BACKGROUND: Use of the bispectral index (BIS) monitor has been suggested to decrease excessive anesthetic drug administration, leading to improved recovery from general anesthesia. The purpose of this substudy of the B-Unaware and BAG-RECALL trials was to assess whether a BIS-based anesthetic protocol was superior to an end-tidal anesthetic concentration-based protocol in decreasing recovery time and postoperative complications. METHODS:Patients at high risk for awareness were randomized to either BIS-guided or end-tidal anesthetic concentration-guided general anesthesia in the original trials. Outcomes included time to postanesthesia care unit discharge readiness, time to achieve a postoperative Aldrete score of 9-10, intensive care unit length of stay, postoperative nausea and vomiting, and severe postoperative pain. Univariate Cox regression and chi-square tests were used for statistical analyses. RESULTS: The BIS cohort was not superior in time to postanesthesia care unit discharge readiness (hazard ratio, 1.0; 95% CI, 1.0-1.1; n = 2,949), time to achieve an Aldrete score of 9-10 (hazard ratio, 1.2; 95% CI, 1.0-1.4; n = 706), intensive care unit length of stay (hazard ratio, 1.0; 95% CI, 0.9-1.1; n = 2,074), incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (absolute risk reduction, -0.5%; 95% CI, -5.8 to 4.8%; n = 789), or incidence of severe postoperative pain (absolute risk reduction, 4.4%; 95% CI, -2.3 to 11.1%; n = 759). CONCLUSIONS: In patients at high risk for awareness, the BIS-guided protocol is not superior to an anesthetic concentration-guided protocol in time needed for postoperative recovery or in the incidences of common postoperative complications.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Use of the bispectral index (BIS) monitor has been suggested to decrease excessive anesthetic drug administration, leading to improved recovery from general anesthesia. The purpose of this substudy of the B-Unaware and BAG-RECALL trials was to assess whether a BIS-based anesthetic protocol was superior to an end-tidal anesthetic concentration-based protocol in decreasing recovery time and postoperative complications. METHODS:Patients at high risk for awareness were randomized to either BIS-guided or end-tidal anesthetic concentration-guided general anesthesia in the original trials. Outcomes included time to postanesthesia care unit discharge readiness, time to achieve a postoperative Aldrete score of 9-10, intensive care unit length of stay, postoperative nausea and vomiting, and severe postoperative pain. Univariate Cox regression and chi-square tests were used for statistical analyses. RESULTS: The BIS cohort was not superior in time to postanesthesia care unit discharge readiness (hazard ratio, 1.0; 95% CI, 1.0-1.1; n = 2,949), time to achieve an Aldrete score of 9-10 (hazard ratio, 1.2; 95% CI, 1.0-1.4; n = 706), intensive care unit length of stay (hazard ratio, 1.0; 95% CI, 0.9-1.1; n = 2,074), incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (absolute risk reduction, -0.5%; 95% CI, -5.8 to 4.8%; n = 789), or incidence of severe postoperative pain (absolute risk reduction, 4.4%; 95% CI, -2.3 to 11.1%; n = 759). CONCLUSIONS: In patients at high risk for awareness, the BIS-guided protocol is not superior to an anesthetic concentration-guided protocol in time needed for postoperative recovery or in the incidences of common postoperative complications.
Authors: Stephen C Gradwohl; Amrita Aranake; Arbi Ben Abdallah; Paul McNair; Nan Lin; Bradley A Fritz; Alex Villafranca; David Glick; Eric Jacobsohn; George A Mashour; Michael S Avidan Journal: Can J Anaesth Date: 2015-02-14 Impact factor: 5.063
Authors: Victoria Cui; Catherine M Tedeschi; Vanessa L Kronzer; Sherry L McKinnon; Michael S Avidan Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2017-07-10 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: T S Wildes; A C Winter; H R Maybrier; A M Mickle; E J Lenze; S Stark; N Lin; S K Inouye; E M Schmitt; S L McKinnon; M R Muench; M R Murphy; R T Upadhyayula; B A Fritz; K E Escallier; G P Apakama; D A Emmert; T J Graetz; T W Stevens; B J Palanca; R Hueneke; S Melby; B Torres; J M Leung; E Jacobsohn; M S Avidan Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2016-06-15 Impact factor: 2.692