A survey of current practices, attitudes and demands of anaesthesiologists regarding the depth of anaesthesia monitoring in China

Background In this study, we aimed to analyse survey data to explore two different hypotheses; and for this purpose, we distributed an online survey to Chinese anaesthesiologists. The hypothetical questions in this survey include: (1) Chinese anaesthesiologists mainly use the depth of anaesthesia (DoA) monitors to prevent intraoperative awareness and (2) the accuracy of these monitors is the most crucial performance factor during the clinical daily practice of Chinese anaesthesiologists. Methods We collected and statistically analysed the response of a total of 12,750 anesthesiologists who were invited to participate in an anonymous online survey. The Chinese Society of Anaesthesiologists (CSA) trial group provided the email address of each anaesthesiologist, and the selection of respondents was random from the computerized system. Results The overall response rate was 32.0% (4037 respondents). Only 9.1% (95% confidence interval, 8.2-10.0%) of the respondents routinely used DoA monitors. Academic respondents (91.5, 90.3-92.7%) most frequently used DoA monitoring to prevent awareness, whereas nonacademic respondents (88.8, 87.4-90.2%) most frequently used DoA monitoring to guide the delivery of anaesthetic agents. In total, the number of respondents who did not use a DoA monitor and whose patients experienced awareness (61.7, 57.8-65.6%) was significantly greater than those who used one or several DoA monitors (51.5, 49.8-53.2%). Overall, the crucial performance factor during DoA monitoring was considered by 61.9% (60.4-63.4%) of the respondents to be accuracy. However, most respondents (95.7, 95.1-96.3%) demanded improvements in the accuracy of the monitors for DoA monitoring. In addition, broad application in patients of all ages (86.3, 85.2-87.4%), analgesia monitoring (80.4, 79.2-81.6%), and all types of anaesthetic agents (75.6, 74.3-76.9%) was reported. In total, 65.0% (63.6-66.5%) of the respondents believed that DoA monitors should be combined with EEG and vital sign monitoring, and 53.7% (52.1-55.2%) believed that advanced DoA monitors should include artificial intelligence. Conclusions Academic anaesthesiologists primarily use DoA monitoring to prevent awareness, whereas nonacademic anaesthesiologists use DoA monitoring to guide the delivery of anaesthetics. Anaesthesiologists demand high-accuracy DoA monitors incorporating EEG signals, multiple vital signs, and antinociceptive indicators. DoA monitors with artificial intelligence may represent a new direction for future research on DoA monitoring.

The use of CONOX as a guide to the general anesthesia on laparotomy patients compared with standard clinical care – A pilot study

Background: Avoiding excessive doses of anesthesia was fundamental, mainly to reduce the adverse effect of anesthesia. Electroencephalography (EEG)-based monitors can be used to measure the depth level of anesthesia and guide intraoperative hypnosis drug and opioid administration. This study aims to evaluate the benefit of using CONOX monitor when administering anesthesia drugs in laparotomy procedures. Method: Twenty patients aged 18-65 years with physical status ASA I-III who underwent major laparotomy surgery with general anesthesia total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) were divided into two groups. Group A received general anesthesia guided with the CONOX monitor, while group B using standard clinical care. We later evaluate the total use of propofol and fentanyl, intraoperative hemodynamic profile, postoperative cognitive disorder (POCD), intraoperative awareness, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), and moderate to severe pain in the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU). Results: The mean total propofol used is lower in CONOX group (63.6 ± 11.7 mcg/kg/min vs. 74 ± 17.87 mcg/kg/min). A similar result was obtained with fentanyl. The CONOX group use a lower total of fentanyl (212.5 ± 32.3 mcg vs. 249 ± 54.6 mcg) than the control group. POCD was found to be more prevalent in the control group (5 vs 2 patients). While there is no report of intraoperative awareness. Conclusion: The incidence of PONV and moderate to severe pain in PACU was similar between the two groups. This pilot study is a preliminary study to evaluate the benefit of using EEG-based monitors to adjust anesthesia drugs.

A prospective randomized study to see the effects of combined administration of dexmedetomidine plus propofol versus propofol alone in cardiac surgical patients.

Objective: To compare the hemodynamics changes, intraoperative awareness and postoperative delirium after combined administration of dexmedetomidine plus propofol versus propofol alone in cardiac surgical patients. Study Design: Randomized Clinical Trial. Setting: Cardiac Center, Bahawal Victoria Hospital, Bahawalpur. Period: 1st December 2018 to January 2020. Material & Methods: Sixty-two (62) patients who underwent different cardiac surgical procedures were included in the study. Patients were randomly divided in group 1 {Dexmedetomidine (DEX) +Propofol} and group 2 {propofol alone}. Induction in group 1 was done by loading dose of DEX (0.7 microgram/kg) while induction in group 2 was done by Lignocaine 1.5 mg/kg. Heart rate (HR), systolic arterial pressure (SAP), diastolic arterial pressure (DAP) and mean arterial pressure (MAP) were recorded at different time intervals. Intraoperative awareness and post-operative delirium was also assessed. Results: All hemodynamic parameters (HR, SAP, DAP, MAP) were statistically significant lower in group 1 in comparison to group 2 at different intervals indicating a more stable hemodynamic profile in group 1. End tidal CO2, pH, and peak airway pressures were not statistically significant between both groups. Intra-operative awareness was diagnosed in 1 (3.2%) patients in group 1 and in 5 (16.1%) patients in group 2 (p-value 0.08). Delirium was diagnosed in 3 (9.6%) patients in group 1 and in only 1 (3.2%) patients in group 2 (p-value 0.30). Conclusion: Combined administration of DEX and propofol produces more stable hemodynamics, less intraoperative awareness but more incidence of delirium as compared to propofol alone in cardiac surgical patients.

Remimazolam anesthesia for cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass: a case report

Background Remimazolam has less cardiovascular depressant effects than propofol in non-cardiac surgical patients. However, the efficacy and safety of remimazolam in cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) have not been reported. We present a case of successful anesthetic management using remimazolam in cardiac surgery with CPB. Case presentation A 76-year-old female was scheduled for mitral valve repair, tricuspid annuloplasty, maze procedure, and left atrial appendage closure. We used remimazolam in induction (6.0 mg/kg/h) and maintenance (0.6–1.0 mg/kg/h) of general anesthesia, and the bispectral index value was maintained in the range of 36 to 48 including the period of CPB. Hemodynamics, mixed venous oxygen saturation, and bilateral regional cerebral oxygen saturation were maintained within acceptable ranges. There was no intraoperative awareness/recall or serious complications associated with remimazolam throughout the perioperative period. Conclusions Remimazolam can be used the same as other existing anesthetics in cardiac surgery with CPB.

Break the Spasm with Succinylcholine, but Risk Intraoperative Awareness with Undiagnosed Pseudocholinesterase Deficiency

Succinylcholine is a commonly used medication in all aspects of anesthetic care, and there are a number of known side effects and complications associated with its use. However, when succinylcholine is used emergently, anesthesia providers must remain vigilant to undiagnosed conditions that pose additional risks to patients. We report the use of succinylcholine to treat acute, refractory laryngospasm after extubation leading to prolonged neuromuscular paralysis. There are unique challenges presented by this case including the risk of anesthesia awareness with recall due to the cognitive biases that prevent the clinical diagnosis of pseudocholinesterase deficiency.

Evaluation of Efficacy of Free Opioid Anesthesia for Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Prospective, Randomized Double-blinded Study

Objectives: To evaluate efficacy and side effects of free opioid anesthesia for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Methods: A prospective study was performed on 94 patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy in Military Hospital 103 from May 2018 to February 2019. These patients were randomly allocated into two groups: patients in FOA (free - opioid anesthesia) group were administered lidocaine (2 mg/kg before induction and 1.5 mg/kg/h for maintenance), magnesium (30 mg/kg before induction and 1.5 g infusion for maintenance) combined with Intravenous (IV) injection of ketamine (0.5 mg/kg), and ketorolac (30 mg); while patients in OA group (opioid anesthesia) were provided with IV fentanyl (5 mcg/kg for induction and 1.5 mcg/kg every 30 minutes for maintenance of anesthesia). Both groups received total intravenous anesthesia by propofol. The depth of anesthesia was monitored by the entropy module during surgery. Neuromuscular blockade was reversed by sugammadex 2 mg/kg at the end of surgery. The postoperative analgesia was delivered using IV fentanyl for 48 to 72 hours. Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score was measured 10 mins, 20 mins, 1 hour, 2 hours and 3 hours after surgery. Results: All patients had an excellent quality of anesthesia with RE (Respond Entropy), SE (State Entropy) always under 60 from induction to abdominal closure without intraoperative awareness and postoperative recall of the operation; 100% of the patients were extubated immediately after surgery. In the first three postoperative hours fentanyl consumption in Group FOA was significantly lower than in Group OA (31.91 ± 3.98 mcg versus 34.47 ± 7.17 mcg, p=0,035). In the OA group, the rate of intraoperative hypotension was higher compared to its counterpart. Despite the higher risk of hypersalivation, group FOA had a significantly lower incidence of nausea and vomiting. Conclusion: Free opioid anesthesia provided adequate sedation and amnesia and may be an alternative approach to opioid anesthesia for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Patients under free opioid anesthesia experienced a lower incidence of intraoperative hypotension, lower rate of nausea, vomiting and lower demand for analgesia in the early postoperative period (0 - 3 h) compared to those receiving opioid anesthesia.