Sudhakaran R, Makkar Jeetinder K, Jain Divya, Wig Jyotsna, Chabra R
Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India.
Department of Neurosurgery, Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India.
Indian J Anaesth. 2018 Jul;62(7):516-523. doi: 10.4103/ija.IJA_172_18.
Several techniques have evolved over time to monitor depth of anesthesia and ensure enhanced recovery. This randomized double-blinded trial was designed to compare bispectral index (BIS) or end-tidal anaesthetic concentration (ETAC) monitoring on the recovery characteristics of patients undergoing thoracolumbar spine surgeries.
Seventy American Society of Anesthesiologist I-II patients of either sex were randomized to Group B - BIS-guided protocol, Group E - ETAC-guided protocol, or Group S - Standard protocol. After intravenous induction, anaesthesia was maintained with desflurane in O/NO (50:50) mixture. In BIS, ETAC and Standard groups, inspired end-tidal desflurane concentration was varied to achieve BIS of 45-55, 0.8-1.0 age-corrected minimum alveolar concentration, and haemodynamic parameters within 20% of the baseline, respectively. Time to eye opening (emergence time, the primary outcome), time to extubation, and time to name recall from the discontinuation of the anaesthetic agent were recorded. Incidence of nausea, vomiting, and total analgesic consumption was noted for 24 h.
Emergence time (mean ± SD) in ETAC (5.1 ± 1.53 min) and BIS (5.0 ± 2.12 min)-guided groups was significantly lower than Standard group (7.5 ± 2.90 min). Extubation time in ETAC (6.3 ± 2.22 min) and BIS-guided group (6.5 ± 1.78 min) was significantly lower than Standard group (9.0 ± 3.20 min) ( < 0.001). Time to achieve fast track score of more than 12 was significantly less in BIS-guided group (13.12 ± 2.59 min).
ETAC-guided anaesthesia is comparable to BIS-guided anaesthesia in achieving early recovery.
随着时间的推移,已发展出多种技术来监测麻醉深度并确保加速康复。本随机双盲试验旨在比较脑电双频指数(BIS)或呼气末麻醉药浓度(ETAC)监测对胸腰椎手术患者恢复特征的影响。
70例美国麻醉医师协会分级为I-II级的患者,不分性别,随机分为B组(BIS引导方案组)、E组(ETAC引导方案组)或S组(标准方案组)。静脉诱导后,用七氟醚与氧化亚氮(50:50)混合维持麻醉。在BIS组、ETAC组和标准组中,分别通过改变吸入的七氟醚呼气末浓度,使BIS达到45-55、年龄校正后的最低肺泡浓度达到0.8-1.0,以及血流动力学参数维持在基线的20%以内。记录睁眼时间(苏醒时间,主要观察指标)、拔管时间以及停止使用麻醉药后能叫出名字的时间。记录24小时内恶心、呕吐的发生率以及总镇痛药消耗量。
ETAC组(5.1±1.53分钟)和BIS引导组(5.0±2.12分钟)的苏醒时间显著低于标准组(7.5±2.90分钟)。ETAC组(6.3±2.22分钟)和BIS引导组(6.5±1.78分钟)的拔管时间显著低于标准组(9.0±3.20分钟)(P<0.001)。BIS引导组达到快速康复评分超过12分的时间显著缩短(13.12±2.59分钟)。
在实现早期康复方面,ETAC引导麻醉与BIS引导麻醉效果相当。