Literature DB >> 15564934

Comparative evaluation of the Datex-Ohmeda S/5 Entropy Module and the Bispectral Index monitor during propofol-remifentanil anesthesia.

Gunter N Schmidt1, Petra Bischoff, Thomas Standl, Angelika Hellstern, Olaf Teuber, Jochen Schulte Esch.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Different analytical concepts were introduced to quantify the changes of the electroencephalogram. The Datex-Ohmeda S/5 Entropy Module (Datex-Ohmeda Division, Instrumentarium Corp., Helsinki, Finland) was the first commercial monitor based on the entropy generating two indices, the state entropy (SE) and the response entropy (RE). The aim of the current study was to compare the accuracy of SE and RE with the Bispectral Index(R) monitor (BIS(R); Aspect Medical Systems, Newton, MA) during propofol-remifentanil anesthesia.
METHODS: The authors investigated 20 female patients during minor gynecologic surgery. SE, RE, BIS, mean arterial blood pressure, heart rate, and sedation level were recorded every 20 s during stepwise increase (target-controlled infusion, 0.5 microg/ml) of propofol until the patients lost response. Five minutes after loss of response, remifentanil infusion (0.4 microg . kg(-1) . min(-1)) was started. Spearman correlation coefficient and prediction probability were calculated for sedation levels with SE, RE, BIS, mean arterial blood pressure, and heart rate. The ability of the investigated parameters to distinguish between the anesthesia steps awake versus loss of response, awake versus anesthesia, anesthesia versus first reaction, and anesthesia versus extubation was analyzed with the prediction probability.
RESULTS: SE correlates best with sedation levels, but no significant differences of the prediction probability values among SE, RE, and BIS were found. The prediction probability for all investigated steps of anesthesia did not show significant differences among SE, RE, and BIS. SE, RE, and BIS were superior to mean arterial blood pressure and heart rate.
CONCLUSION: SE, RE, and BIS revealed similar information about the level of sedation and allowed the authors to distinguish between different steps of anesthesia. Both monitors provided useful additional information for the anesthesiologist.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15564934     DOI: 10.1097/00000542-200412000-00007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anesthesiology        ISSN: 0003-3022            Impact factor:   7.892


  23 in total

1.  Response entropy changes after noxius stimulus.

Authors:  Jose L Guerrero; E Matute; E Alsina; B Del Blanco; F Gilsanz
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2012-03-20       Impact factor: 2.502

Review 2.  Using EEG to monitor anesthesia drug effects during surgery.

Authors:  Leslie C Jameson; Tod B Sloan
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 2.502

3.  Comparing Entropy and the Bispectral index with the Ramsay score in sedated ICU patients.

Authors:  Carmen Hernández-Gancedo; David Pestaña; Hanna Pérez-Chrzanowska; Elena Martinez-Casanova; Antonio Criado
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2007-08-16       Impact factor: 2.502

Review 4.  [Measurement of the depth of anaesthesia].

Authors:  G N Schmidt; J Müller; P Bischoff
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 1.041

5.  Response entropy is more reactive than bispectral index during laparoscopic gastric banding.

Authors:  James Feld; William E Hoffman
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2006-07-04       Impact factor: 2.502

6.  Drug-induced sleep endoscopy with target-controlled infusion using propofol and monitored depth of sedation to determine treatment strategies in obstructive sleep apnea.

Authors:  Clemens Heiser; Phillippe Fthenakis; Alexander Hapfelmeier; Sebastian Berger; Benedikt Hofauer; Winfried Hohenhorst; Eberhard F Kochs; Klaus J Wagner; Guenther M Edenharter
Journal:  Sleep Breath       Date:  2017-03-31       Impact factor: 2.816

7.  Recovery from paralysis with succinylcholine increased Response entropy and EMG but not State entropy.

Authors:  Verna L Baughman; William E Hoffman; Heidi M Koenig; Peggy L Wheeler; Ranga C Ananda; Mathew Wang
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 2.502

8.  Electrocorticographic delineation of human auditory cortical fields based on effects of propofol anesthesia.

Authors:  Kirill V Nourski; Matthew I Banks; Mitchell Steinschneider; Ariane E Rhone; Hiroto Kawasaki; Rashmi N Mueller; Michael M Todd; Matthew A Howard
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2017-02-27       Impact factor: 6.556

9.  Effect of remifentanil on consumption of sevoflurane in entropy monitored general anesthesia.

Authors:  Hyung Tae Kim; Hyeon Eon Heo; Young Eun Kwon; Myeong Jong Lee
Journal:  Korean J Anesthesiol       Date:  2010-10-21

10.  Effects of caudal sufentanil supplemented with levobupivacaine on blocking spermatic cord traction response in pediatric orchidopexy.

Authors:  Tingting Wang; Qiang Xiang; Feng Liu; Guanghui Wang; Yanxia Liu; Liang Zhong
Journal:  J Anesth       Date:  2013-04-23       Impact factor: 2.078

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.