying commands were consistently shorter in the AEP and BIS groups (6 ± 4 and 6 ± 5 versus 8 ± 8 min; 6 ± 5 and 6 ± 4 versus 11 ± 10 min; and 8 ± 4 and 7 ± 4 versus 12 ± 9 min, respectively), only the extubation times were significantly different from the control group (P < 0.05). More importantly, the length of the PACU stay was significantly shorter in both the AEP- and BIS-guided groups (79 ± 43 and 80 ± 47 versus 108 ± 58 min, respectively) (P < 0.05). The patients’ quality of recovery was also significantly higher in the two monitored groups (15 ± 2 versus 13 ± 3 in the control group, P < 0.05). We concluded that cerebral monitoring with either the BIS or AEP devices reduced the maintenance anesthetic (desflurane) requirement, resulting in a shorter length of stay in the PACU and improved quality of recovery after laparoscopic surgery. However, there were no significant outcome differences between the two cerebral monitored groups.

IMPLICATIONS: Compared with standard monitoring practices, use of an auditory evoked potential or bispectral index monitor to titrate the volatile anesthetic led to a significant reduction in the anesthetic requirement. The anesthetic-sparing effect of cerebral monitoring resulted in a shorter postanesthesia care unit stay and improved quality of recovery from the patient’s perspective.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Anesth. Analg.Home page
T. Nishiyama
The Effects of Auditory Evoked Potential Click Sounds on Bispectral Index and Entropy
Anesth. Analg., August 1, 2008; 107(2): 545 - 548.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
NEJMHome page
M. S. Avidan, L. Zhang, B. A. Burnside, K. J. Finkel, A. C. Searleman, J. A. Selvidge, L. Saager, M. S. Turner, S. Rao, M. Bottros, et al.
Anesthesia Awareness and the Bispectral Index
N. Engl. J. Med., March 13, 2008; 358(11): 1097 - 1108.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Anesth. Analg.Home page
I. Aime, N. Verroust, C. Masson-Lefoll, G. Taylor, P.-A. Laloe, N. Liu, and M. Fischler
Does Monitoring Bispectral Index or Spectral Entropy Reduce Sevoflurane Use?
Anesth. Analg., December 1, 2006; 103(6): 1469 - 1477.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Canadian J. AnesthesiaHome page
E. Zohar, I. Luban, P. F. White, E. Ramati, S. Shabat, and B. Fredman
Bispectral index monitoring does not improve early recovery of geriatric outpatients undergoing brief surgical procedures: [Le monitorage avec l'index bispectral n'ameliore pas la recuperation precoce des patients ambulatoires ages apres une operation breve]
Can J Anesth, January 1, 2006; 53(1): 20 - 25.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Anesth. Analg.Home page
P. F. White, J. Tang, G. F. Romero, R. H. Wender, R. Naruse, A. Sloninsky, and R. Kariger
A Comparison of State and Response Entropy Versus Bispectral Index Values During the Perioperative Period
Anesth. Analg., January 1, 2006; 102(1): 160 - 167.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Br J AnaesthHome page
J. Bruhn, S. Kreuer, P. Bischoff, P. Kessler, G. N. Schmidt, A. Grzesiak, and W. Wilhelm
Bispectral index and A-line AAI index as guidance for desflurane-remifentanil anaesthesia compared with a standard practice group: a multicentre study
Br. J. Anaesth., January 1, 2005; 94(1): 63 - 69.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Anesth. Analg.Home page
P. F. White, J. Tang, H. Ma, R. H. Wender, A. Sloninsky, and R. Kariger
Is the Patient State Analyzer with the PSArray2 a Cost-Effective Alternative to the Bispectral Index Monitor During the Perioperative Period?
Anesth. Analg., November 1, 2004; 99(5): 1429 - 1435.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Br J AnaesthHome page
J. R. Sneyd
Editorial III: Remembering awareness
Br. J. Anaesth., September 1, 2004; 93(3): 324 - 326.
[Full Text] [PDF]




Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins Anesthesia & Analgesia® is published for the International Anesthesia Research Society® by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins with the assistance of Stanford University Libraries' HighWire Press®. Copyright 2006 by the International Anesthesia Research Society. Online ISSN: 1526-7598   Print ISSN: 0003-2999 HighWire Press
Copyright © 2003 by the International Anesthesia Research Society.