Nina Zech1,2, Milena Seemann2, Timo F Seyfried2, Max Lange1,3, Juergen Schlaier1,3, Ernil Hansen4,5. 1. Center for Deep Brain Stimulation, University Hospital Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany. 2. Department of Anaesthesiology, University Hospital Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany. 3. Department of Neurosurgery, University Hospital Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany. 4. Center for Deep Brain Stimulation, University Hospital Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany, ernil.hansen@ukr.de. 5. Department of Anaesthesiology, University Hospital Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany, ernil.hansen@ukr.de.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sedatives and opioids used during deep brain stimulation (DBS) surgery interfere with optimal target localization and add to side effects and risks, and thus should be minimized. OBJECTIVE: To retrospectively test the actual need for sedatives and opioids when cranial nerve blocks and specific therapeutic communication are applied. METHODS: In a case series, 64 consecutive patients treated with a strong rapport, constant contact, non-verbal communication and hypnotic suggestions, such as dissociation to a "safe place," reframing of disturbing noises and self-confirmation, were compared to 22 preceding patients under standard general anaesthesia or conscious sedation. RESULTS: With introduction of the protocol the need for sedation dropped from 100% in the control group to 5%, and from a mean dose of 444 mg to 40 mg in 3 patients. Remifentanil originally used in 100% of the patients in an average dose of 813 µg was reduced in the study group to 104 µg in 31% of patients. There were no haemodynamic reactions indicative of stress during incision, trepanation, electrode insertion and closure. CONCLUSION: With adequate therapeutic communication, patients do not require sedation and no or only low-dose opioid treatment during DBS surgery, leaving patients fully awake and competent during surgery and testing.
BACKGROUND: Sedatives and opioids used during deep brain stimulation (DBS) surgery interfere with optimal target localization and add to side effects and risks, and thus should be minimized. OBJECTIVE: To retrospectively test the actual need for sedatives and opioids when cranial nerve blocks and specific therapeutic communication are applied. METHODS: In a case series, 64 consecutive patients treated with a strong rapport, constant contact, non-verbal communication and hypnotic suggestions, such as dissociation to a "safe place," reframing of disturbing noises and self-confirmation, were compared to 22 preceding patients under standard general anaesthesia or conscious sedation. RESULTS: With introduction of the protocol the need for sedation dropped from 100% in the control group to 5%, and from a mean dose of 444 mg to 40 mg in 3 patients. Remifentanil originally used in 100% of the patients in an average dose of 813 µg was reduced in the study group to 104 µg in 31% of patients. There were no haemodynamic reactions indicative of stress during incision, trepanation, electrode insertion and closure. CONCLUSION: With adequate therapeutic communication, patients do not require sedation and no or only low-dose opioid treatment during DBS surgery, leaving patients fully awake and competent during surgery and testing.