Department of Anesthesiology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109-5048, USA.
Anesthesiology. 2012 Oct;117(4):717-25. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e31826904a6.
Intraoperative awareness with explicit recall occurs in approximately 0.15% of all surgical cases. Efficacy trials based on the Bispectral Index® (BIS) monitor (Covidien, Boulder, CO) and anesthetic concentrations have focused on high-risk patients, but there are no effectiveness data applicable to an unselected surgical population.
We conducted a randomized controlled trial of unselected surgical patients at three hospitals of a tertiary academic medical center. Surgical cases were randomized to alerting algorithms based on either BIS values or anesthetic concentrations. The primary outcome was the incidence of definite intraoperative awareness; prespecified secondary outcomes included postanesthetic recovery variables.
The study was terminated because of futility. At interim analysis the incidence of definite awareness was 0.12% (11/9,376) (95% CI: 0.07-0.21%) in the anesthetic concentration group and 0.08% (8/9,460) (95% CI: 0.04-0.16%) in the BIS group (P = 0.48). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of meeting criteria for recovery room discharge or incidence of nausea and vomiting. By post hoc secondary analysis, the BIS protocol was associated with a 4.7-fold reduction in definite or possible awareness events compared with a cohort receiving no intervention (P = 0.001; 95% CI: 1.7-13.1).
This negative trial could not detect a difference in the incidence of definite awareness or recovery variables between monitoring protocols based on either BIS values or anesthetic concentration. By post hoc analysis, a protocol based on BIS monitoring reduced the incidence of definite or possible intraoperative awareness compared with routine care.
术中知晓伴明确回忆的发生率约占所有手术的 0.15%。基于脑电双频指数(BIS)监测仪(Covidien,博尔德,科罗拉多州)和麻醉浓度的疗效试验主要集中在高危患者,但尚无适用于未选择手术人群的有效性数据。
我们在一家三级学术医疗中心的 3 家医院对未选择的手术患者进行了一项随机对照试验。手术病例随机分为基于 BIS 值或麻醉浓度的警报算法。主要结局是明确的术中意识发生率;预设的次要结局包括麻醉后恢复变量。
由于无效,该研究提前终止。在中期分析时,麻醉浓度组的明确意识发生率为 0.12%(11/9376)(95%CI:0.07-0.21%),BIS 组为 0.08%(8/9460)(95%CI:0.04-0.16%)(P=0.48)。两组在恢复室出院标准或恶心呕吐发生率方面无显著差异。通过事后二次分析,与未接受干预的队列相比,BIS 方案与明确或可能的意识事件发生率降低 4.7 倍(P=0.001;95%CI:1.7-13.1)。
这项阴性试验未能检测到基于 BIS 值或麻醉浓度的监测方案在明确意识或恢复变量方面的发生率差异。通过事后分析,与常规护理相比,基于 BIS 监测的方案降低了明确或可能的术中意识发生率。