Andrew Davidson1. 1. Royal Children's Hospital and Department of Pharmacology, University of Melbourne, Australia. andrew.davidson@rch.org.au
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Unwanted airway reflexes such as laryngospasm are a frequent cause for concern in paediatric anaesthesia. They are more active during light anaesthesia. Bispectral index (BIS) is a recognized measure of anaesthetic effect. Ensuring adequate depth with the BIS may prevent these reflexes. This study investigates the relationship between BIS and a defined measure of airway reactivity. METHODS: Sixty-two children scheduled for direct laryngoscopy and bronchoscopy were enrolled in this prospective nonrandomized blinded study. They were induced and maintained with either sevoflurane or halothane. When depth of anaesthesia was judged deep enough on clinical grounds, the cords were sprayed with 2% lidocaine. Using an A2000 monitor, the BIS was recorded at the moment of spraying the cords. The anaesthetist was blinded to the BIS and noted whether or not spraying resulted in complete closure of the cords. Breath holding, desaturation and coughing were also recorded as secondary endpoints. RESULTS: Using logistic regression there was a significant correlation between BIS and cord closure for halothane but not for sevoflurane (halothane Pseudo r2 = 0.5, P = 0.003; sevoflurane Pseudo r2 = 0.0004, P = 0.9). Although the study was not specifically designed to test for it, no difference was detected between agents in the incidence of cord closure (halothane 38%, sevoflurane 36%), or secondary endpoints (halothane 29%, sevoflurane 29%). CONCLUSIONS: The BIS may be useful to help prevent unwanted airway reflexes when using halothane but not with sevoflurane. The differing sites of anaesthetic action for sevoflurane and halothane may explain this result.
BACKGROUND: Unwanted airway reflexes such as laryngospasm are a frequent cause for concern in paediatric anaesthesia. They are more active during light anaesthesia. Bispectral index (BIS) is a recognized measure of anaesthetic effect. Ensuring adequate depth with the BIS may prevent these reflexes. This study investigates the relationship between BIS and a defined measure of airway reactivity. METHODS: Sixty-two children scheduled for direct laryngoscopy and bronchoscopy were enrolled in this prospective nonrandomized blinded study. They were induced and maintained with either sevoflurane or halothane. When depth of anaesthesia was judged deep enough on clinical grounds, the cords were sprayed with 2% lidocaine. Using an A2000 monitor, the BIS was recorded at the moment of spraying the cords. The anaesthetist was blinded to the BIS and noted whether or not spraying resulted in complete closure of the cords. Breath holding, desaturation and coughing were also recorded as secondary endpoints. RESULTS: Using logistic regression there was a significant correlation between BIS and cord closure for halothane but not for sevoflurane (halothane Pseudo r2 = 0.5, P = 0.003; sevoflurane Pseudo r2 = 0.0004, P = 0.9). Although the study was not specifically designed to test for it, no difference was detected between agents in the incidence of cord closure (halothane 38%, sevoflurane 36%), or secondary endpoints (halothane 29%, sevoflurane 29%). CONCLUSIONS: The BIS may be useful to help prevent unwanted airway reflexes when using halothane but not with sevoflurane. The differing sites of anaesthetic action for sevoflurane and halothane may explain this result.