Literature DB >> 27766525

Comparison of the qCON and qNOX indices for the assessment of unconsciousness level and noxious stimulation response during surgery.

Umberto Melia1, Eva Gabarron2, Mercé Agustí3, Nuria Souto3, Patricia Pineda2, Joan Fontanet2, Montserrat Vallverdu4, Erik Weber Jensen2,3,4, Pedro Gambus3,5,6.   

Abstract

The objective of this work is to compare the performances of two electroencephalogram based indices for detecting loss of consciousness and loss of response to nociceptive stimulation. Specifically, their behaviour after drug induction and during recovery of consciousness was pointed out. Data was recorded from 140 patients scheduled for general anaesthesia with a combination of propofol and remifentanil. The qCON 2000 monitor (Quantium Medical, Barcelona, Spain) was used to calculate the qCON and qNOX. Loss of response to verbal command and loss of eye-lash reflex were assessed during the transition from awake to anesthetized, defining the state of loss of consciousness. Movement as a response to laryngeal mask (LMA) insertion was interpreted as the response to the nociceptive stimuli. The patients were classified as movers or non-movers. The values of qCON and qNOX were statistically compared. Their fall times and rise times defined at the start and at the end of the surgery were calculated and compared. The results showed that the qCON was able to predict loss of consciousness such as loss of verbal command and eyelash reflex better than qNOX, while the qNOX has a better predictive value for response to noxious stimulation such as LMA insertion. From the analysis of the fall and rise times, it was found that the qNOX fall time (median: 217 s) was significantly longer (p value <0.05) than the qCON fall time (median: 150 s). At the end of the surgery, the qNOX started to increase in median at 45 s before the first annotation related to response to stimuli or recovery of consciousness, while the qCON at 88 s after the first annotation related to response to stimuli or recovery of consciousness (p value <0.05). The indices qCON and qNOX showed different performances in the detection of loss of consciousness and loss of response to stimuli during induction and recovery of consciousness. Furthermore, the qCON showed faster decrease during induction. This behaviour is associated with the hypothesis that the loss of response to stimuli (analgesic effect) might be reached after the loss of consciousness (hypnotic effect). On the contrary, the qNOX showed a faster increase at the end of the surgery, associated with the hypothesis that a higher probability of response to stimuli might be reached before the recovery of consciousness.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Anesthesia monitor; Clinical indices; Electroencephalography; Nociception

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27766525     DOI: 10.1007/s10877-016-9948-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput        ISSN: 1387-1307            Impact factor:   2.502


  40 in total

Review 1.  A review of the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of remifentanil.

Authors:  P S Glass; T J Gan; S Howell
Journal:  Anesth Analg       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 5.108

2.  Utility of Nociceptive Flexion Reflex Threshold, Bispectral Index, Composite Variability Index and Noxious Stimulation Response Index as measures for nociception during general anaesthesia.

Authors:  F von Dincklage; C Correll; M H N Schneider; B Rehberg; J H Baars
Journal:  Anaesthesia       Date:  2012-05-18       Impact factor: 6.955

3.  Monitoring the nociception level: a multi-parameter approach.

Authors:  Nir Ben-Israel; Mark Kliger; Galit Zuckerman; Yeshayahu Katz; Ruth Edry
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2013-07-09       Impact factor: 2.502

4.  Pupillary effects of high-dose opioid quantified with infrared pupillometry.

Authors:  Mark D Rollins; John R Feiner; Jessica M Lee; Sameer Shah; Merlin Larson
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  2014-11       Impact factor: 7.892

5.  Targeting effect compartment or central compartment concentration of propofol: what predicts loss of consciousness?

Authors:  H G Wakeling; J B Zimmerman; S Howell; P S Glass
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 7.892

6.  Monitoring depth of anesthesia utilizing a combination of electroencephalographic and standard measures.

Authors:  Gerhard Schneider; Denis Jordan; Gerhard Schwarz; Petra Bischoff; Cornelis J Kalkman; Hermann Kuppe; Ingrid Rundshagen; Adem Omerovic; Matthias Kreuzer; Gudrun Stockmanns; Eberhard F Kochs
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 7.892

7.  Prevention of intraoperative awareness with explicit recall in an unselected surgical population: a randomized comparative effectiveness trial.

Authors:  George A Mashour; Amy Shanks; Kevin K Tremper; Sachin Kheterpal; Christopher R Turner; Satya Krishna Ramachandran; Paul Picton; Christa Schueller; Michelle Morris; John C Vandervest; Nan Lin; Michael S Avidan
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 7.892

8.  Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of remifentanil. II. Model application.

Authors:  C F Minto; T W Schnider; S L Shafer
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  1997-01       Impact factor: 7.892

9.  Influence of age and gender on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of remifentanil. I. Model development.

Authors:  C F Minto; T W Schnider; T D Egan; E Youngs; H J Lemmens; P L Gambus; V Billard; J F Hoke; K H Moore; D J Hermann; K T Muir; J W Mandema; S L Shafer
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  1997-01       Impact factor: 7.892

10.  Preliminary pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of an ultra-short-acting opioid: remifentanil (GI87084B).

Authors:  P S Glass; D Hardman; Y Kamiyama; T J Quill; G Marton; K H Donn; C M Grosse; D Hermann
Journal:  Anesth Analg       Date:  1993-11       Impact factor: 5.108

View more
  6 in total

Review 1.  Journal of clinical monitoring and computing 2017 end of year summary: anesthesia.

Authors:  Jan F A Hendrickx; Andre M De Wolf; Stanley Skinner
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2018-02-24       Impact factor: 2.502

2.  Comparison of Quantium Consciousness Index and Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale in Mechanically Ventilated Critically Ill Patients: An Observational Study.

Authors:  Makam S Harsha; Pradeep K Bhatia; Ankur Sharma; Priyanka Sethi
Journal:  Indian J Crit Care Med       Date:  2022

Review 3.  Postoperative pain management in the postanesthesia care unit: an update.

Authors:  Jie Luo; Su Min
Journal:  J Pain Res       Date:  2017-11-16       Impact factor: 3.133

Review 4.  Different perspectives for monitoring nociception during general anesthesia.

Authors:  Pablo Martinez-Vazquez; Erik Weber Jensen
Journal:  Korean J Anesthesiol       Date:  2022-02-17

5.  Usefulness of bispectral index and patient state index during sevoflurane anesthesia in children: A prospective observational study.

Authors:  Young-Eun Jang; Eun-Hee Kim; Ji-Hyun Lee; Jin-Tae Kim; Hee-Soo Kim
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2022-07-29       Impact factor: 1.817

6.  Time delay of the qCON monitor and its performance during state transitions.

Authors:  Robert Zanner; Gerhard Schneider; Adrian Meyer; Eberhard Kochs; Matthias Kreuzer
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2020-02-10       Impact factor: 2.502

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.