Comparison of closed loop vs. manual administration of propofol using the Bispectral index in cardiac surgery.

BACKGROUND

In recent years, electroencephalographic indices of anaesthetic depth have facilitated automated anaesthesia delivery systems. Such closed-loop control of anaesthesia has been described in various surgical settings in ASA I-II patients (1-4), but not in open heart surgery characterized by haemodynamic instability and higher risk of intra-operative awareness. Therefore, a newly developed closed-loop anaesthesia delivery system (CLADS) to regulate propofol infusion by the Bispectral index (BIS) was compared with manual control during open heart surgery.

METHODS

Forty-four adult ASA II-III patients undergoing elective cardiac surgery under cardiopulmonary bypass were enrolled. The study participants were randomized to two groups: the CLADS group received propofol delivered by the CLADS, while in the manual group, propofol delivery was adjusted manually. The depth of anaesthesia was titrated to a target BIS of 50 in both the groups.

RESULTS

During induction, the CLADS group required lower doses of propofol (P<0.001), resulting in lesser overshoots of BIS (P<0.001) and mean arterial blood pressure (P=0.004). Subsequently, BIS was maintained within +/- 10 of the target for a significantly longer time in the CLADS group (P=0.01). The parameters of performance assessment, median absolute performance error (P=0.01), wobble (P=0.04) and divergence (P<0.001), were all significantly better in the CLADS group. Haemodynamic stability was better in the CLADS group and the requirement of phenylephrine in the pre-cardiopulmonary bypass period as well as the cumulative dose of phenylephrine used were significantly higher in the manual group.

CONCLUSION

The automated delivery of propofol using CLADS was safe, efficient and performed better than manual administration in open heart surgery.