Jain Neena, Mathur Pooja Rawat, Khan Shoyeb, Khare Arvind, Mathur Veena, Sethi Surendra
Department of Anaesthesiology, Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, Ajmer, Rajasthan, India.
Anesth Essays Res. 2016 Sep-Dec;10(3):591-596. doi: 10.4103/0259-1162.186600.
Early extubation is a desirable goal after general anesthesia. Very few studies have compared the effect of bispectral index (BIS) monitoring versus standard end-tidal anesthetic gas (ETAG) concentration monitoring on tracheal extubation time for halothane-based anesthesia. The aim of this study was to compare the effect of BIS versus ETAG-guided anesthesia on time to tracheal extubation for halothane-based anesthesia in general surgical setting.
This was a randomized, controlled double-blind study. Sixty patients with the American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status Class 1 or 2, receiving halothane-based general anesthesia were randomized to BIS-guided ( = 30) and ETAG-guided anesthesia ( = 30). Time to tracheal extubation was measured. In BIS group, BIS value was kept between 40 and 60 while in ETAG group; ETAG value was kept between 0.7 and 1.3 minimum alveolar concentration. The two groups were compared using Student's -test, and < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Data were processed and analyzed using SPSS version 17 software.
Mean time to tracheal extubation was significantly longer in BIS group (9.63 ± 3.02 min) as compared to ETAG group (5.29 ± 1.51 min), mean difference 4.34 min with 95% confidence interval (3.106, 5.982) ( < 0.05).
In our study, the extubation time was significantly longer in BIS-guided anesthesia as compared to ETAG-guided anesthesia. ETAG monitoring promotes earlier extubation of patients as compared to BIS monitoring during halothane anesthesia.
全身麻醉后早期拔管是一个理想的目标。很少有研究比较脑电双频指数(BIS)监测与标准呼气末麻醉气体(ETAG)浓度监测对基于氟烷麻醉的气管拔管时间的影响。本研究的目的是比较在普通外科手术中,BIS与ETAG引导下的麻醉对基于氟烷麻醉的气管拔管时间的影响。
这是一项随机对照双盲研究。60例美国麻醉医师协会身体状况分级为1或2级、接受基于氟烷全身麻醉的患者被随机分为BIS引导组(n = 30)和ETAG引导组(n = 30)。测量气管拔管时间。在BIS组,BIS值保持在40至60之间,而在ETAG组,ETAG值保持在0.7至1.3最低肺泡浓度之间。两组采用Student's t检验进行比较,P < 0.05被认为具有统计学意义。数据使用SPSS 17版软件进行处理和分析。
与ETAG组(5.29 ± 1.51分钟)相比,BIS组气管拔管的平均时间显著更长(9.63 ± 3.02分钟),平均差异为4.34分钟,95%置信区间为(3.106,5.982)(P < 0.05)。
在我们的研究中,与ETAG引导的麻醉相比,BIS引导的麻醉拔管时间显著更长。在氟烷麻醉期间,与BIS监测相比,ETAG监测可促进患者更早拔管。