From the Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Daegu Catholic University Medical Center, School of Medicine, Daegu Catholic University, Daegu, Republic of Korea.
Division of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Department of Surgery, Daegu Catholic University Medical Center, School of Medicine, Daegu Catholic University, Daegu, Republic of Korea.
Anesth Analg. 2020 Nov;131(5):1589-1598. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000004958.
Intraoperative monitoring with pupillometry has shown promising results for nociception/antinociception balance monitoring. However, its benefits in clinical practice remain unproven. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of intraoperative pupillometry monitoring on intraoperative opioid consumption and postoperative pain compared to surgical pleth index (SPI), another widely investigated monitoring.
American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) I-II patients scheduled for elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy were included. This prospective, parallel-arm, single-center study was conducted in 2 steps. First, we evaluated the feasibility of using pupillometry and SPI monitoring compared with conventional hemodynamic monitoring. Next, a parallel-arm, double-blind randomized study compared the peak postoperative pain measured with numerical rating scale (NRS) from 0 (no pain) to 10 (extreme pain) as a primary outcome between pupillometry (pupillometry group, n = 43) and SPI monitoring (SPI group, n = 43) using Mann-Whitney U test. Secondary outcomes included intraoperative remifentanil consumption, postoperative opioid responsiveness (a decrease in NRS by ≥1 after fentanyl administrations), number of analgesic administrations, and opioid-related complications.
In the preliminary study (n = 50), remifentanil consumption was less under pupillometry monitoring compared to SPI monitoring, and peak postoperative pain was lower under pupillometry compared to conventional monitoring. In the main study (n = 86), peak postoperative pain and intraoperative remifentanil consumption were lower in the pupillometry group (median [first to third quartile], 5 [4-6]; mean ± standard deviation [SD], 0.078 ± 0.019 μg·kg·minute) compared to the SPI group (7 [5-8] and 0.0130 ± 0.051 μg·kg·minute; P < .001), with the median difference in peak postoperative pain of -1 and its 95% confidence interval between -2 and -0.5. The pupillometry group had better responsiveness to fentanyl (84.6% vs 61.0%; P = .005) and lower number of analgesic administrations (2 [1-2] vs 2 [1-3]; P = .048) compared to the SPI group.
Intraoperative pupillometry monitoring reduced intraoperative remifentanil consumption and postoperative pain. It may be an alternative option for intraoperative opioid control under general anesthesia in adult patients.
瞳孔测量术中监测在伤害感受/抗伤害感受平衡监测方面显示出有前景的结果。然而,其在临床实践中的益处尚未得到证实。本研究的目的是评估与另一种广泛研究的监测方法——手术 pleth 指数(SPI)相比,术中瞳孔测量监测对术中阿片类药物消耗和术后疼痛的效果。
纳入接受择期腹腔镜胆囊切除术的美国麻醉医师学会(ASA)I-II 级患者。这是一项前瞻性、平行臂、单中心研究,分为两步进行。首先,我们评估了瞳孔测量和 SPI 监测与常规血流动力学监测相比的可行性。接下来,一项平行臂、双盲随机研究比较了使用数字评分量表(NRS)测量的术后疼痛峰值(0 为无痛,10 为极度疼痛)作为主要结局,比较了瞳孔测量组(n = 43)和 SPI 监测组(n = 43)之间的差异,使用 Mann-Whitney U 检验。次要结局包括术中瑞芬太尼消耗、术后阿片类药物反应性(芬太尼给药后 NRS 降低≥1)、镇痛药物使用次数和阿片类药物相关并发症。
在初步研究(n = 50)中,与 SPI 监测相比,瑞芬太尼消耗在瞳孔测量监测下更少,与常规监测相比,术后疼痛峰值更低。在主要研究(n = 86)中,与 SPI 组相比,瞳孔测量组的术后疼痛峰值和术中瑞芬太尼消耗更低(中位数[第一至第三四分位数],5[4-6];均值±标准差[SD],0.078±0.019 μg·kg·min)(P <.001),术后疼痛峰值的中位数差值为-1,其 95%置信区间为-2 至-0.5。与 SPI 组相比,瞳孔测量组对芬太尼的反应性更好(84.6% vs 61.0%;P =.005),镇痛药物使用次数更少(2[1-2] vs 2[1-3];P =.048)。
术中瞳孔测量监测减少了术中瑞芬太尼消耗和术后疼痛。它可能是成人患者全身麻醉下术中阿片类药物控制的另一种选择。