A comparison of SNAP II and bispectral index monitoring in patients undergoing sedation

A Prospective, Multicenter, Single-Blind Study Assessing Indices of SNAP II Versus BIS VISTA on Surgical Patients Undergoing General Anesthesia

Background

Traditionally, anesthesiologists have relied on nonspecific subjective and objective physical signs to assess patients’ comfort level and depth of anesthesia. Commercial development of electrical monitors, which use low- and high-frequency electroencephalogram (EEG) signals, have been developed to enhance the assessment of patients’ level of consciousness. Multiple studies have shown that monitoring patients’ consciousness levels can help in reducing drug consumption, anesthesia-related adverse events, and recovery time. This clinical study will provide information by simultaneously comparing the performance of the SNAP II (a single-channel EEG device) and the bispectral index (BIS) VISTA (a dual-channel EEG device) by assessing their efficacy in monitoring different anesthetic states in patients undergoing general anesthesia.

Objective

The primary objective of this study is to establish the range of index values for the SNAP II corresponding to each anesthetic state (preinduction, loss of response, maintenance, first purposeful response, and extubation). The secondary objectives will assess the range of index values for BIS VISTA corresponding to each anesthetic state compared to published BIS VISTA range information, and estimate the area under the curve, sensitivity, and specificity for both devices.

Methods

This is a multicenter, prospective, double-arm, parallel assignment, single-blind study involving patients undergoing elective surgery that requires general anesthesia. The study will include 40 patients and will be conducted at the following sites: The Ohio State University Medical Center (Columbus, OH); Northwestern University Prentice Women's Hospital (Chicago, IL); and University of Miami Jackson Memorial Hospital (Miami, FL). The study will assess the predictive value of SNAP II versus BIS VISTA indices at various anesthetic states in patients undergoing general anesthesia (preinduction, loss of response, maintenance, first purposeful response, and extubation). The SNAP II and BIS VISTA electrode arrays will be placed on the patient’s forehead on opposite sides. The hemisphere location for both devices’ electrodes will be equally alternated among the patient population. The index values for both devices will be recorded and correlated with the scorings received by performing the Modified Observer’s Assessment of Alertness and Sedation and the American Society of Anesthesiologists Continuum of Depth of Sedation, at different stages of anesthesia.

Results

Enrollment for this study has been completed and statistical data analyses are currently underway.

Conclusions

The results of this trial will provide information that will simultaneously compare the performance of SNAP II and BIS VISTA devices, with regards to monitoring different anesthesia states among patients.

ClinicalTrial

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00829803; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00829803 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6nmyi8YKO)

Patient state index and cerebral blood flow changes during shoulder arthroscopy in beach chair position

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The aim of the study were to demonstrate the possible hemodynamic changes and cerebral blood flow alterations in patients who were positioned from supine to beach chair position; and to detect if the position change causes any cortical activity alteration as measured by the 4-channeled electroencephalography monitor.

METHODS

35 patients were included. Before the induction, mean arterial pressure and patient state index values were recorded (T0). After the intubation, doppler-ultrasonography of the patients' internal carotid and vertebral arteries were evaluated to acquire cerebral blood flow values from the formula. In supine position, mean arterial pressure, patient state index and cerebral blood flow values were recorded (T1) and the patient was positioned to beach chair position. After 5min all measurements were repeated (T2). Measurements of patient state index and mean arterial pressure were repeated after 20 (T3), and 40 (T4)min.

RESULTS

There was a significant decrease between T0 and T1 in heart rate (80.5±11.6 vs. 75.9±14.4beats/min), MAP (105.8±21.9 vs. 78.9±18.4mmHg) and PSI (88.5±8.3 vs. 30.3±9.7) (all p<0.05). Mean arterial pressure decreased significantly after position change, and remained decreased, compared to T1. The overall analysis of patient state index values (T1-T4) showed no significant change; however, comparing only T1 and T2 resulted in a statically significant decrease in patient state index. There was a significant decrease in cerebral blood flow after beach chair position.

CONCLUSION

Beach chair position was associated with a decrease in cerebral blood flow and patient state index values. Patient state index was affected by the gravitational change of the cerebral blood flow; however, both factors were not directly correlated to each other. Moreover, the decrease in patient state index value was transient and returned to normal values within 20min.

The SNAP index does not correlate with the State Behavioral Scale in intubated and sedated children

BACKGROUND

Ensuring appropriate levels of sedation for critically ill children is integral to pediatric critical care. Traditionally, clinicians have used subjective scoring tools to assess sedation levels. The SNAP II uses dual frequency processed electroencephalography to evaluate brain activity and may provide an objective assessment of sedation levels.

OBJECTIVE

This study attempts to find an objective method to monitor sedation in critically ill pediatric patients. We compared the SNAP II, a processed electroencephalography device, with the State Behavioral Scale (SBS), a subjective sedation scoring tool. We hypothesize that the SNAP II correlates with the SBS and has less observer bias.

METHODS

This was an IRB approved prospective, observational study. Patients receiving intravenous sedation while being mechanically ventilated were enrolled after informed consent. After the SNAP II monitoring electrodes were attached, blinded bedside nurses assessed sedation levels using the SBS. SNAP indices were collected and compared with SBS scores to determine correlation.

RESULTS

We compared 417 paired data points from 15 patients using Pearson's correlation and least squares means to determine correlation between the SBS and SNAP indices. No correlation was observed. Using covariance model patterning for repeated measures to adjust for covariates again showed no correlation.

CONCLUSION

The SNAP index does not correlate with SBS scores in our pediatric intensive care unit (PICU). Its use cannot be recommended to measure levels of sedation in our population. Future research should continue to explore objective ways of measuring sedation in critically ill children.

Sedation for critically ill or injured adults in the intensive care unit: a shifting paradigm

As most critically ill or injured patients will require some degree of sedation, the goal of this paper was to comprehensively review the literature associated with use of sedative agents in the intensive care unit (ICU). The first and selected latter portions of this article present a narrative overview of the shifting paradigm in ICU sedation practices, indications for uninterrupted or prolonged ICU sedation, and the pharmacology of sedative agents. In the second portion, we conducted a structured, although not entirely systematic, review of the available evidence associated with use of alternative sedative agents in critically ill or injured adults. Data sources for this review were derived by searching OVID MEDLINE and PubMed from their first available date until May 2012 for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs), systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses and economic evaluations. Advances in the technology of mechanical ventilation have permitted clinicians to limit the use of sedation among the critically ill through daily sedative interruptions or other means. These practices have been reported to result in improved mortality, a decreased length of ICU and hospital stay and a lower risk of drug-associated delirium. However, in some cases, prolonged or uninterrupted sedation may still be indicated, such as when patients develop intracranial hypertension following traumatic brain injury. The pharmacokinetics of sedative agents have clinical importance and may be altered by critical illness or injury, co-morbid conditions and/or drug-drug interactions. Although use of validated sedation scales to monitor depth of sedation is likely to reduce adverse events, they have no utility for patients receiving neuromuscular receptor blocking agents. Depth of sedation monitoring devices such as the Bispectral Index (BIS©) also have limitations. Among existing RCTs, no sedative agent has been reported to improve the risk of mortality among the critically ill or injured. Moreover, although propofol may be associated with a shorter time to tracheal extubation and recovery from sedation than midazolam, the risk of hypertriglyceridaemia and hypotension is higher with propofol. Despite dexmedetomidine being linked with a lower risk of drug-associated delirium than alternative sedative agents, this drug increases risk of bradycardia and hypotension. Among adults with severe traumatic brain injury, there are insufficient data to suggest that any single sedative agent decreases the risk of subsequent poor neurological outcomes or mortality. The lack of examination of confounders, including the type of healthcare system in which the investigation was conducted, is a major limitation of existing pharmacoeconomic analyses, which likely limits generalizability of their results.