Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Soonchunhyang University Hospital Seoul, Yongsan-gu, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Department of Cardiovascular and thoracic surgery, Soonchunhyang University Hospital Seoul, Yongsan-gu, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Medicine (Baltimore). 2022 Nov 4;101(44):e31191. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000031191.
Phase-lag entropy (PLE) based on functional connectivity between different regions of the brain may be superior to conventional depth of anesthesia (DoA) methods for monitoring changes in consciousness. However, few studies have compared the PLE and bispectral index (BIS) methods for monitoring consciousness during clinical anesthesia, such as total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) or anesthesia via inhalation. Therefore, we evaluated differences between the PLE and BIS methods in clinical anesthesia, including TIVA using propofol and anesthesia with sevoflurane.
The observational trial included 60 patients scheduled for elective surgery under general anesthesia. The BIS and PLE electrodes were placed together on the left temporal-frontal area of all patients. During anesthesia, anesthetic levels were adjusted using the BIS values, which are generally used to monitor the DoA; the level of anesthesia was maintained at between 40 and 60. BIS- and PLE-derived values were recorded continuously. Anesthetic events, the concentration of each anesthetic, and standard monitoring values were recorded. The patients included were divided into 2 groups, the TIVA and sevoflurane groups, with 30 patients in each. For the TIVA group, anesthesia was induced and maintained using propofol and remifentanil target-controlled infusion. For the sevoflurane group, anesthesia was induced using propofol and maintained using sevoflurane and remifentanil.
From loss of consciousness until the anesthetic maintenance period, PLE values were higher than BIS values at several time points. During the recovery period, BIS values were higher than PLE values (all P < .001). Spaghetti plots showed that there was more variation among the BIS values than among the PLE values.
For monitoring DoA during general anesthesia and surgery, PLE values vary less than BIS values; thus, PLE may be more reliable for monitoring changes in consciousness. However, further studies are needed to evaluate the clinical application of these methods in general anesthesia.
基于大脑不同区域之间功能连接的相位滞后熵(PLE)可能优于传统的麻醉深度(DoA)方法,用于监测意识变化。然而,很少有研究比较 PLE 和双频谱指数(BIS)方法在临床麻醉期间监测意识,如全凭静脉麻醉(TIVA)或吸入麻醉。因此,我们评估了 PLE 和 BIS 方法在临床麻醉中的差异,包括使用丙泊酚的 TIVA 和使用七氟醚的麻醉。
这项观察性试验纳入了 60 例拟在全身麻醉下接受择期手术的患者。所有患者的左侧颞额区均同时放置 BIS 和 PLE 电极。在麻醉过程中,使用 BIS 值调整麻醉水平,BIS 值通常用于监测 DoA;麻醉水平维持在 40 至 60 之间。连续记录 BIS 和 PLE 衍生值。记录麻醉事件、每种麻醉药的浓度和标准监测值。将纳入的患者分为 TIVA 和七氟醚两组,每组 30 例。对于 TIVA 组,使用丙泊酚和瑞芬太尼靶控输注诱导和维持麻醉。对于七氟醚组,使用丙泊酚诱导麻醉,并用七氟醚和瑞芬太尼维持麻醉。
从意识丧失到麻醉维持期,PLE 值在几个时间点高于 BIS 值。在恢复期,BIS 值高于 PLE 值(均 P <.001)。面条图显示 BIS 值的变异性大于 PLE 值。
在全身麻醉和手术期间监测 DoA 时,PLE 值的变化小于 BIS 值;因此,PLE 可能更可靠地监测意识变化。然而,需要进一步研究来评估这些方法在全身麻醉中的临床应用。