Closed Loop Control of Intravenous Agents

 

Gavin NC Kenny, BSc(Hons), MB ChB, MD, FRCA, FANZCA

Professor and Head of Department

Glasgow University Department of Anaesthesia

 

 

What is Anaesthesia?

We all practice anaesthesia but as yet we have no specific method by which the level of anaesthesia can be assessed. Some would maintain that anaesthesia is an all-or-none phenomenon and that there is no gradation. Others would support the view that, while the loss of consciousness may well be a single transition, different levels of the subsequent state of anaesthesia allow different levels of responsiveness following stimulation of the patient.

 

 

Assessment Techniques

A variety of different techniques have been proposed to provide an objective assessment of anaesthetic depth. These range from the most simple clinical observations to complex analyses of the electrical activity of the brain. The bispectral index is one such technique which has been developed and subjected to several clinical trials. Another technique is the auditory evoked response which measures the response of the brain to auditory stimuli. The principal difficulty in assessing any technique to measure anaesthetic depth is that there is no accepted gold standard available to define the state of anaesthesia. If we define the state of consciousness as responding to command, then it is recognised that lack of recall for events during anaesthesia does not guarantee that the patient was unconscious at the time. Patients have been reported to respond to a command but to have no recollection of this afterwards.1 This state has been called ‘general amnesia’ and illustrates the difficulty of detecting when patients were truly anaesthetised.

 

 

When do we have Anaesthesia?

If we define anaesthesia as a loss of response to command then we can assess any monitoring system for anaesthesia by taking subjects from consciousness to loss of consciousness and back. Changes in the signal during these transitions must be sufficiently large that we have confidence in detecting a true change in the clinical state of our patients from awake to asleep and vice versa. It must function satisfactorily in all patients and the system must be sufficiently robust to operate reliably in the operating theatre environment. Clearly, this approach can only be used when the subjects are either not undergoing surgery or else have a completely satisfactory local block in place. We studied 12 patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery with a local block.2; 3. Auditory evoked potentials were monitored and patients were repeatedly allowed to awaken during surgery. The auditory evoked potentials provided a clear indication of the state of consciousness. A further study compared the AEPIndex with the spectral edge, median frequency and bispectral index during repeated transitions from consciousness to unconsciousness. Of the four measurements, only the AEPIndex demonstrated a significant difference between all mean values one minute before recovery of consciousness and all mean values one minute after recovery of consciousness. Our findings suggest that of the four electrophysiologic variables, the AEPIndex is best at distinguishing the transition from unconsciousness to consciousness.4

 

Anaesthesia During Surgery

The assessment of a monitor for anaesthetic depth during surgery remains an outstanding problem. Anaesthetists would agree generally that patient movement during surgery represents an inadequate level of anaesthesia. However, there is no report of any patient having experienced awareness in MAC studies which are designed deliberately to have 50% of patients move. One possible gold standard is that any monitor of anaesthetic depth should allow the anaesthetist to deliver good quality anaesthesia in a non-paralysed patient. Satisfactory anaesthesia requires:

 

                                1. adequate cardiovascular and respiratory stability

                                2. no or minimal patient movement

                                3. no awareness or recall of events during the procedure

 

The monitor should function with all types of anaesthetics with the possible exception of ketamine anaesthesia which is recognised to produce a distinct form of anaesthesia from other agents.

 

 

Closed-Loop Anaesthesia

The ultimate proof for a measure of anaesthetic depth is that it should be capable of controlling automatically the delivery of an anaesthetic agent to produce satisfactory anaesthesia in a patient breathing spontaneously during surgery. Closed-loop anaesthesia (CLAN) systems have been developed using blood pressure5or median frequency of the compressed spectral array.6 However, these CLAN systems have only been used in paralysed patients during surgery and required intervention often because of unsatisfactory conditions. A system based on the bispectral index has been reported to have successfully controlled the level of sedation in 10 patients during spinal anaesthesia for elective orthopaedic surgery. 7

 

A closed-loop control system based on the auditory evoked response has been used to control the intravenous administration of propofol in 100 patients breathing spontaneously and also in patients who received paralysing drugs during surgery.8; 9 The quality of anaesthesia was judged to be satisfactory as assessed by scores of autonomic activity, cardiovascular stability and minimal movement during surgery. Patients were visited postoperatively and there was no occurrence of awareness during the surgical procedures in any patient.

 

 

Hypnosis and Analgesia

CLAN techniques have demonstrated the interdependence of hypnosis, analgesia and stimulation and have illustrated that there is no single concentration of an anaesthetic agent which results in satisfactory anaesthesia for all patients. Indeed within individual patients, the requirements for anaesthetic vary considerably depending on the degree of surgical stimulation and the quality of analgesia provided at any point in time.

 

Relatively high concentrations of a hypnotic agent are required when a low dose analgesic technique is used. When a high concentration of analgesic is administered, smaller doses of hypnotic are then required to maintain satisfactory. This is shown most clearly when patients have good premedication and a fully functioning local block in place. In this situation, the requirements for anaesthetic can be reduced to very low values.

 

 

Conclusion

The requirements for a depth of anaesthesia monitor are summarised in the table. We can expect considerable progress in the developments of systems to provide some estimates of the depth of anaesthesia. It is clear, however, that anaesthetists must attempt to define the state of anaesthesia and lay down conditions which these devices must meet.10

 

 

 

References

 

     1.    Russell IF: Midazolam-alfentanil: an anaesthetic? An investigation using the isolated forearm technique.  Br.J.Anaesth. 1993; 70: 42-6

     2.    Davies FW, Mantzaridis H, Fisher AC, Kenny GN: Middle latency auditory evoked potentials during repeated transitions from consciousness to unconsciousness.  Anaesthesia 1996; 51: 107-13

     3.    Mantzaridis H, Kenny GN: Auditory evoked potential index: a quantitative measure of changes in auditory evoked potentials during general anaesthesia.  Anaesthesia 1997; 52: 1030-6

     4.    Gajraj RJ, Doi M, Mantzaridis H, Kenny GN: Analysis of the EEG bispectrum, auditory evoked potentials and the EEG power spectrum during repeated transitions from consciousness to unconsciousness.  Br.J.Anaesth. 1998; 80: 46-52

     5.    Robb HM, Asbury AJ, Gray WM, Linkens DA: Towards a standardized anaesthetic state using isoflurane and morphine.  Br.J.Anaesth. 1993; 71: 366-9

     6.    Schwilden H, Stoeckel H: Closed-loop feedback controlled administration of alfentanil during alfentanil-nitrous oxide anaesthesia.  Br.J.Anaesth. 1993; 70: 389-93

     7.    Mortier E, Struys M, De ST, Versichelen L, Rolly G: Closed-loop controlled administration of propofol using bispectral analysis.  Anaesthesia 1998; 53: 749-54

     8.    Kenny GN, McFadzean WA, Mantzaridis H: Propofol requirements during closed-loop anesthesia.  Anesthesiol. 1993; 79: A329-A329

     9.    Kenny GN, Mantzaridis H: Closed-loop control of propofol anaesthesia.  Br.J.Anaesth. 1999; 83 (2): 223-8

   10.    Kenny GN, Mantzaridis H, Fisher AC: Validation of anesthetic depth by closed-loop control, Memory and Awareness in Anesthesia. Edited by Sebel PS, Bonke B, Winograd E. Englewood Cliffs, Prentice Hall, 1993, pp 225-264.