Skip Navigation


BJA Advance Access originally published online on December 9, 2008
British Journal of Anaesthesia 2009 102(2):244-250; doi:10.1093/bja/aen351
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
102/2/244    most recent
aen351v1
Right arrow E-Letters: Submit a response to the article
Right arrow E-letters: View responses
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by von Dincklage, F.
Right arrow Articles by Baars, J. H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by von Dincklage, F.
Right arrow Articles by Baars, J. H.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?


© The Board of Management and Trustees of the British Journal of Anaesthesia 2008. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Comparison of the nociceptive flexion reflex threshold and the bispectral index as monitors of movement responses to noxious stimuli under propofol mono-anaesthesia

F. von Dincklage*, K. Send, M. Hackbarth, B. Rehberg and J. H. Baars

Charité—Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Klinik für Anästhesiologie und operative Intensivmedizin, Campus Mitte, Charitéplatz 1, 10117 Berlin, Germany

* Corresponding author. E-mail: falk.von-dincklage{at}charite.de

Background: Prediction of movement responses to noxious stimuli during anaesthesia is of clinical importance. Susceptibility of a parameter of immobility to both hypnotic and analgesic influences could pose an advantage. Here, nociceptive reflexes might be useful, but data regarding the suppression by hypnotic substances are scarce. Therefore, we compared the prediction of movement responses by the RIII reflex threshold and the bispectral index (BIS) during propofol mono-anaesthesia.

Methods: Fifteen male volunteers were included. Propofol effect compartment concentration was increased every 15 min in steps of 1 µg ml–1 (max 7 µg ml–1). Every 5 min, the reactions to trapezius squeezes and 30 s tetanic stimulations (80 mA) of the right ulnar nerve were tested. The RIII reflex threshold was estimated continuously using an automated threshold tracking system that analyses the nociceptive RIII response at the left biceps femoris muscle to stimulation of the left sural nerve.

Results: Twelve subjects completed the study. RIII threshold values were normalized by subtraction of the first threshold that was estimated after the subject’s loss of consciousness. The population prediction probability PK amounted to 0.84 for the RIII threshold and to 0.86 for the BIS (difference not significant).

Conclusions: Movement responses to noxious stimuli under propofol can be predicted by the RIII threshold with a comparable accuracy as the BIS. Therefore, the RIII threshold seems to be influenced by hypnotic effects. Since susceptibility of the RIII threshold to analgesic influences is well established, an advantage for the RIII threshold in the prediction of motor responses could be expected when analgesic substances are used in addition to propofol.

Keywords: anaesthetics i.v., propofol; depth of anaesthesia; electroencephalography; spinal cord, reflexes


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


E-letters:

Read all E-letters

Bispectral Index - smoothing interval
ARUN NATARAJAN, et al.
British Journal of Anaesthesia, 1 Apr 2009 [Full text]
Re: Bispectral Index - smoothing interval
Falk von Dincklage
British Journal of Anaesthesia, 7 Apr 2009 [Full text]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.