| Literature DB >> 28466018 |
Muhammad Ilyas1,2, Muhammad Fasih Uddin Butt1, Muhammad Bilal1, Khalid Mahmood2, Ali Khaqan1, Raja Ali Riaz1.
Abstract
Regulating the depth of hypnosis during surgery is one of the major objectives of an anesthesia infusion system. Continuous administration of Propofol infusion during surgical procedures is essential but it unduly increases the load of an anesthetist working in a multitasking scenario in the operation theatre. Manual and target controlled infusion systems are not appropriate to handle instabilities like blood pressure and heart rate changes arising due to interpatient and intrapatient variability. Patient safety, large interindividual variability, and less postoperative effects are the main factors motivating automation in anesthesia administration. The idea of automated system for Propofol infusion excites control engineers to come up with more sophisticated systems that can handle optimum delivery of anesthetic drugs during surgery and avoid postoperative effects. A linear control technique is applied initially using three compartmental pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic models. Later on, sliding mode control and model predicative control achieve considerable results with nonlinear sigmoid model. Chattering and uncertainties are further improved by employing adaptive fuzzy control and H∞ control. The proposed sliding mode control scheme can easily handle the nonlinearities and achieve an optimum hypnosis level as compared to linear control schemes, hence preventing mishaps such as underdosing and overdosing of anesthesia.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28466018 PMCID: PMC5390600 DOI: 10.1155/2017/7432310
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Figure 1Input and output description of the anesthetic process [8].
Required effect site concentration for commonly used closed loop anesthesia.
| Drug | Effect | Required effect site concentration |
|---|---|---|
| Propofol | Sedation | 2-3 |
| Anesthesia | 4–6 | |
|
| ||
| Remifentanil | Laryngoscopy | 2-3 ng·ml−1 |
| Analgesia for superficial surgery | 3-4 ng·ml−1 | |
| Analgesia for laparotomy | 6–8 ng·ml−1 | |
| Analgesia for cardiac surgery | 10–12 ng·ml−1 | |
|
| ||
| Alfentanil | Analgesia for major surgery | 75–100 ng·ml−1 |
| Analgesia for cardiac surgery | 150–220 ng·ml−1 | |
|
| ||
| Sufentanil | Analgesia for major surgery | 0.1–0.4 ng·ml−1 |
| Analgesia for cardiac surgery | 0.6–1.0 ng·ml−1 | |
Figure 2BIS for general surgery.
Figure 3Block diagram of PK and PD models.
Nomenclature of clinical parameters.
| Symbol | Unit | Name |
|---|---|---|
|
| mg·sec−1 | Infusion rate |
|
| sec−1 | Elimination rate constant |
|
| mg | Amount of drug in primary compartment |
|
| mg | Amount of drug in rapid peripheral compartment |
|
| mg | Amount of drug in slow peripheral compartment |
|
| mg | Flow of hypnotic agent in effect site |
|
| sec−1 | Rate constant at effect site |
|
| sec−1 | Elimination rate constant at effect site |
Figure 4Closed loop drug infusion in anesthesia.
Targeted control infusion (5 μg·ml−1) based on calculated blood concentration using Paedfusor PK model.
| Blood concentration targeting | Effect site concentration targeting | |
|---|---|---|
| Loading dose | 1.7 mg·kg−1 | 5.7 mg·kg−1 |
| Maximum blood target reached | 5 mcg·kg−1 | 12 mcg·kg−1 |
| Total Propofol infused after 60 min | 23.2 mg·kg−1 | 23.3 mg·kg−1 |
| Time to achieve effect site target of 5 mcg·ml−1 | 17.5 min | 4.5 min |
Figure 5Comparative analysis of various control mechanisms and clinical tools employed in anesthesia.
| Terminology | Action | Merits | Demerits | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Anesthesia | Lack of sense | Applied in surgical procedure | Effect digestive system, vomiting, and so forth | [ |
|
| ||||
| Propofol | Anesthetic agent | Fast metabolic action, less side effects, being easily recoverable | No | [ |
|
| ||||
| Remifentanil | Analgesic, painkiller | Less side effect, providing relief from pain, no postoperative effect | Excessive amount affects the stomach | [ |
|
| ||||
| Nitrous oxide | Inhale volatile drugs | Used as painkiller | Not purely hypnotic | [ |
|
| ||||
| PID controller | Linear control technique | Fast transient response, showing adaptive behavior | Linearizing the data leads to loss of information. Cannot cope with uncertainties | [ |
|
| ||||
| Sliding mode control | Nonlinear control scheme | Handling uncertainties like skin incision, less steady error up to 5% | Chattering is observed in hypnosis level | [ |
|
| ||||
| Adaptive fuzzy SMC | Robust control scheme | Handling chattering in maintenance phase of anesthesia | Steady-state error still exists | [ |
|
| ||||
| Model predicative control | Optimal control strategy | Noise rejection of Intense care equipment, hypnosis level tracking | Settling time of achieving hypnosis can further be improved; steady-state error is 5% | [ |
|
| ||||
| Robust predicative control | Robust control scheme | Handling interpatient and intrapatient variability | No serious issues. Result is clinically accepted | [ |
|
| ||||
| Backstepping control | Nonlinear control algorithm | Fast transient response | Steady-state error exists | [ |
|
| ||||
| Internal model control | Robust control scheme | Handling dynamics in hypnosis level | Complication in handling uncertainty | [ |
|
| ||||
| Adaptive control | Used in adaptive model | Handling interpatient variability | Complex mathematics involved | [ |
|
| ||||
|
| Based on linear model | Handling uncertainly | Data lost in linearizing model | [ |
|
| ||||
| TCI | Open loop system | Being easily applicable | Unable to compensate disturbances | [ |
|
| ||||
| BIS | Display cortical activity of brain | Extracting the inform of DOH from EEG easily | Unable to compensate noise of other equipment in ICU | [ |
|
| ||||
| TANGO | Software platform | Supervisory network for sensing as well as control purpose | Not viable for compensating interpatient variability | [ |