Mid-latency auditory evoked response during propofol and alfentanil anaesthesia

Background. Propofol has been shown to affect the mid-latencyauditory evoked response (MLAER) in a dose-dependant manner.Few studies have investigated the addition of alfentanil. Myogenicresponses, such as the post-auricular responses (PAR), can confoundthe MLAER but there has been little investigation as to whichelectrode site reduces this interference. Methods. We studied the MLAER in 27 women. They received aninfusion of alfentanil 15 µg kg^–1 h^–1, followedby either a high or low infusion regimen of propofol (finalinfusion rates 6 and 3 mg kg^–1 h^–1). We comparedthe results with those of our study using propofol alone. Wecollected the data from two electrode sites: vertex–inionand vertex–mastoid. We evaluated the occurrence of thePAR and the shape of the MLAER at each electrode site. Results. The infusion rate of propofol associated with lossof the eyelash response in 50% of subjects was 3.3 mg kg^–1h^–1. This was significantly lower than using propofolalone (5.8 mg kg^–1 h^–1). Nb latency was the bestMLAER discriminator of unconsciousness (sensitivity 94%, specificity88%), with a threshold of 46 ms (propofol alone was 53 ms).The addition of alfentanil did not alter the relationship betweenpropofol infusion rate and MLAER. The vertex–inion electrodesite gave the best protection against PAR in awake subjects(P=0.0003), and after 30 min of propofol infusion (P=0.06).The magnitude of the MLAER obtained from the vertex–mastoidelectrodes was larger than from the other site, although theincrease was not consistent throughout the waveform (brain stem100%, Nb 14%). Conclusions. Addition of alfentanil lowers the propofol infusionrate required to produce unconsciousness and the Nb latencythat predicts it. The better of the two sites to reduce theincidence of PAR is the vertex–inion electrode site. Br J Anaesth 2004; 92: 25–32