Doufas A G, Bakhshandeh M, Haugh G S, Bjorksten A R, Greif R, Sessler D I
The Outcomes Research Institute and Department of Anesthesiology and Pharmacology, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY 40202, USA.
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2003 Sep;47(8):951-7. doi: 10.1034/j.1399-6576.2003.00184.x.
Sedation practice, especially when non-anaesthesia personnel are involved, requires efficient anaesthetic depth monitoring. Therefore, we used prediction probability (PK) to evaluate the performance of the bispectral index (BIS) of the EEG and automated responsiveness test (ART) to predict sedation depth and loss of subject's responsiveness during propofol sedation, with and without N2O.
Twenty volunteers were studied during propofol administration with (N2O) and without (Air) N2O. The protocol consisted of sequential 15-min cycles. After a control period, propofol was infused to a target effect-site concentration of 0.25 microg/ml (N2O) or 1.5 microg/ml (Air), which was subsequently increased by 0.25 or 0.5 microg/ml, respectively, until loss of responsiveness was detected by loss of response to command [observer's assessment of alertness/sedation (OAA/S) score <or= 2].
Deeply sedated patients did not respond to ART indicating that the sensitivity was 1.0 with or without N2O. The specificity of ART was 0.24 with Air and 0.98 with N2O. The BIS was better than ART in predicting OAA/S score (PK = 0.84 vs. 0.77) and loss of responsiveness (PK = 0.87 vs. 0.69) during the Air trial. Nitrous oxide decreased the performance of BIS in predicting OAA/S score (PK = 0.76), but increased the performance of ART to predict loss of responsiveness (PK = 0.85).
BIS and ART comparably predict sedation and loss of responsiveness. However, ART, because of its resistance to false-normal responses, might prove to be more useful on an individual patient basis - especially in the presence of agents that impair BIS sensitivity.
镇静操作,尤其是在非麻醉人员参与的情况下,需要有效的麻醉深度监测。因此,我们使用预测概率(PK)来评估脑电图双谱指数(BIS)和自动反应性测试(ART)在丙泊酚镇静期间(有或无氧化亚氮)预测镇静深度和受试者反应丧失的性能。
对20名志愿者在使用(氧化亚氮)和不使用(空气)氧化亚氮的情况下进行丙泊酚给药期间进行研究。方案包括连续15分钟的周期。在对照期后,将丙泊酚输注至目标效应室浓度0.25微克/毫升(氧化亚氮)或1.5微克/毫升(空气),随后分别以0.25或0.5微克/毫升的速度增加,直到通过对指令无反应(观察者对警觉性/镇静的评估(OAA/S)评分≤2)检测到反应丧失。
深度镇静的患者对ART无反应,表明无论有无氧化亚氮,敏感性均为1.0。ART在使用空气时的特异性为0.24,在使用氧化亚氮时为0.98。在空气试验期间,BIS在预测OAA/S评分(PK = 0.84对0.77)和反应丧失(PK = 0.87对0.69)方面优于ART。氧化亚氮降低了BIS预测OAA/S评分的性能(PK = 0.76),但提高了ART预测反应丧失的性能(PK = 0.85)。
BIS和ART在预测镇静和反应丧失方面具有可比性。然而,ART由于其对假正常反应的抗性,可能在个体患者基础上被证明更有用 - 特别是在存在损害BIS敏感性的药物的情况下。