Hugo Vereecke

Ability of the bispectral index, autoregressive modelling with exogenous input-derived auditory evoked potentials, and predicted propofol concentrations to measure patient responsiveness during anesthesia with propofol and remifentanil.

Background This study was conducted to compare the performance accuracy of the independent variables Bispectral Index (BIS), A-Line ARX index (AAI), and predicted propofol effect-site concentration (CePROP) to measure the dependent variables of loss of responses to different stimulation defined as loss of response to verbal command (LORverbal), eyelash reflex (LORlash), and noxious stimulus (LORnoxious) during stepwise increased levels of propofol infusion with and without remifentanil. Methods Forty-five patients were randomly allocated to one of three groups (0, 2, and 4 ng/ml remifentanil) to receive graded CePROP and predicted effect compartment controlled remifentanil (CeREMI). At every step, the ability to respond to verbal command using the Observers Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Scale (OAA/S), eyelash reflex, and electrical tetanic noxious stimulus were compared against BIS, AAI, and CePROP. Prediction probability and sensitivity/specificity were calculated. Results Increasing CeREMI increased BIS and AAI values at LORverbal and LORlash and decreased CePROP. Similar findings were found for LORnoxious. The overall prediction probability to measure the hypnotic component of anesthesia remained accurate in the three groups for BIS, AAI, and CePROP. Combined information from CePROP, CeREMI, and BIS or AAI increased the overall prediction probability for predicting the OAA/S scale and LORlash. Less accuracy to LORnoxious was found in all independent variables. Conclusions Although BIS, AAI, and CePROP were influenced by remifentanil during propofol administration, their ability to detect OAA/S and LORlash remained accurate. Improved performance is obtained when BIS and AAI are measured in conjunction with drug targeted effect-site concentrations. Remifentanil decreases the ability of these independent variables to detect LORnoxious.

Spectral entropy as an electroencephalographic measure of anesthetic drug effect: a comparison with bispectral index and processed midlatency auditory evoked response.

Background:The authors compared the behavior of two calculations of electroencephalographic spectral entropy, state entropy (SE) and response entropy (RE), with the A-Line® ARX Index (AAI) and the Bispectral Index (BIS) and as measures of anesthetic drug effect. They compared the measures for baseline variability, burst suppression, and prediction probability. They also developed pharmacodynamic models relating SE, RE, AAI, and BIS to the calculated propofol effect-site concentration (Ceprop). Methods:With institutional review board approval, the authors studied 10 patients. All patients received 50 mg/min propofol until either burst suppression greater than 80% or mean arterial pressure less than 50 mmHg was observed. SE, RE, AAI, and BIS were continuously recorded. Ceprop was calculated from the propofol infusion profile. Baseline variability, prediction of burst suppression, prediction probability, and Spearman rank correlation were calculated for SE, RE, AAI, and BIS. The relations between Ceprop and the electroencephalographic measures of drug effect were estimated using nonlinear mixed effect modeling. Results:Baseline variability was lowest when using SE and RE. Burst suppression was most accurately detected by spectral entropy. Prediction probability and individualized Spearman rank correlation were highest for BIS and lowest for SE. Nonlinear mixed effect modeling generated reasonable models relating all four measures to Ceprop. Conclusions:Compared with BIS and AAI, both SE and RE seem to be useful electroencephalographic measures of anesthetic drug effect, with low baseline variability and accurate burst suppression prediction. The ability of the measures to predict Ceprop was best for BIS.

A comparison of bispectral index and ARX-derived auditory evoked potential index in measuring the clinical interaction between ketamine and propofol anaesthesia

We evaluated the effects of a bolus (0.4 mg.kg−1) and continuous infusion (1 mg.kg−1.h−1) of ketamine on Bispectral Index (BIS) and A‐Line® ARX Index (AAI) during propofol anaesthesia. We included 15 ASA I patients scheduled for general anaesthesia. Induction was performed by infusion of propofol at 100 ml.h−1 until loss of consciousness. Both BIS and AAI monitors responded appropriately at that time. The calculated effect site concentration of propofol at loss of consciousness was maintained by means of a computer controlled infusion system. A ‘pseudo’ steady‐state effect site concentration was reached after 4 min. After 1 min of baseline measurements, ketamine was administered. BIS values increased from the 3rd to the 8th min after the administration of ketamine. The AAI showed no significant increase or decrease, but between‐patient variability increased.

Detrended Fluctuation Analysis of EEG as a Measure of Depth of Anesthesia

For several decades, a number of methods have been developed for the noninvasive assessment of the level of consciousness during general anesthesia. In this paper, detrended fluctuation analysis is used to study the scaling behavior of the electroencephalogram as a measure of the level of consciousness. Three indexes are proposed in order to characterize the patient state. Statistical analysis demonstrates that they allow significant discrimination between the awake, sedated and anesthetized states. Two of them present a good correlation with established indexes of depth of anesthesia. The scaling behavior has been found related to the depth of anesthesia and the methodology allows real-time implementation, which enables its application in monitoring devices

Cerebral state index during propofol anesthesia : A Comparison with the Bispectral Index and the A-Line ARX Index

Background:The objective of this study was to prospectively test the Cerebral State Index designed for measuring the depth of anesthesia. The Cerebral State Index is calculated using a fuzzy logic combination of four subparameters of the electroencephalographic signal. The performance of the Cerebral State Index was compared with that of the Bispectral Index and the A-Line ARX Index. Methods:This study applied raw data from two previously published clinical protocols. The patients in protocol 1 were given a continuous propofol infusion, 300 ml/h, until 80% of burst suppression occurred. In protocol 2, a stepwise increased target-controlled infusion of propofol was administered to patients until loss of response to noxious stimuli while the Observer’s Assessment of Alertness and Sedation was registered every 4 min. The Cerebral State Index was calculated off-line from the recorded electroencephalographic data. The Spearman rank correlation coefficient between electronic indices and the effect site concentration of propofol was calculated along with the prediction probability of each index to predict the Observer’s Assessment of Alertness and Sedation level. Results:The Spearman rank correlation coefficients between the Cerebral State Index, Bispectral Index, and A-Line ARX Index and the propofol effect site concentration were −0.94, −0.89, and −0.82, respectively, in protocol 1, whereas the prediction probability values between the Cerebral State Index, Bispectral Index, and A-Line ARX Index and the Observer’s Assessment of Alertness and Sedation score in protocol 2 were 0.92, 0.93, and 0.91, respectively. Conclusion:The Cerebral State Index detects well the graduated levels of propofol anesthesia when compared with the propofol effect site concentration and the Observer’s Assessment of Alertness and Sedation score.

An Evaluation of Using Population Pharmacokinetic Models to Estimate Pharmacodynamic Parameters for Propofol and Bispectral Index in Children

Background:To study propofol pharmacodynamics in a clinical setting a pharmacokinetic model must be used to predict drug plasma concentrations. Some investigators use a population pharmacokinetic model from existing literature and minimize the pharmacodynamic objective function. The purpose of the study was to determine whether this method selects the best-performing pharmacokinetic model in a set and provides accurate estimates of pharmacodynamic parameters in models for bispectral index in children after propofol administration. Methods:Twenty-eight children classified as American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status 1 who were given general anesthesia for dental treatment were studied. Anesthesia was given using target-controlled infusion of propofol based on the Kataria model. Propofol target plasma concentration was 7 &mgr;g/ml for 15 min, followed by 1 &mgr;g/ml for 15 min or until signs of awakening, followed by 5 &mgr;g/ml for 15 min. Venous blood samples were taken 1, 2, 5, 10, and 15 min after each change in target. A classic pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic model was estimated, and the methodology of other studies was duplicated using pharmacokinetic models from the literature and (re-)estimating the pharmacodynamic models. Results:There is no clear relationship between pharmacokinetic precision and the pharmacodynamic objective function. Low pharmacodynamic objective function values are not associated with accurate estimation of the pharmacodynamic parameters when the pharmacokinetic model is taken from other sources. Conclusion:Minimization of the pharmacodynamic objective function does not select the most accurate pharmacokinetic model. Using population pharmacokinetic models from the literature instead of the ‘true’ pharmacokinetic model can lead to better predictions of bispectral index while incorrectly estimating the pharmacodynamic parameters.

Noxious stimulation response index: a novel anesthetic state index based on hypnotic-opioid interaction.

Background:The noxious stimulation response index (NSRI) is a novel anesthetic depth index ranging between 100 and 0, computed from hypnotic and opioid effect-site concentrations using a hierarchical interaction model. The authors validated the NSRI on previously published data. Methods:The data encompassed 44 women, American Society of Anesthesiology class I, randomly allocated to three groups receiving remifentanil infusions targeting 0, 2, and 4 ng/ml. Propofol was given at stepwise increasing effect-site target concentrations. At each concentration, the observer assessment of alertness and sedation score, the response to eyelash and tetanic stimulation of the forearm, the bispectral index (BIS), and the acoustic evoked potential index (AAI) were recorded. The authors computed the NSRI for each stimulation and calculated the prediction probabilities (PKs) using a bootstrap technique. The PKs of the different predictors were compared with multiple pairwise comparisons with Bonferroni correction. Results:The median (95% CI) PK of the NSRI, BIS, and AAI for loss of response to tetanic stimulation was 0.87 (0.75–0.96), 0.73 (0.58–0.85), and 0.70 (0.54–0.84), respectively. The PK of effect-site propofol concentration, BIS, and AAI for observer assessment of alertness and sedation score and loss of eyelash reflex were between 0.86 (0.80–0.92) and 0.92 (0.83–0.99), whereas the PKs of NSRI were 0.77 (0.68–0.85) and 0.82 (0.68–0.92). The PK of the NSRI for BIS and AAI was 0.66 (0.58–0.73) and 0.63 (0.55–0.70), respectively. Conclusion:The NSRI conveys information that better predicts the analgesic component of anesthesia than AAI, BIS, or predicted propofol or remifentanil concentrations. Prospective validation studies in the clinical setting are needed.

New composite index based on midlatency auditory evoked potential and electroencephalographic parameters to optimize correlation with propofol effect site concentration: comparison with bispectral index and solitary used fast extracting auditory evoked potential index.

Background:This study investigates the accuracy of a composite index, the A-Line® auditory evoked potentials index version 1.6 (AAI1.6; Danmeter A/S, Odense, Denmark), as a measure of cerebral anesthetic drug effect in a model for predicting a calculated effect site concentration of propofol (CePROP). The AAI1.6 algorithm extracts information from the midlatency auditory evoked potentials, the spontaneous electroencephalographic activity, and the detection of burst suppression. The former version of this monitor, the A-Line® auditory evoked potential index version 1.5, is only based on fast extracted midlatency auditory evoked potential information. Methods:After institutional ethics committee approval (University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium), informed consent was obtained from 13 patients (10 women, 3 men) with an American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status of I, aged 18–65 yr, who were scheduled to undergo ambulatory gynecologic or urologic surgery. The authors evaluated for Bispectral Index, A-Line® auditory evoked potential index, version 1.5, AAI1.6 scaled from 0 to 100 and AAI1.6 scaled from 0 to 60, the interpatient stability at baseline, the detection of burst suppression, prediction probability, and correlation with CePROP, during a constant infusion of 1% propofol at 300 ml/h. The authors developed pharmacodynamic models relating the predicted CePROP to each measure of cerebral anesthetic drug effect. Results:Bispectral Index had the lowest interindividual baseline variability. No significant difference was found with prediction probability analysis for all measures. Comparisons for correlation were performed for all indices. The AAI1.6 scaled to 60 had a significantly higher correlation with CePROP compared with all other measures. The AAI1.6 scaled to 100 had a significant higher correlation with CePROP compared with the A-Line® auditory evoked potential index version 1.5 (P < 0.05) Conclusions:The authors found that the application of AAI1.6 has a better correlation with a calculated CePROP compared with a solitary fast extracting midlatency auditory evoked potential measure. Whether this improvement in pharmacodynamic tracing is accompanied by an improved clinical performance should be investigated using clinical endpoints.

Study of the time course of the clinical effect of propofol compared with the time course of the predicted effect-site concentration: performance of three pharmacokinetic–dynamic models

BACKGROUND In the ideal pharmacokinetic-dynamic (PK-PD) model for calculating the predicted effect-site concentration of propofol (Ce(PROP)), for any Ce(PROP), the corresponding hypnotic effect should be constant. We compared three PK-PD models (Marsh PK with Shüttler PD, Schnider PK with fixed ke0, and Schnider PK with Minto PD) in their ability to maintain a constant bispectral index (BIS), while using the respective effect-site-controlled target-controlled infusion (TCI) algorithms. METHODS We randomized 60 patients to Group M (Marshs model with k(e0)=0.26 min(-1)), Group S1 or Group S2 (Schniders model with a fixed k(e0)=0.456 min(-1) or a k(e0) adapted to a fixed time-to-peak effect=1.6 min, respectively). All patients received propofol at a constant rate until loss of consciousness. The corresponding Ce(PROP), as calculated by the respective models, was set as a target for effect-site-controlled TCI. We observed BIS for 20 min. We hypothesized that BIS remains constant, if Ce(PROP) remains constant over time. RESULTS All patients in Group M woke up, one in Group S1 and none in Group S2. In Groups S1 and S2, BIS remained constant after 11 min of constant Ce(PROP), at a more pronounced level of hypnotic drug effect than intended. CONCLUSIONS Targeting Ce(PROP) at which patients lose consciousness with effect-site-controlled TCI does not translate into an immediate constant effect.

The History of Target-Controlled Infusion

Target-controlled infusion (TCI) is a technique of infusing IV drugs to achieve a user-defined predicted (“target”) drug concentration in a specific body compartment or tissue of interest. In this review, we describe the pharmacokinetic principles of TCI, the development of TCI systems, and technical and regulatory issues addressed in prototype development. We also describe the launch of the current clinically available systems.