Bispectral index monitoring during sedation with sevoflurane, midazolam, and propofol.

BACKGROUND: Bispectral Index (BIS) has been used to measure sedation depth. Ideally, to guide anesthetic management, range of BIS scores at different sedation levels should not overlap, and BIS should be independent of drug used. This study assessed ability of BIS to predict sedation depth between sevoflurane, propofol, and midazolam. Quality of recovery was also compared. METHODS: Patients undergoing surgery with local or regional anesthesia and sedation were randomized to sevoflurane (n = 23), midazolam (n = 21), or propofol (n = 22). Sedation was titrated to Observers's Assessment of Alertness-Sedation score of 3 (responds slowly to voice). BIS and Observers's Assessment of Alertness-Sedation were measured every 5 min. BIS prediction probability (PK) was compared between drugs. Recovery was assessed by BIS and Digit Symbol Substitution and memory tests. RESULTS: Bispectral Index of responders to voice was significantly different from nonresponders (86 +/- 10 vs. 74 +/- 14, mean +/- SD; P < 0.001) However, wide variability and overlap in BIS were observed (25th-75th percentile, responders vs. non-responders: 79-96 vs. 65-83). BIS of responders was different for sevoflurane versus propofol and midazolam. BIS was a better predictor of propofol sedation than sevoflurane or midazolam (PK = 0.87 +/- 0.11, 0.76 +/- 0.01, and 0.69 +/- 0.02, respectively; P < 0.05). At 10 min after the procedure, 76, 48, and 24% of sevoflurane, propofol, midazolam patients, respectively, returned to baseline Digit Symbol Substitution scores (P < 0.05). Excitement-disinhibition occurred in 70, 36, and 5% of sevoflurane, propofol, and midazolam patients, respectively (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Individual BIS scores demonstrate significant variability, making it difficult to predict sedation depth. The relation between BIS and sedation depth may not be independent of anesthetic agent. Quality of recovery was similar between drugs, but excitement occurred frequently with sevoflurane.     

Speed of Recovery and Side-effect Profile of Sevoflurane Sedation Compared with Midazolam

Background: Sedation for surgical procedures performed with regional or local anesthesia has usually been achieved with intravenous medications, whereas the use of volatile anesthetics has been limited. The use of sevoflurane for sedation has been suggested because of its characteristics of nonpungency, rapid induction, and quick elimination. The purpose of this investigation was to assess the quality, recovery, and side effects of sevoflurane sedation compared with midazolam.

Methods: One hundred seventy-three patients undergoing surgery with local or regional anesthesia were enrolled in a multicenter, open-label, randomized investigation comparing sedation with sevoflurane versus midazolam. Sedation level was titrated to an Observer's Assessment of Alertness-Sedation score of 3 (responds slowly to voice). Recovery was assessed objectively by Observer's Assessment of Alertness-Sedation, Digit Symbol Substitution Test (DSST), and memory scores, and subjectively by visual analog scales.

Results: Significantly more patients in the sevoflurane group had to be converted to general anesthesia because of excessive movement (18 sevoflurane and 2 midazolam;P = 0.043). Of remaining patients, 141 were assessable for efficacy and recovery data (93 sevoflurane and 48 midazolam). Sevoflurane and midazolam produced dose-related sedation. Sevoflurane patients had higher DSST and memory scores during recovery. Seventy-six percent (sevoflurane) compared with 35% (midazolam) returned to baseline DSST at 30 min postoperatively (P < 0.05). More frequent excitement-disinhibition was observed with sevoflurane (15 [16%]vs. midazolam;P = 0.008).     

Speed of recovery and side-effect profile of sevoflurane sedation compared with midazolam

BACKGROUND: Sedation for surgical procedures performed with regional or local anesthesia has usually been achieved with intravenous medications, whereas the use of volatile anesthetics has been limited. The use of sevoflurane for sedation has been suggested because of its characteristics of nonpungency, rapid induction, and quick elimination. The purpose of this investigation was to assess the quality, recovery, and side effects of sevoflurane sedation compared with midazolam. METHODS: One hundred seventy-three patients undergoing surgery with local or regional anesthesia were enrolled in a multicenter, open-label, randomized investigation comparing sedation with sevoflurane versus midazolam. Sedation level was titrated to an Observer's Assessment of Alertness--Sedation score of 3 (responds slowly to voice). Recovery was assessed objectively by Observer's Assessment of Alertness--Sedation, Digit Symbol Substitution Test (DSST), and memory scores, and subjectively by visual analog scales. RESULTS: Significantly more patients in the sevoflurane group had to be converted to general anesthesia because of excessive movement (18 sevoflurane and 2 midazolam; P = 0.043). Of remaining patients, 141 were assessable for efficacy and recovery data (93 sevoflurane and 48 midazolam). Sevoflurane and midazolam produced dose-related sedation. Sevoflurane patients had higher DSST and memory scores during recovery. Seventy-six percent (sevoflurane) compared with 35% (midazolam) returned to baseline DSST at 30 min postoperatively (P < 0.05). More frequent excitement-disinhibition was observed with sevoflurane (15 [16%] vs. midazolam; P = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: Sevoflurane for sedation produces faster recovery of cognitive function as measured by DSST and memory scores compared with midazolam. However, sevoflurane for sedation is complicated by a high incidence of intraoperative excitement.     

Kognitive Störungen in der frühen postoperativen Phase nach Remifentanil/Propofol- und Sevofluran/Fentanylanästhesie

OBJECTIVE: In ambulatory anaesthesia the time required to recover from cognitive impairment should be as short as possible. The aim of this study was to compare the early cognitive recovery after remifentanil/propofol (R/P) and sevoflurane/fentanyl (S/F) anaesthesia. METHODS: Sixty patients scheduled for elective gynaecological laparoscopy and 24 female volunteers tested for the assessment of learning effects were investigated. After praemedication with midazolam anaesthesia was induced with propofol, atracurium and either 1 microgram/kg fentanyl or 1 microgram/kg remifentanil. For maintenance 0.25 microgram/kg/min remifentanil and 0.6 mg/kg/min propofol (R/P) or 1.7 vol% sevoflurane (S/F) were given. Both groups were ventilated with 30% oxygen in air and received metamizol for postoperative analgesia. Verbal Learning Test, Stroop Colour and Word Interference Test, Digit Symbol Substitution Test and Four Boxes Test were performed the day before surgery and 30 min, 1 h, 2 h and 4 h after termination of anaesthesia. RESULTS: For remifentanil/propofol cognitive function was still impaired 2 h (Verbal Learning) and 4 h (Stroop, Digit Symbol Substitution and Four Boxes Test) after termination of anaesthesia. After sevoflurane/fentanyl anaesthesia cognitive impairment lasted the same duration in Four Boxes Test, but shorter in Stroop and Digit Symbol Substitution and could not be found in Verbal Learning Test. CONCLUSION: The duration of cognitive impairment in the early postoperative period differed by the test procedures and the anaesthetic procedures used in this investigation. Recovery appeared to be faster after sevoflurane/fentanyl than after remifentanil/propofol at least in aspects of cognitive function.     

Propofol and midazolam versus propofol alone for sedation following coronary artery bypass grafting: a randomized,placebo-controlled trial

The aim was to compare the efficacy and side-effects of propofol combined with a constant, low dose of midazolam versus propofol alone for sedation. In a prospective, randomized and double-blinded study, 60 male patients scheduled for elective coronary bypass grafting were enrolled. Postoperatively, patients were stratified to receive either a continuous intravenous infusion of midazolam 1 mg/h or placebo. Target Ramsay sedation score was 3 to 5 corresponding to conscious sedation. An intention-to-treat design for propofol was performed to reach target sedation. Efficacy of sedation was statistically significantly higher in the group midazolam + intention-to-treat with propofol compared with the group placebo + intention-to-treat with propofol (91% vs 79%; P=0.0005). Nine of 27 patients in the midazolam group (33.4%) and nine of 26 patients in the placebo group (34.6%) needed no supplementary propofol. Weaning time from mechanical ventilation was longer in the midazolam group whether or not they required supplemental propofol when compared with placebo group (all: 432 +/- 218 min vs 319 +/- 223 min; P=0.04; supplementary propofol: 424 +/- 234 min vs 265 +/- 175 min; P=0.03). The cumulative number of patients remaining intubated was significantly higher in the group midazolam + propofol compared with the group placebo + propofol (P=0.03). In conclusion, target sedation is reached slightly more often by the co-administration of propofol and a low dose of midazolam, but weaning time from mechanical ventilation is prolonged by the co-administration of propofol and a low dose of midazolam.     

Bispectral index and regional cerebral oxygen saturation during propofol/N2O anesthesia

PURPOSE: A study was undertaken to compare the influence of midazolam, isoflurane, and aminophylline (which may antagonize anesthetic action) on bispectral index (BIS) and regional cerebral oxygen saturation (rSO(2)) during propofol/N(2)O anesthesia, and to test the hypothesis that the drug-induced changes in BIS values are accompanied by a change in rSO(2). METHODS: General anesthesia was administered to 36 patients with a continuous infusion of propofol to maintain a BIS value of 40 +/- 5. After baseline recordings, patients were randomly assigned to receive either midazolam, isoflurane, or aminophylline. Bispectral index values, rSO(2) using near-infrared spectroscopy, and hemodynamic parameters were recorded for 60 min. RESULTS: Midazolam (0.05 mg x kg(-1)) significantly decreased the BIS from 47.8 +/- 5.4 to 35.0 +/- 4.5 at five minutes after injection (P < 0.001 vs control) during propofol anesthesia, whereas the rSO(2) was unchanged. Similarly, isoflurane (1.1% end-tidal) decreased the BIS from 42.5 +/- 7.5 to 27.8 +/- 6.9 (P < 0.001) without affecting rSO(2). In contrast, aminophylline (3 mg.kg(-1)) was associated with an increase in BIS from 41.6 +/- 2.1 to 48.3 +/- 9.2 at five minutes after injection (P < 0.05) without affecting rSO(2). CONCLUSIONS: Midazolam or isoflurane-induced decreases in the BIS during propofol anesthesia were not accompanied by a decrease in rSO(2). Aminophylline significantly increased the BIS score during propofol anesthesia, suggesting that aminophylline can antagonize, at least in part, the sedative actions of propofol.     

Overestimation of Bispectral Index in Sedated Intensive Care Unit Patients Revealed by Administration of Muscle Relaxant

Background: Electromyographic activity has previously been reported to elevate the Bispectral Index (BIS) in patients not receiving neuromuscular blockade while under sedation in the intensive care unit. This study aimed to investigate the magnitude of the decrease of BIS following administration of muscle relaxant in sedated intensive care unit patients.

Methods: The authors prospectively investigated 45 patients who were continuously sedated with midazolam and sufentanil to achieve a Sedation-Agitation Scale value equal to 1 and who required administration of muscle relaxant. BIS (BIS(R) version 2.10), electromyography, and acceleromyography at the adductor pollicis muscle were recorded simultaneously before and after neuromuscular blockade. Sixteen of these 45 patients were also studied simultaneously with the new BIS(R) XP.

Results: After administration of a muscle relaxant, BIS (67 +/- 19 vs. 43 +/- 10, P < 0.001) and electromyographic activity (37 +/- 9 vs. 27 +/- 3 dB, P < 0.001) significantly decreased. Multiple regression analysis showed that the decrease of BIS following administration of myorelaxant was significantly correlated to BIS and electromyographic baseline values. Using standard BIS range guidelines, the number of patients under light or deep sedation versus general anesthesia or deep hypnotic state was markedly overestimated before administration of myorelaxant (53 vs. 2%, P < 0.001).     

A comparison of four intravenous sedation techniques and Bispectral Index monitoring in sinonasal surgery

This study was performed to investigate the quality of different intravenous sedation techniques, and the correlation between the Bispectral Index (BIS) values and the Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation (OAA/S) scores. Eighty patients undergoing sinonasal surgery were randomly assigned to one of four groups. Group MF received midazolam and fentanyl, group PF received propofol and fentanyl, group MR received midazolam and remifentanil, and group PR received propofol and remifentanil. Heart rate and mean arterial pressure values were not different among the groups. SpO2 decreased only after intravenous medication in groups MF and MR (P < 0.017). Emesis was less common with propofol. A positive relationship existed between the BIS values and OAA/S scores during the operation in all groups and the strongest correlation was observed in group PR (r = 0.565 and P < 0.001). In conclusion, these four intravenous sedation techniques did not change mean arterial pressure, heart rate or SpO2 clinically and produced a similar level of light sedation. The BIS was useful for monitoring of sedation during sinonasal surgery under local anaesthesia with intravenous sedation.     

Choice of volatile anesthetic for the morbidly obese patient: sevoflurane or desflurane

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Morbid obesity is associated with significant comorbidities. Desflurane has a low fat-blood solubility coefficient and may be better suited in this population to achieve a rapid emergence; however, sevoflurane has favorable cardiorespiratory properties that might also prove advantageous in the morbidly obese (MO) patient. This study used careful drug titration to determine if emergence differences between sevoflurane and desflurane could be minimized in MO patients. DESIGN: A randomized, prospective blinded study to determine the emergence profiles of desflurane and sevoflurane in MO patients when anesthetic drug titration is used. SETTING: Operating room of the VA Medical Center, Milwaukee, Wis. PATIENTS: Forty American Society of Anesthesiologists II and III, MO patients (body mass index > or = 35 kg/m2), who were scheduled for elective surgery predicted to last for more than 2 hours, were studied. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were induced with fentanyl, midazolam, and propofol and maintained with desflurane or sevoflurane, mixed in air and oxygen. Intraoperative bispectral index (BIS) was targeted to 45 to 50 and to 60 in the last 15 minutes of surgery. MEASUREMENTS: Intraoperative anesthetic concentration, BIS, and hemodynamics were recorded. During emergence, time to follow command and extubation were noted, with assessments of cognitive function via the Mini-Mental Status Test and psychomotor performance via the Digit Symbol Substitution Test. A blinded observer recorded key recovery events. MAIN RESULTS: Demographic data (age, 61 [36-83] years; body mass index, 38 [35-47] kg/m2), surgical procedures, length of anesthesia (approximately 3.5 hours), adjuvant drugs, and intraoperative BIS, heart rate, and mean arterial pressure were not significantly different. Hemodynamics, time to follow commands and to extubation, and results of Digit Symbol Substitution Test and Mini-Mental Status Test did not differ between anesthetic groups during recovery. CONCLUSIONS: There were no differences in emergence and recovery profiles in MO patients receiving desflurane or sevoflurane when anesthetic concentration was carefully titrated.     

Respiratory reflex responses of the larynx differ between sevoflurane and propofol in pediatric patients

BACKGROUND: The effects of anesthetics on airway protective reflexes have not been extensively characterized in children. The aim of this study was to compare the laryngeal reflex responses in children anesthetized with either sevoflurane or propofol under two levels of hypnosis using the Bispectral Index score (BIS). The authors hypothesized that the incidence of apnea with laryngospasm evoked by laryngeal stimulation would not differ between sevoflurane and propofol when used in equipotent doses and that laryngeal responsiveness would be diminished with increased levels of hypnosis. METHODS: Seventy children, aged 2-6 yr, scheduled to undergo elective surgery were randomly allocated to undergo propofol or sevoflurane anesthesia while breathing spontaneously through a laryngeal mask airway. Anesthesia was titrated to achieve the assigned level of hypnosis (BIS 40 +/- 5 or BIS 60 +/- 5) in random order. Laryngeal and respiratory responses were elicited by spraying distilled water on the laryngeal mucosa, and a blinded reviewer assessed evoked responses. RESULTS: Apnea with laryngospasm occurred more often during anesthesia with sevoflurane compared with propofol independent of the level of hypnosis: episodes lasting longer than 5 s, 34% versus 19% at BIS 40 and 34% versus 16% at BIS 60; episodes lasting longer than 10 s, 26% versus 10% at BIS 40 and 26% versus 6% at BIS 60 (group differences P < 0.04 and P < 0.01, respectively). In contrast, cough and expiration reflex occurred significantly more frequently in children anesthetized with propofol. CONCLUSION: Laryngeal and respiratory reflex responses in children aged 2-6 yr were different between sevoflurane and propofol independent of the levels of hypnosis examined in this study.     

Respiratory Reflex Responses of the Larynx Differ between Sevoflurane and Propofol in Pediatric Patients

Background: The effects of anesthetics on airway protective reflexes have not been extensively characterized in children. The aim of this study was to compare the laryngeal reflex responses in children anesthetized with either sevoflurane or propofol under two levels of hypnosis using the Bispectral Index score (BIS). The authors hypothesized that the incidence of apnea with laryngospasm evoked by laryngeal stimulation would not differ between sevoflurane and propofol when used in equipotent doses and that laryngeal responsiveness would be diminished with increased levels of hypnosis.

Methods: Seventy children, aged 2-6 yr, scheduled to undergo elective surgery were randomly allocated to undergo propofol or sevoflurane anesthesia while breathing spontaneously through a laryngeal mask airway. Anesthesia was titrated to achieve the assigned level of hypnosis (BIS 40 +/- 5 or BIS 60 +/- 5) in random order. Laryngeal and respiratory responses were elicited by spraying distilled water on the laryngeal mucosa, and a blinded reviewer assessed evoked responses.

Results: Apnea with laryngospasm occurred more often during anesthesia with sevoflurane compared with propofol independent of the level of hypnosis: episodes lasting longer than 5 s, 34% versus 19% at BIS 40 and 34% versus 16% at BIS 60; episodes lasting longer than 10 s, 26% versus 10% at BIS 40 and 26% versus 6% at BIS 60 (group differences P < 0.04 and P < 0.01, respectively). In contrast, cough and expiration reflex occurred significantly more frequently in children anesthetized with propofol.     

Cardiovascular Responses during Sedation after Coronary Revascularization: Incidence of Myocardial Ischemia and Hemodynamic Episodes with Propofol Versus Midazolam

Background: Propofol sedation offers advantages for titration and rapid emergence in the critically ill patient, but concern for adverse hemodynamic effects potentially limits its use in these patients. The current study compares the cardiovascular effects of sedation with propofol versus midazolam during the first 12 h after coronary revascularization.

Methods: Three hundred fifty-one patients undergoing coronary revascularization were anesthetized using a standardized sufentanil/midazolam regimen, and assigned randomly to 12 h of sedation with either propofol or midazolam while tracheally intubated. The incidence and characteristics of hemodynamic episodes, defined as heart rate less than 60 or greater than 100 beats/min or systolic blood pressure greater than 140 or less than 90 mmHg, were determined using data electronically recorded at 1-min intervals. The presence of myocardial ischemia was determined using continuous three-channel Holter electrocardiography (ECG) and of myocardial infarctions (MI) using 12-lead ECG (Q wave MI, Minnesota Code) or creatine kinase isoenzymes (CK-MB) analysis (non-Q wave MI, peak CK-MB > 70 ng/ml, or CK-MB > 70 IU/l).

Results: Ninety-three percent of patients in both treatment groups had at least one hemodynamic episode during the period of postoperative sedation. Propofol sedation resulted in a 17% lower incidence of tachycardia (58% vs. 70%, propofol vs. midazolam; P = 0.04), a 28% lower incidence of hypertension (39% vs. 54%; P = 0.02), and a greater incidence of hypotension (68% vs. 51%; P = 0.01). Despite these hemodynamic effects, the incidence of myocardial ischemia did not differ between treatment groups (12% propofol vs. 13% midazolam; P = 0.66), nor did its severity, as measured by ischemic minutes per hour monitored (8.7+/-5.8 vs. 6.2+/-4.6 min/h, propofol vs. midazolam; P = 0.19) or ischemic area under the curve (6.8+/-4.0 vs. 5.3+/-4.2; P = 0.37). The incidence of cardiac death (one per group), Q wave MI (propofol, n = 7; midazolam, n = 3; P = 0.27), or non Q wave MI (propofol, n = 16; midazolam, n = 18; P = 0.81) did not differ between treatment groups.     

Overestimation of Bispectral Index in sedated intensive care unit patients revealed by administration of muscle relaxant

BACKGROUND: Electromyographic activity has previously been reported to elevate the Bispectral Index (BIS) in patients not receiving neuromuscular blockade while under sedation in the intensive care unit. This study aimed to investigate the magnitude of the decrease of BIS following administration of muscle relaxant in sedated intensive care unit patients. METHODS: The authors prospectively investigated 45 patients who were continuously sedated with midazolam and sufentanil to achieve a Sedation-Agitation Scale value equal to 1 and who required administration of muscle relaxant. BIS (BIS version 2.10), electromyography, and acceleromyography at the adductor pollicis muscle were recorded simultaneously before and after neuromuscular blockade. Sixteen of these 45 patients were also studied simultaneously with the new BIS XP. RESULTS: After administration of a muscle relaxant, BIS (67 +/- 19 vs. 43 +/- 10, P < 0.001) and electromyographic activity (37 +/- 9 vs. 27 +/- 3 dB, P < 0.001) significantly decreased. Multiple regression analysis showed that the decrease of BIS following administration of myorelaxant was significantly correlated to BIS and electromyographic baseline values. Using standard BIS range guidelines, the number of patients under light or deep sedation versus general anesthesia or deep hypnotic state was markedly overestimated before administration of myorelaxant (53 vs. 2%, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The BIS in sedated intensive care unit patients may be lower with paralysis for an equivalent degree of sedation because of high muscular activity. The magnitude of BIS overestimation is significantly correlated to both BIS and electromyographic activity before neuromuscular blockade. The authors conclude that clinicians who determine the amount of sedation in intensive care unit patients only from BIS monitoring may expose them to unnecessary oversedation.     

BIS - AAI and clinical measures during propofol target controlled infusion with Schnider's pharmacokinetic model

AIM: The A-line autoregressive index (AAI) and the Bispectral Index Score (BIS) are two commercially available indexes of anesthetic depth widely used in clinical practice. The aim of the current study was to compare the accuracy of AAI, BIS, Schnider's predicted effect-site concentration of propofol (Ce propofol) to assess depth of anesthesia. METHODS: Forty-four patients scheduled for major elective abdominal surgery received target effect-site controlled infusion of propofol. Target effect-site (Ce propofol) was started at 1.5 mug/mL and increased every 4 min by 1.0 microg/mL until 5.5 microg/mL were achieved. At every step sedation level was estimated, using AAI, BIS, Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation scale (OAA/S), loss of eyelash reflex and Ce propofol. RESULTS: We enrolled 44 patients, 20 males and 24 females, ASA I/II 18/26, 48+/-10 years, 68.2+/-9 kg, 165+/-7.1 cm, body mass index (BMI) 25+/-3.5. At increasing Ce propofol BIS-AAI values decreased progressively (BIS range 97-38) (AAI range 97-17). Values of BIS < or = 50, of AAI < or = 48 and of Ce propofol > or = 5.1 resulted in OAA/S=0, while values of BIS < or = 62, AAI < or = 53 and Ce propofol < or = 3.5 resulted in OAA/S=2. Loss of eyelash reflex occurred when values were BIS < or = 64 and AAI < or 61. CONCLUSION: BIS, AAI, propofol site effect concentration revealed information on sedation level and consciousness but no gold standard yet exists because of consistent overlap between 'conscious' and 'not conscious' states.     

Bispectral-index-guided versus clinically guided remifentanil/propofol analgesia/sedation for interventional radiological procedures: an observer-blinded randomized study

Patients undergoing potentially painful interventional radiological procedures generally require a combination of analgesia and sedation. This sedation/analgesia should allow the patient to communicate while also remaining calm. Bispectral index (BIS) monitoring could be useful in achieving this. The primary end-point of our study was to compare the percentage time with optimal sedation, defined as Sedation Agitation Scale (SAS) grade 4, between a BIS-guided remifentanil/propofol regimen and a clinically guided regimen in 54 randomly allocated patients. The mean +/- sd percentage time with optimal sedation was significantly longer (P = 0.004) in the BIS group (76.6% +/- 14.7%) than in the SAS group (63.8% +/- 16.4%). There was a significant difference in the weighted mean infusion rates of remifentanil (P = 0.0067) and propofol (P = 0.0075) in the BIS group (0.066 +/- 0.027 microg.kg(-1) . min(-1) 1.59 +/- 0.44 mg.kg(-1) . h(-1)) compared with the SAS group (0.091 +/- 0.036 microg.kg(-1).min(-1) 1.92 +/- 0.43 mg.kg(-1).h(-1)), respectively. BIS values exhibited a temporal correlation to SAS scores (r2 = 0.72). In conclusion, a BIS-guided regimen was more effective than a SAS-guided regimen. The use of BIS resulted in fewer remifentanil and propofol doses. The targeted BIS range of 80-85 provided a sufficient functional level of sedation.     

Differences between Midazolam and Propofol Sedation on Upper Airway Collapsibility Using Dynamic Negative Airway Pressure

Background: Upper airway obstruction (UAO) during sedation can often cause clinically significant adverse events. Direct comparison of different drugs' propensities for UAO may improve selection of appropriate sedating agents. The authors used the application of negative airway pressure to determine the pressure that causes UAO in healthy subjects sedated with midazolam or propofol infusions.

Methods: Twenty subjects (12 male and 8 female) completed the study. After achieving equivalent levels of sedation, the subjects' ventilation, end-tidal gases, respiratory inductance plethysmographic signals, and Bispectral Index values were monitored for 5 min. Negative airway pressure was then applied via a facemask in steps of 3 cm H2O from -3 to -18 cm H2O. UAO was assessed by cessation of inspiratory airflow and asynchrony between abdomen and chest respiratory inductance plethysmographic signals.

Results: Equivalent levels of sedation were achieved with both drugs with average (+/- SD) Bispectral Index levels of 75 +/- 5. Resting ventilation was mildly reduced without any changes in end-tidal pressure of carbon dioxide. There was no difference between the drugs in the negative pressure resulting in UAO. Five female subjects and one male subject with midazolam and four female subjects and one male subject with propofol did not show any UAO even at -18 cm H2O. Compared with males, female subjects required more negative pressures to cause UAO with midazolam (P = 0.02) but not with propofol (P = 0.1).     

Bispectral index monitoring is useful to reduce total amount of propofol and to obtain immediate recovery after propofol anesthesia

Bispectral index (BIS) is a processed EEG parameter for assessment of hypnotic effects of anesthetics. We studied whether BIS monitoring can improve recovery from propofol anesthesia and decrease the total amount of propofol needed. Forty-six patients without hypertension and obesity were studied. In the BIS group (n = 20), propofol infusion rate was adjusted to achieve a target BIS value between 40-60, increasing to 65 during the final 10 min of the surgical procedure. In the control group (n = 19), propofol infusion rate was adjusted based only on standard clinical signs. Compared with the control group, patients in the BIS group required lower propofol infusion rates(4.3 +/- 1.1 vs 4.9 +/- 0.8 mg.kg-1.h-1; P < 0.05), and the total amount of propofol decreased significantly (709 +/- 210 vs 914 +/- 326 mg; P < 0.05). BIS monitoring led to immediate recovery after propofol anesthesia. There were no significant differences in the incidence of intraoperative responses between the two groups. BIS monitoring decreased the total amount of propofol and led to immediate recovery after propofol anesthesia. These findings indicate that the use of BIS monitoring may be useful in controlling the infusion rate of propofol during surgery.     

A comparison of propofol and midazolam in sedation of mechanically-ventilated postoperative patients]

To compare the quality of sedation using propofol (n = 8) vs midazolam (n = 7) we evaluated their effectiveness, safety, and recovery time after their continuous infusion in patients who required mechanical ventilation after cervical spine surgery. We also calculated the cost of drugs used during the mechanical ventilation. In addition, processed electroencephalogram (pEEG) was monitored employing spectral edge frequency 90 (SEF 90) as an indicator of sedation. Both drugs produced good sedation without any complication. The patients who had received propofol were extubated significantly earlier than those who had received midazolam (P; 35 +/- 18 mins, M; 97 +/- 55 mins). However, the mean drug cost in the propofol group was five times higher than that in the midazolam group (P; yen 15,881 +/- 7,788, M; yen 3,355 +/- 1,187). There was no correlation between the value of SEF 90 and the depth of sedation during mechanical ventilation. In conclusion, propofol exhibited the shorter recovery time after cessation of the continuous infusion than midazolam, but it costed five times compared with midazolam. SEF 90 failed to indicate the depth of sedation during mechanical ventilation.     

The utility of bispectral index monitoring in general anesthesia

BACKGROUND: The Bispectral Index (BIS), a parameter derived from the electroencephalograph, has been shown to correlate with increasing sedation and loss of consciousness. This study was designed to investigate whether using BIS would improve anaesthetic drug management and immediate recovery after anaesthesia. METHODS: 160 patients undergoing abdominal surgery were studied. The patients were randomised to receive either propofol or sevoflurane anaesthesia. In each group 40 patients were anaesthetised with BIS monitoring and 40 without BIS. In BIS groups, propofol and sevoflurane dose was adjusted to achieve a target BIS values between 40-60 during the whole procedure. Drug consumption, intraoperative responses, times of recovery after anaesthesia and a "Clinical Quality Scale of Recovery" score were recorded from blinded observators. RESULTS: Demographic data were similar between groups. BIS monitoring improved the immediate recovery after propofol anaesthesia, while no significant differences were observed in patients receiving sevoflurane. The consumption of both propofol and sevoflurane significantly decreased (30 and 40%, respectively). There was no significant differences in the incidence of intraoperative responses between groups. The BIS groups had a higher percentage of patients with better ICU assessments. CONCLUSIONS: BIS monitoring decreased the consumption of both propofol and sevoflurane and facilitated the immediate recovery after propofol anaesthesia. Intraoperative course was not changed. These findings indicate that the use of BIS may be a valuable guide of the intraoperatively administration of propofol and sevoflurane.     

Differences between midazolam and propofol sedation on upper airway collapsibility using dynamic negative airway pressure

BACKGROUND: Upper airway obstruction (UAO) during sedation can often cause clinically significant adverse events. Direct comparison of different drugs' propensities for UAO may improve selection of appropriate sedating agents. The authors used the application of negative airway pressure to determine the pressure that causes UAO in healthy subjects sedated with midazolam or propofol infusions. METHODS: Twenty subjects (12 male and 8 female) completed the study. After achieving equivalent levels of sedation, the subjects' ventilation, end-tidal gases, respiratory inductance plethysmographic signals, and Bispectral Index values were monitored for 5 min. Negative airway pressure was then applied via a facemask in steps of 3 cm H(2)O from -3 to -18 cm H(2)O. UAO was assessed by cessation of inspiratory airflow and asynchrony between abdomen and chest respiratory inductance plethysmographic signals. RESULTS: Equivalent levels of sedation were achieved with both drugs with average (+/- SD) Bispectral Index levels of 75 +/- 5. Resting ventilation was mildly reduced without any changes in end-tidal pressure of carbon dioxide. There was no difference between the drugs in the negative pressure resulting in UAO. Five female subjects and one male subject with midazolam and four female subjects and one male subject with propofol did not show any UAO even at -18 cm H(2)O. Compared with males, female subjects required more negative pressures to cause UAO with midazolam (P = 0.02) but not with propofol (P = 0.1). CONCLUSIONS: At the mild to moderate level of sedation studied, midazolam and propofol sedation resulted in the same propensity for UAO. In this homogeneous group of healthy subjects, there was a considerable range of negative pressures required to cause UAO. The specific factors responsible for the maintenance of the upper airway during sedation remain to be elucidated.