Does the Use of Electroencephalographic Bispectral Index or Auditory Evoked Potential Index Monitoring Facilitate Recovery after Desflurane Anesthesia in the Ambulatory Setting?

Background Analogous to the Bispectral Index (BIS) monitor, the auditory evoked potential monitor provides an electroencephalographic-derived index (AAI), which is alleged to correlate with the central nervous system depressant effects of anesthetic drugs. This clinical study was designed to test the hypothesis that intraoperative cerebral monitoring guided by either the BIS or the AAI value would facilitate recovery from general anesthesia compared with standard clinical monitoring practices alone in the ambulatory setting. Methods Sixty consenting outpatients undergoing gynecologic laparoscopic surgery were randomly assigned to one of three study groups: (1) control (standard practice), (2) BIS guided, or (3) AAI guided. Anesthesia was induced with 1.5-2.5 mg/kg propofol and 1-1.5 microg/kg fentanyl given intravenously. Desflurane, 3%, in combination with 60% nitrous oxide in oxygen was administered for maintenance of general anesthesia. In the control group, the inspired desflurane concentration was varied based on standard clinical signs. In the BIS- and AAI-guided groups, the inspired desflurane concentrations were titrated to maintain BIS and AAI values in targeted ranges of 50-60 and 15-25, respectively. BIS and AAI values, hemodynamic variables, and the end-tidal desflurane concentration were recorded at 5-min intervals during the maintenance period. The emergence times and recovery times to achieve specific clinical endpoints were recorded at 1- to 10-min intervals. The White fast-track and modified Aldrete recovery scores were assessed on arrival in the PACU, and the quality of recovery score was evaluated at the time of discharge home. Results A positive correlation was found between the AAI and BIS values during the maintenance period. The average BIS and AAI values (mean +/- SD) during the maintenance period were significantly lower in the control group (BIS, 41 +/- 10; AAI, 11 +/- 6) compared with the BIS-guided (BIS, 57 +/- 14; AAI, +/- 11) and AAI-guided (BIS, 55 +/- 12; AAI, 20 +/- 10) groups. The end-tidal desflurane concentration was significantly reduced in the BIS-guided (2.7 +/- 0.9%) and AAI-guided (2.6 +/- 0.9%) groups compared with the control group (3.6 +/- 1.5%). The awakening (eye-opening) and discharge times were significantly shorter in the BIS-guided (7 +/- 3 and 132 +/- 39 min, respectively) and AAI-guided (6 +/- 2 and 128 +/- 39 min, respectively) groups compared with the control group (9 +/- 4 and 195 +/- 57 min, respectively). More importantly, the median [range] quality of recovery scores was significantly higher in the BIS-guided (18 [17-18]) and AAI-guided (18 [17-18]) groups when compared with the control group (16 [10-18]). Conclusion Compared with standard anesthesia monitoring practice, adjunctive use of auditory evoked potential and BIS monitoring can improve titration of desflurane during general anesthesia, leading to an improved recovery profile after ambulatory surgery.

Download Full-text

The effect of opioid-free anesthesia on the quality of recovery after gynecological laparoscopy: study protocol for a prospective randomized controlled trial

Trials ◽

10.1186/s13063-021-05166-z ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 22 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Jae Yen Song ◽

Hoon Choi ◽

Minsuk Chae ◽

Jemin Ko ◽

Young Eun Moon

Keyword(s):

General Anesthesia ◽

Assessment Tool ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Perioperative Period ◽

Postoperative Outcomes ◽

Control Group ◽

Quality Of Recovery ◽

Gynecological Laparoscopy ◽

Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

Abstract Background Because of the indiscriminate use of opioids during the perioperative period, opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) has been increasingly required. Nevertheless, the studies on the detailed techniques and effects of OFA are not sufficient. The Quality of Recovery-40 (QoR-40) questionnaire is a validated assessment tool for measuring recovery from general anesthesia. However, no study has used the QoR-40 to determine if OFA leads to better recovery than standard general anesthesia. Therefore, we aim to perform this study to determine the effects of OFA using dexmedetomidine and lidocaine on the quality of recovery as well as the various postoperative outcomes. Methods The participants (n = 78) will be allocated to one of the two groups; the study group will receive bolus and infusion of dexmedetomidine and lidocaine, and the control group will receive remifentanil infusion during general anesthesia for gynecological laparoscopy. The other processes including anesthetic and postoperative care will be performed similarly in the two groups. Intraoperative hemodynamic, anesthetic, and nociceptive variables will be recorded. Postoperative outcomes such as QoR-40, pain severity, and opioid-related side effects will be assessed. Additionally, an ancillary cytokine study (inflammatory cytokine, stress hormone, and reactive oxygen species) will be performed during the study period. Discussion This will be the first study to determine the effect of OFA, using the combination of dexmedetomidine and lidocaine, on the quality of recovery after gynecological laparoscopy compared with standard general anesthesia using remifentanil. The findings from this study will provide scientific and clinical evidence on the efficacy of OFA. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04409964. Registered on 28 May 2020

Download Full-text

Effect of Auditory Evoked Potential Index Monitoring on Anesthetic Drug Requirements and Recovery Profile after Laparoscopic Surgery

Anesthesiology ◽

10.1097/00000542-200310000-00011 ◽

2003 ◽

Vol 99 (4) ◽

pp. 813-818 ◽

Cited By ~ 32

Author(s):

Alejandro Recart ◽

Paul F. White ◽

Agnes Wang ◽

Irina Gasanova ◽

Stephanie Byerly ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Laparoscopic Surgery ◽

Fast Track ◽

Evoked Potential ◽

Rating Scale ◽

Auditory Evoked Potential ◽

Control Group ◽

Early Recovery ◽

Anesthetic Drugs ◽

Desflurane Concentration ◽

Pacu Stay

Background The auditory evoked potential (AEP) monitor provides an electroencephalogram-derived index (AAI) that has been reported to correlate with the central nervous system depressant effects of anesthetic drugs. This clinical utility study was designed to test the hypothesis that AAI-guided administration of the maintenance anesthetics and analgesics would improve their titration and thereby provide a faster recovery from general anesthesia. Methods Seventy consenting patients undergoing elective general surgery procedures were randomly assigned to either a control (standard clinical practice) or AEP-monitored group. Although the AEP monitor was connected to all patients, the information from the monitor was only made available to the anesthesiologists assigned to patients in the AEP-monitored group. In the AEP-monitored group, the inspired desflurane concentration was titrated to maintain an AAI value of 15-20. In the control group, the inspired desflurane concentration was varied based on standard clinical signs. The AAI values and hemodynamic variables, as well as end-tidal desflurane concentrations, were recorded at 3- to 5-min intervals. The recovery times to achieve a White fast-track score greater than 12 and an Aldrete score of 10, as well as the actual duration of the PACU stay, were evaluated at 5- to 10-min intervals. Patient satisfaction with recovery from anesthesia was assessed using a 100-point verbal rating scale at 24 h after surgery. Results The average intraoperative AAI value in the AEP-monitored group was significantly higher than in the control group (16 +/- 5 vs. 11 +/- 8, P < 0.05). Use of the AEP monitor reduced the desflurane requirement by 26% compared to the control group (P < 0.01). In addition, the AEP-monitored group received less intraoperative fentanyl (270 +/- 120 vs. 390 +/- 203 microg, P < 0.05) and more rapidly achieved fast-track eligibility (29 +/- 19 vs. 56 +/- 41 min, P < 0.05). The time required to achieve an Aldrete score of 10 (60 +/- 31 vs. 98 +/- 55 min) and the duration of stay in the recovery room (78 +/- 32 vs. 106 +/- 54 min) were also significantly reduced in the AEP-monitored (vs. control) group (P < 0.05). Conclusion Use of AEP monitoring as an adjunct to standard clinical monitors improved titration of anesthetic drugs, thereby facilitating the early recovery process after laparoscopic surgery.

Download Full-text

The effect of opioid-free anesthesia on the quality of recovery after gynecological laparoscopy: study protocol for a prospective randomized controlled trial

10.21203/rs.3.rs-63859/v1 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Jae Yen Song ◽

Hoon Choi ◽

Minsuk Chae ◽

Jemin Ko ◽

Youg Eun Moon

Keyword(s):

General Anesthesia ◽

Assessment Tool ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Perioperative Period ◽

Postoperative Outcomes ◽

Control Group ◽

Quality Of Recovery ◽

Gynecological Laparoscopy ◽

And Control

Abstract Background: Because of the indiscriminate use of opioids during the perioperative period, opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) has been increasingly required. Nevertheless, the studies on the detailed techniques and effects of OFA are not sufficient. The Quality of Recovery-40 (QoR-40) questionnaire is a validated assessment tool for measuring recovery from general anesthesia. However, no study has used the QoR-40 to determine if OFA leads to better recovery than standard general anesthesia. Therefore, we aim to perform this study to determine the effects of OFA using dexmedetomidine and lidocaine on the quality of recovery as well as the various postoperative outcomes. Methods: The patients (n=78) will be allocated to one of the two groups; Study group will receive bolus and infusion of dexmedetomidine and lidocaine and Control group will receive remifentanil infusion during general anesthesia for gynecological laparoscopy. The other processes including anesthetic and postoperative care will be performed similarly in two groups. Intraoperative hemodynamic, anesthetic, and nociceptive variables will be recorded. Postoperative outcomes such as QoR-40, pain severity, opioid-related side effects will be assessed. Additionally, ancillary cytokine study (inflammatory cytokine, stress hormone, and reactive oxygen species) will be performed during study period. Discussion: This will be the first study to determine the effect of OFA, using the combination of dexmedetomidine and lidocaine, on the quality of recovery after gynecological laparoscopy compared with standard general anesthesia using remifentanil. The findings from this study will provide scientific and clinical evidence on the efficacy of OFA.

Download Full-text

The effect of opioid-free anesthesia on the quality of recovery after gynecological laparoscopy: study protocol for a prospective randomized controlled trial

10.21203/rs.3.rs-63859/v3 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Jae Yen Song ◽

Hoon Choi ◽

Minsuk Chae ◽

Jemin Ko ◽

Youg Eun Moon

Keyword(s):

General Anesthesia ◽

Assessment Tool ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Perioperative Period ◽

Postoperative Outcomes ◽

Control Group ◽

Quality Of Recovery ◽

Gynecological Laparoscopy ◽

And Control

Abstract Background: Because of the indiscriminate use of opioids during the perioperative period, opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) has been increasingly required. Nevertheless, the studies on the detailed techniques and effects of OFA are not sufficient. The Quality of Recovery-40 (QoR-40) questionnaire is a validated assessment tool for measuring recovery from general anesthesia. However, no study has used the QoR-40 to determine if OFA leads to better recovery than standard general anesthesia. Therefore, we aim to perform this study to determine the effects of OFA using dexmedetomidine and lidocaine on the quality of recovery as well as the various postoperative outcomes. Methods: The participants (n=78) will be allocated to one of the two groups; Study group will receive bolus and infusion of dexmedetomidine and lidocaine and Control group will receive remifentanil infusion during general anesthesia for gynecological laparoscopy. The other processes including anesthetic and postoperative care will be performed similarly in two groups. Intraoperative hemodynamic, anesthetic, and nociceptive variables will be recorded. Postoperative outcomes such as QoR-40, pain severity, opioid-related side effects will be assessed. Additionally, ancillary cytokine study (inflammatory cytokine, stress hormone, and reactive oxygen species) will be performed during study period. Discussion: This will be the first study to determine the effect of OFA, using the combination of dexmedetomidine and lidocaine, on the quality of recovery after gynecological laparoscopy compared with standard general anesthesia using remifentanil. The findings from this study will provide scientific and clinical evidence on the efficacy of OFA.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04409964. Registered on 28 May 2020.

Download Full-text

The effect of opioid-free anesthesia on the quality of recovery after gynecological laparoscopy: study protocol for a prospective randomized controlled trial

10.21203/rs.3.rs-63859/v2 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Jae Yen Song ◽

Hoon Choi ◽

Minsuk Chae ◽

Jemin Ko ◽

Youg Eun Moon

Keyword(s):

General Anesthesia ◽

Assessment Tool ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Perioperative Period ◽

Postoperative Outcomes ◽

Control Group ◽

Quality Of Recovery ◽

Gynecological Laparoscopy ◽

And Control

Abstract Background: Because of the indiscriminate use of opioids during the perioperative period, opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) has been increasingly required. Nevertheless, the studies on the detailed techniques and effects of OFA are not sufficient. The Quality of Recovery-40 (QoR-40) questionnaire is a validated assessment tool for measuring recovery from general anesthesia. However, no study has used the QoR-40 to determine if OFA leads to better recovery than standard general anesthesia. Therefore, we aim to perform this study to determine the effects of OFA using dexmedetomidine and lidocaine on the quality of recovery as well as the various postoperative outcomes. Methods: The participants (n=78) will be allocated to one of the two groups; Study group will receive bolus and infusion of dexmedetomidine and lidocaine and Control group will receive remifentanil infusion during general anesthesia for gynecological laparoscopy. The other processes including anesthetic and postoperative care will be performed similarly in two groups. Intraoperative hemodynamic, anesthetic, and nociceptive variables will be recorded. Postoperative outcomes such as QoR-40, pain severity, opioid-related side effects will be assessed. Additionally, ancillary cytokine study (inflammatory cytokine, stress hormone, and reactive oxygen species) will be performed during study period. Discussion: This will be the first study to determine the effect of OFA, using the combination of dexmedetomidine and lidocaine, on the quality of recovery after gynecological laparoscopy compared with standard general anesthesia using remifentanil. The findings from this study will provide scientific and clinical evidence on the efficacy of OFA.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04409964. Registered on 28 May 2020.

Download Full-text

Ultrasound-guided Multilevel Paravertebral Blocks and Total Intravenous Anesthesia Improve the Quality of Recovery after Ambulatory Breast Tumor Resection

Anesthesiology ◽

10.1097/aln.0000436117.52143.bc ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 120 (3) ◽

pp. 703-713 ◽

Cited By ~ 72

Author(s):

Faraj W. Abdallah ◽

Pamela J. Morgan ◽

Tulin Cil ◽

Andrew McNaught ◽

Jaime M. Escallon ◽

...

Keyword(s):

General Anesthesia ◽

Breast Tumor ◽

Tumor Resection ◽

Total Intravenous Anesthesia ◽

Control Group ◽

Discharge Time ◽

Intravenous Anesthesia ◽

Quality Of Recovery ◽

Pain Scores

Abstract Background: Regional anesthesia improves postoperative analgesia and enhances quality of recovery (QoR) after ambulatory surgery. This randomized, double-blinded, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trial examines the effects of multilevel ultrasound-guided paravertebral blocks (PVBs) and total intravenous anesthesia on QoR after ambulatory breast tumor resection. Methods: Sixty-six women were randomized to standardized general anesthesia (control group) or PVBs and propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia (PVB group). The PVB group received T1–T5 PVBs with 5 ml of 0.5% ropivacaine per level, whereas the control group received sham subcutaneous injections. Postoperative QoR was designated as the primary outcome. The 29-item ambulatory QoR tool was administered in the preadmission clinic, before discharge, and on postoperative days 2, 4, and 7. Secondary outcomes included block success, pain scores, intra- and postoperative morphine consumption, time to rescue analgesia, incidence of nausea and vomiting, and hospital discharge time. Results: Data from sixty-four patients were analyzed. The PVB group had higher QoR scores than control group upon discharge (146 vs. 131; P < 0.0001) and on postoperative day 2 (145 vs. 135; P = 0.013); improvements beyond postoperative day 2 lacked statistical significance. None of the PVB group patients required conversion to inhalation gas–based general anesthesia or experienced block-related complications. PVB group patients had improved pain scores on postanesthesia care unit admission and discharge, hospital discharge, and postoperative day 2; their intraoperative morphine consumption, incidence of nausea and vomiting, and discharge time were also reduced. Conclusion: Combining multilevel PVBs with total intravenous anesthesia provides reliable anesthesia, improves postoperative analgesia, enhances QoR, and expedites discharge compared with inhalational gas- and opioid-based general anesthesia for ambulatory breast tumor resection.

Download Full-text