Published October 19, 2016 | Version v1
Dataset Open

Data from: Anaesthetic interventions for prevention of awareness during surgery

  • 1. The University of Texas at Dallas
  • 2. University of Leicester
  • 3. Dartmouth–Hitchcock Medical Center
  • 4. ARUP Laboratories (United States)
  • 5. University of Utah

Description

BACKGROUND: General anaesthesia is usually associated with unconsciousness. 'Awareness' is when patients have postoperative recall of events or experiences during surgery. 'Wakefulness' is when patients become conscious during surgery, but have no postoperative recollection of the period of consciousness. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy of two types of anaesthetic interventions in reducing clinically significant awareness: - anaesthetic drug regimens; and - intraoperative anaesthetic depth monitors. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, ISSUE 4 2016); PubMed from 1950 to April 2016; MEDLINE from 1950 to April 2016; and Embase from 1980 to April 2016. We contacted experts to identify additional studies. We performed a handsearch of the citations in the review. We did not search trial registries. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of either anaesthetic regimens or anaesthetic depth monitors. We excluded volunteer studies, studies of patients prior to skin incision, intensive care unit studies, and studies that only randomized different word presentations for memory tests (not anaesthetic interventions). Anaesthetic drug regimens included studies of induction or maintenance, or both. Anaesthetic depth monitors included the Bispectral Index monitor, M-Entropy, Narcotrend monitor, cerebral function monitor, cerebral state monitor, patient state index, and lower oesophageal contractility monitor. The use of anaesthetic depth monitors allows the titration of anaesthetic drugs to maintain unconsciousness. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: At least two authors independently scanned abstracts, extracted data from the studies, and evaluated studies for risk of bias. We made attempts to contact all authors for additional clarification. We performed meta-analysis statistics in packages of the R language. MAIN RESULTS: We included 160 studies with 54,109 enrolled participants; 53,713 participants started the studies and 50,034 completed the studies or data analysis (or both). We could not use 115 RCTs in meta-analytic comparisons because they had zero awareness events. We did not merge 27 of the remaining 45 studies because they had excessive clinical and methodological heterogeneity. We pooled the remaining 18 eligible RCTs in meta-analysis. There are 10 studies awaiting classification which we will process when we update the review. The meta-analyses included 18 trials with 36,034 participants. In the analysis of anaesthetic depth monitoring (either Bispectral Index or M-entropy) versus standard clinical and electronic monitoring, there were nine trials with 34,744 participants. The overall event rate was 0.5%. The effect favoured neither anaesthetic depth monitoring nor standard clinical and electronic monitoring, with little precision in the odds ratio (OR) estimate (OR 0.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.59 to 1.62). In a five-study subset of Bispectral Index monitoring versus standard clinical and electronic monitoring, with 34,181 participants, 503 participants gave awareness reports to a blinded, expert panel who adjudicated or judged the outcome for each patient after reviewing the questionnaires: no awareness, possible awareness, or definite awareness. Experts judged 351 patient awareness reports to have no awareness, 87 to have possible awareness, and 65 to have definite awareness. The effect size favoured neither Bispectral Index monitoring nor standard clinical and electronic monitoring, with little precision in the OR estimate for the combination of definite and possible awareness (OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.35 to 2.65). The effect size favoured Bispectral Index monitoring for definite awareness, but with little precision in the OR estimate (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.13 to 2.75). We performed three smaller meta-analyses of anaesthetic drugs. There were nine studies with 1290 participants. Wakefulness was reduced by ketamine and etomidate compared to thiopental. Wakefulness was more frequent than awareness. Benzodiazepines reduces awareness compared to thiopental, ketamine, and placebo., Also, higher doses of inhaled anaesthetics versus lower doses reduced the risk of awareness. We graded the quality of the evidence as low or very low in the 'Summary of findings' tables for the five comparisons. Most of the secondary outcomes in this review were not reported in the included RCTs. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Anaesthetic depth monitors may have similar effects to standard clinical and electrical monitoring on the risk of awareness during surgery. In older studies comparing anaesthetics in a smaller portion of the patient sample, wakefulness occurred more frequently than awareness. Use of etomidate and ketamine lowered the risk of wakefulness compared to thiopental. Benzodiazepines compared to thiopental and ketamine, or higher doses of inhaled anaesthetics versus lower doses, reduced the risk of awareness. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Methods to prevent people waking during surgery and remembering surgical events KEY QUESTION: We reviewed the evidence about the use of devices to adjust the amount of drugs given during anaesthesia to prevent premature waking up. We also reviewed the evidence about the choice of drugs used during anaesthesia to prevent premature waking up. BACKGROUND: Anaesthesia is the use of drugs to render a patient unconscious for painful procedures and surgery. Being anaesthetized is not the same as being asleep. Someone sleeping may be easily awakened. Someone anaesthetized should only be allowed to awake when the surgery or procedure is completed. A very small percentage of patients may wake up during anaesthesia and surgery; this is called wakefulness. Patients usually do not remember being awake after emerging from anaesthesia. However, an even smaller percentage of patients do remember or recall events from surgery afterwards. This memory is called an awareness event. If that memory is distressing, it can impair the individual's quality of life. New devices known as anaesthetic depth monitors are being used to monitor the patient's brainwave response to anaesthetic drugs. Anaesthetic depth monitors have been compared to the usual clinical observations (e.g. fast heart rate, tearing, movement, etc.) during surgery to adjust the amount of drugs given and reduce the risk of wakefulness and awareness. Anaesthetic drugs have many different effects on brain function. Some drugs are used alone as the sole anaesthetic. Other drugs have insufficient effect to be used as a sole anaesthetic, but are used in combination with more powerful drugs. Drugs may have different risks of the patient waking up prematurely. SEARCH DATE: The evidence is current to April 2016. STUDY CHARACTERISTICS: We found 160 randomized controlled trials with 54,109 participants. Eighteen studies with 36,034 participants contributed evidence about devices and drugs to prevent premature waking up during surgery. Nine studies compared anaesthetic depth monitoring versus other methods to adjust drugs. Nine studies compared different drugs. There are 10 studies awaiting classification, which we will process when we update the review. KEY RESULTS: In the largest studies of anaesthetic depth monitors (five studies with 31,181 participants) there were 152 participants with possible or definite awareness (recall of surgery events after surgery). The use of anaesthetic depth monitors to adjust drugs during anaesthesia may have similar effects on the risk of awareness when compared with standard clinical and electrical monitoring. Wakefulness is reduced by ketamine and etomidate compared to thiopental. Benzodiazepines reduces awareness compared to thiopental, ketamine, and placebo. Also higher doses of inhaled anaesthetics versus lower doses reduced the risk of awareness. QUALITY OF EVIDENCE: The quality of the evidence was low or very low because the studies the results were not similar across studies, and there were not enough data.

Notes

Files

Files (1.5 MB)

Name Size Download all
md5:cc437298f327a698caaf7ff7da01cf32
28.6 kB Download
md5:1fcfb2934ce9bc739806bf22594dbcdf
17.1 kB Download
md5:014e541d47c11bbddf3e58a474480a57
28.9 kB Download
md5:0ac1cde7730dc3c2aee4566cce4aaf79
33.8 kB Download
md5:82fa0f8c05951503d1f04c01ed08338c
297.9 kB Download
md5:5fac49edfe8637c32bc96e58daf7b906
15.6 kB Download
md5:3d8a580adf37c407351430dec58e81a0
74.2 kB Download
md5:5f13b333ed246597cf8f3544fd21d0cd
17.0 kB Download
md5:2acc421e0c249bdaaa9821608e0f72a8
91.1 kB Download
md5:3fad1d11379a5d0a23af78a9a1e1af97
43.5 kB Download
md5:4bbc6f81e8b93ed46368ada15468f7b6
9.8 kB Download
md5:ee8607a2164bc0d7af80f8e8eba64130
35.3 kB Download
md5:1730d0bfc95ef4fb4dde334793d56ad1
43.3 kB Download
md5:833adeb6aa2f5718a1a46dc028a1e53c
42.2 kB Download
md5:0accade488decc8e3298f3db8a2fb928
29.2 kB Download
md5:04452a3b8893fa67d99b0a0d80ba99ec
89.5 kB Download
md5:b45dea7814c548f37614533202438dec
45.6 kB Download
md5:180fb782062b1fcae74c50da81ebc306
41.4 kB Download
md5:8083441c088c970c7174fb2ab11abce8
16.9 kB Download
md5:e9181d9ca17518b64003609a1558b453
16.5 kB Download
md5:48679829147dac4d05b559d767598e8e
13.1 kB Download
md5:c9a30a0493df69e95d21d24f79642a2c
18.7 kB Download
md5:f2b9541b689279ea73b6ede5ab59d36f
195.0 kB Download
md5:d864f4e27974344ffed50545b61636d9
14.3 kB Download
md5:c9d259a873d67e3453705fbe56d42873
40.2 kB Download
md5:25fb1eb7769d89e215677631525c0987
110.2 kB Download
md5:b625600f3e60f89018b32bcdae354414
11.3 kB Download
md5:099040b1d8d6ee6b42f942ee95082506
67.3 kB Download

Additional details

Related works