Targeted Interventions to Increase Blood Pressure and Decrease Anaesthetic Concentrations Reduce Intraoperative Burst Suppression: A Randomised, Interventional Clinical Trial

Marie-Therese Georgii, Matthias Kreuzer, Antonia Fleischmann, Jule Schuessler, Gerhard Schneider, Stefanie Pilge, Marie-Therese Georgii, Matthias Kreuzer, Antonia Fleischmann, Jule Schuessler, Gerhard Schneider, Stefanie Pilge

Abstract

Background: It has been suggested that intraoperative electroencephalographic (EEG) burst suppression (BSupp) may be associated with post-operative neurocognitive disorders in the elderly, and EEG-guided anaesthesia may help to reduce BSupp. Despite of this suggestion, a standard treatment does not exist, as we have yet to fully understand the phenomenon and its underlying pathomechanism. This study was designed to address two underlying phenomena-cerebral hypoperfusion and individual anaesthetic overdose.

Objectives: We aimed to demonstrate that targeted anaesthetic interventions-treating intraoperative hypotension and/or reducing the anaesthetic concentration-reduce BSupp.

Methods: We randomly assigned patients to receive EEG-based interventions during anaesthesia or EEG-blinded standard anaesthesia. If BSupp was detected, defined as burst suppression ratio (BSR) > 0, the primary intervention aimed to adjust the mean arterial blood pressure to patient baseline (MAP intervention) followed by reduction of anaesthetic concentration (MAC intervention).

Results: EEG-based intervention significantly reduced total cumulative BSR, BSR duration, and maximum BSR. MAP intervention caused a significant MAP increase at the end of a BSR > 0 episode compared to the control group. Coincidentally, the maximum BSR decreased significantly; in 55% of all MAP interventions, the BSR decreased to 0% without any further action. In the remaining events, additional MAC intervention was required.

Conclusion: Our results show that targeted interventions (MAC/MAP) reduce total cumulative amount, duration, and maximum BSR > 0 in the elderly undergoing general anaesthesia. Haemodynamic intervention already interrupted or reduced BSupp, strengthening the current reflections that hypotension-induced cerebral hypoperfusion may be seen as potential pathomechanism of intraoperative BSupp.

Clinical trial registration: NCT03775356 [ClinicalTrials.gov], DRKS00015839 [German Clinical Trials Register (Deutsches Register klinischer Studien, DRKS)].

Keywords: Burst Suppression Rate; anaesthetic intervention; electroencephalography; entropy; intraoperative neuromonitoring.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Copyright © 2022 Georgii, Kreuzer, Fleischmann, Schuessler, Schneider and Pilge.

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Study algorithm for the interventional trial on reduction of intraoperative Burst Suppression Rate (BSR).
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 2
Recruitment, randomisation, and patient flowchart for the interventional trial on reduction of intraoperative BSR.
FIGURE 3
FIGURE 3
Description of total cumulative BSR, duration, and maximum of BSR. All boxplots show the medians (solid horizontal lines) and interquartile ranges (IQR, boundaries of the boxes). The square [□] indicates the median and the cross [+] the mean value. The dots represent all measured cases with positive BSR (68 patients) including outliers at the most extreme values outside the boxes. The values on the y-axis are calculated as logarithms. Black coloured boxes/graphs represent the control group and red coloured the intervention group. (A) Displays the total duration of BSR in seconds. The duration of positive BSupp was significantly less in the INTgroup (5.9 min) compared to the CNTgroup (10.1 min) (p = 0.002; difference of medians CI: 165–840 s). (B) The BSR(tot)–the sum of all positive BSR-values–was significantly reduced by intervention (CNTmedian 1385, INTmedian 433; p = 0.002; difference of medians CI: 281–1876). (C) Features a significant reduction of the maximum BSR-value (in %) in the INTgroup (CNTmedian 50, INTmedian 35; p = 0.027; difference of medians CI: -3–29.5).
FIGURE 4
FIGURE 4
Description of the duration of BSR and the cumulative BSR separating induction from maintenance. (A) During induction the duration of BSR (A-left) and the cumulative BSR (A-right) were reduced significantly in the intervention group compared to the control group. The duration of BSR was cut by 2.3 min [p = 0.029, AUC 0.68; CI (0.53; 0.81)]. Similar reductive effect was achieved by intervention regarding the cumulative BSR during induction [CNTmedian 1184 vs. INTmedian 373; p = 0.011; AUC 0.70; CI (0.56; 0.83)]. (B) During maintenance the intervention did not produce statistically significant effects, nevertheless both the duration of BSR (B-left) and the cumulative BSR (B-right) demonstrate a decreasing trend in the intervention group [CNTmedian duration 13.3 min vs. INTmedian duration 10.8 min; p = 0.687; AUC 0.55; CI (0.30; 0.82)] [CNTmedian cumBSR 2129 vs. INTmedian cumBSR 1259; p = 0.828; AUC 0.53; CI (0.29; 0.78)].
FIGURE 5
FIGURE 5
Description of the effect of MAP intervention on BSR during maintenance. (A) When the MAP was increased to its baseline value in INT during maintenance, a sub-analysis showed that the maximum BSR was reduced significantly (p = 0.002). In 7/11 patients, BSR was suppressed to 0. (B) The box and scatter plot shows the distribution of the MAP of all patients at their maximum BSR.
FIGURE 6
FIGURE 6
Description of the MAP values when BSR > 0 during induction and maintenance. (A) During induction (A) both the MAP ratio of “MAP at the start/end of the BSR” (A-left) and the Delta-MAP “end-start” (A-right) showed significant differences comparing CNT with INT. For INT the MAP was increased by 13 mmHg, while for CNT the MAP showed a decreasing trend of -2.9 mmHg [p = 0.033; AUC 0.33; CI (0.19; 0.48)]. (B) In contrast to the non-statistically significant trends of the cumulative BSR and duration of BSR during maintenance, the analysis of the MAP values during maintenance displayed–similar to the induction phase–considerable differences regarding both the MAP ratio (B-left) and the Delta-MAP (B-right) amongst both groups. MAP-ratio: CNT = 0.96 vs. INT = 1.08 (p = 0.012) and Delta MAP: CNT = -1 mmHg vs. INT = 0.7 mmHg [p = 0.006; AUC 0.19; CI (0.04; 0.38)].
FIGURE 7
FIGURE 7
Paired analysis within the groups of the MAP values comparing the MAP at the start and the end of the BSR during induction and maintenance. (A) During induction the paired analysis within INT shows that the MAP by the end of BSR was elevated substantially by intervention [p = 0.009; Hedges’ g 0.68 (−1.25; −0.26)], while there was no significance within CNT [p = 0.802; Hedges’ g 0.03 (−0.38; 0.49)]. (B) Same findings were observed during maintenance: The intervention induced a considerable increase of the MAP at the end of BSR [p = 0.011; Hedges’ g −0.90 (−1.54; −0.42)]. In contrast with CNT, the MAPend often decreased compared to the MAPstart [p = 0.322; Hedges’ g 0.34 (−0.31; 0.89)].
FIGURE 8
FIGURE 8
Paired analysis–comparison of the BL-MAP and MAP at the start of the BSR within the groups during induction and maintenance. During induction (A) and maintenance (B) the paired analysis of the MAP values within both groups (CNT–left; INT–right) demonstrates that the MAP at the start of the BSR was substantially lower than the individual baseline value. For absolute values see Table 1.

References

    1. Aldecoa C., Bettelli G., Bilotta F., Sanders R. D., Audisio R., Borozdina A., et al. (2017). European society of anaesthesiology evidence-based and consensus-based guideline on postoperative delirium. Eur. J. Anaesthesiol. EJA 34 192–214. 10.1097/eja.0000000000000594
    1. Besch G., Liu N., Samain E., Pericard C., Boichut N., Mercier M., et al. (2011). Occurrence of and risk factors for electroencephalogram burst suppression during propofol–remifentanil anaesthesia. Br. J. Anaesth. 107 749–756. 10.1093/bja/aer235
    1. Bijker J. B., van Klei W. A., Kappen T. H., van Wolfswinkel L., Moons K. G., Kalkman C. J. (2007). Incidence of intraoperative hypotension as a function of the chosen definition: literature definitions applied to a retrospective cohort using automated data collection. J. Am. Soc. Anesthesiol. 107 213–220. 10.1097/01.anes.0000270724.40897.8e
    1. Bruhn J., Bouillon T. W., Shafer S. L. (2000a). Bispectral index (BIS) and burst suppression: revealing a part of the BIS algorithm. J. Clin. Monit. Comput. 16 593–596. 10.1023/A:1012216600170
    1. Bruhn J., Röpcke H., Rehberg B., Bouillon T., Hoeft A. (2000b). Electroencephalogram approximate entropy correctly classifies the occurrence of burst suppression pattern as increasing anesthetic drug effect. J. Am. Soc. Anesthesiol. 93 981–985. 10.1097/00000542-200010000-00018
    1. Chan M. T., Cheng B. C., Lee T. M., Gin T. Coda Trial, and Group. (2013). BIS-guided anesthesia decreases postoperative delirium and cognitive decline. J. Neurosurg. Anesthesiol. 25 33–42. 10.1097/ANA.0b013e3182712fba
    1. Ching S., Purdon P. L., Vijayan S., Kopell N. J., Brown E. N. (2012). A neurophysiological–metabolic model for burst suppression. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U S A. 109 3095–3100. 10.1073/pnas.1121461109
    1. Ely E. W., Margolin R., Francis J., May L., Truman B., Dittus R., et al. (2001). Evaluation of delirium in critically ill patients: validation of the Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit (CAM-ICU). Crit. Care Med. 29 1370–1379. 10.1097/00003246-200107000-00012
    1. Ely E. W., Shintani A., Truman B., Speroff T., Gordon S. M., Harrell F. E., et al. (2004). Delirium as a predictor of mortality in mechanically ventilated patients in the intensive care unit. JAMA 291 1753–1762. 10.1001/jama.291.14.1753
    1. Etzioni D. A., Liu J. H., Maggard M. A., Ko C. Y. (2003). The aging population and its impact on the surgery workforce. Ann. Surg. 238:170. 10.1097/01.SLA.0000081085.98792.3d
    1. Fleischmann A., Pilge S., Kiel T., Kratzer S., Schneider G., Kreuzer M. (2018). Substance-specific differences in human electroencephalographic burst suppression patterns. Front. Human Neurosci. 12:368. 10.3389/fnhum.2018.00368
    1. Fritz B. A., Kalarickal P. L., Maybrier H. R., Muench M. R., Dearth D., Chen Y., et al. (2016). Intraoperative electroencephalogram suppression predicts postoperative delirium. Anesth. Analg. 122:234. 10.1213/ane.0000000000000989
    1. Fritz B., Maybrier H., Avidan M. (2018). Intraoperative electroencephalogram suppression at lower volatile anaesthetic concentrations predicts postoperative delirium occurring in the intensive care unit. Br. J. Anaesth. 121 241–248. 10.1016/j.bja.2017.10.024
    1. Georgii M.-T., Pilge S., Schneider G., Kreuzer M. (2020). State entropy and burst suppression ratio can show contradictory information: a retrospective study. Eur. J. Anaesthesiol. EJA 37 1084–1092. 10.1097/EJA.0000000000001312
    1. Hart S., Buchannan C., Sleigh J. (2009). A failure of M-Entropy™ to correctly detect burst suppression leading to sevoflurane overdosage. Anaesth. Intensive. Care 37 1002–1004. 10.1177/0310057X0903700619
    1. Hentschke H., Stüttgen M. C. (2011). Computation of measures of effect size for neuroscience data sets. Eur. J. Neurosci. 34 1887–1894. 10.1111/j.1460-9568.2011.07902.x
    1. Hesse S., Kreuzer M., Hight D., Gaskell A., Devari P., Singh D., et al. (2019). Association of electroencephalogram trajectories during emergence from anaesthesia with delirium in the postanaesthesia care unit: an early sign of postoperative complications. Br. J. Anaesth. 122 622–634. 10.1016/j.bja.2018.09.016
    1. Kratzer S., Schneider M., Obert D. P., Schneider G., García P. S., Kreuzer M. (2020). Age-Related EEG features of bursting activity during anesthetic-induced burst suppression. Front. Systems Neurosci. 14:599962. 10.3389/fnsys.2020.599962
    1. MacKenzie K. K., Britt-Spells A. M., Sands L. P., Leung J. M. (2018). Processed electroencephalogram monitoring and postoperative delirium: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Anesthesiology 129 417–427. 10.1097/ALN.0000000000002323
    1. Muhlhofer W., Zak R., Kamal T., Rizvi B., Sands L., Yuan M., et al. (2017). Burst-suppression ratio underestimates absolute duration of electroencephalogram suppression compared with visual analysis of intraoperative electroencephalogram. Br. J. Anaesth. 118 755–761. 10.1093/bja/aex054
    1. Noether G. E. (1987). Sample size determination for some common nonparametric tests. J. Am. Statistical Assoc. 82 645–647.
    1. Pompei P., Foreman M., Rudberg M. A., Inouye S. K., Braund V., Cassel C. K. (1994). Delirium in hospitalized older persons: outcomes and predictors. J. Am. Geriatr. Soc. 42 809–815. 10.1111/j.1532-5415.1994.tb06551.x
    1. Purdon P., Pavone K., Akeju O., Smith A., Sampson A., Lee J., et al. (2015). The ageing brain: age-dependent changes in the electroencephalogram during propofol and sevoflurane general anaesthesia. Br. J. Anaesth. 115 i46–i57. 10.1093/bja/aev213
    1. Radtke F., Franck M., Lendner J., Krüger S., Wernecke K., Spies C. (2013). Monitoring depth of anaesthesia in a randomized trial decreases the rate of postoperative delirium but not postoperative cognitive dysfunction. Br. J. Anaesth. 110 i98–i105. 10.1093/bja/aet055
    1. Rampil I. J. (1998). A primer for EEG signal processing in anesthesia. J. Am. Soc. Anesthesiol. 89 980–1002. 10.1097/00000542-199810000-00023
    1. Reiss R., Deutsch A., Nudelman I. (1992). Surgical problems in octogenarians: epidemiological analysis of 1,083 consecutive admissions. World J. Surgery 16 1017–1020. 10.1007/BF02067023
    1. Salluh J. I., Wang H., Schneider E. B., Nagaraja N., Yenokyan G., Damluji A., et al. (2015). Outcome of delirium in critically ill patients: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ 350:h2538. 10.1136/bmj.h2538
    1. Särkelä M., Mustola S., Seppänen T., Koskinen M., Lepola P., Suominen K., et al. (2002). Automatic analysis and monitoring of burst suppression in anesthesia. J. Clin. Monit. Comput. 17:125. 10.1023/a:1016393904439
    1. Sessler D. I., Sigl J. C., Kelley S. D., Chamoun N. G., Manberg P. J., Saager L., et al. (2012). Hospital stay and mortality are increased in patients having a “triple low” of low blood pressure, low bispectral index, and low minimum alveolar concentration of volatile anesthesia. J. Am. Soc. Anesthesiol. 116 1195–1203. 10.1097/ALN.0b013e31825683dc
    1. Soehle M., Dittmann A., Ellerkmann R. K., Baumgarten G., Putensen C., Guenther U. (2015). Intraoperative burst suppression is associated with postoperative delirium following cardiac surgery: a prospective, observational study. BMC Anesthesiol. 15:61. 10.1186/s12871-015-0051-7
    1. van Velthuijsen E. L., Zwakhalen S. M., Warnier R. M., Mulder W. J., Verhey F. R., Kempen G. I. (2016). Psychometric properties and feasibility of instruments for the detection of delirium in older hospitalized patients: a systematic review. Int. J. Geriatr. Psychiatry 31 974–989. 10.1002/gps.4441
    1. Viertio-Oja H., Maja V., Sarkela M., Talja P., Tenkanen N., Tolvanen-Laakso H., et al. (2004). Description of the entropytm algorithm as applied in the Datex-Ohmeda S/5 tm entropy module. Acta Anaesthesiol. Scand. 48 154–161. 10.1111/j.0001-5172.2004.00322.x
    1. Wesselink E., Kappen T., Torn H., Slooter A., Van Klei W. (2018). Intraoperative hypotension and the risk of postoperative adverse outcomes: a systematic review. Br. J. Anaesth. 121 706–721. 10.1016/j.bja.2018.04.036
    1. Whitlock E. L., Torres B. A., Lin N., Helsten D. L., Nadelson M. R., Mashour G. A., et al. (2014). Postoperative delirium in a substudy of cardiothoracic surgical patients in the BAG-RECALL clinical trial. Anesth. Analg. 118:809. 10.1213/ANE.0000000000000028
    1. Wildes T. S., Mickle A. M., Abdallah A. B., Maybrier H. R., Oberhaus J., Budelier T. P., et al. (2019). Effect of electroencephalography-guided anesthetic administration on postoperative delirium among older adults undergoing major surgery: the ENGAGES randomized clinical trial. JAMA 321 473–483. 10.1001/jama.2018.22005
    1. Wong C. L., Holroyd-Leduc J., Simel D. L., Straus S. E. (2010). Does this patient have delirium?: value of bedside instruments. JAMA 304 779–786. 10.1001/jama.2010.1182

Source: PubMed

Sponsoren und Mitarbeiter

Krankheiten

Drogeninterventionen

3
Abonnieren