Correlation of Sedline-generated variables and clinical signs with anaesthetic depth in experimental pigs receiving propofol

PLoS One. 2022 Sep 29;17(9):e0275484. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0275484. eCollection 2022.

Abstract

Most of currently available electroencephalographic (EEG)-based tools to assess depth of anaesthesia have not been studied or have been judged unreliable in pigs. Our primary aim was to investigate the dose-effect relationship between increasing propofol dose and variables generated by the EEG-based depth of anaesthesia monitor Sedline in pigs. A secondary aim was to compare the anaesthetic doses with clinical outcomes commonly used to assess depth of anaesthesia in this species. Sixteen juvenile pigs were included. Propofol infusion was administered at 10 mg kg-1 h-1, increased by 10 mg kg-1 h-1 every 15 minutes, and stopped when an EEG Suppression ratio >80% was reached. Patient state index, suppression ratio, left and right spectral edge frequency 95%, and outcomes from commonly used clinical methods to assess depth of anaesthesia in pigs were recorded. The best pharmacodynamic model was assessed for Patient state index, suppression ratio, left and right spectral edge frequency 95% in response to propofol administration. The decrease of Patient state index best fitted to an inhibitory double-sigmoid model (including a plateau phase). The increase of suppression ratio fitted a typical sigmoid Emax model. No relevant relationship could be identified between spectral edge frequency 95% values and propofol administration. A large variability in clinical outcomes was observed among pigs, such that they did not provide a reliable evaluation of propofol dose. The relationship between propofol dose and Patient state index/suppression ratio described in the present study can be used for prediction in future investigations. The evaluation of depth of anaesthesia based on common clinical outcomes was not reliable.

Publication types

  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Anesthesia*
  • Anesthesiology*
  • Anesthetics*
  • Animals
  • Electroencephalography
  • Propofol* / pharmacology
  • Seizures
  • Swine

Substances

  • Anesthetics
  • Propofol

Grants and funding

This work was supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (Spark) [https://www.snf.ch/en. Grant number CRSK-3_190926/1. Main grant applicant: OL] and by the Berne University Research Foundation and BEKB Förderfonds [https://forschungsstiftung.ch/. Grant number 22/2020. Main grant applicant: OL]. The funder had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. There was no additional external funding received for this study.