Using the nociception level index to compare the intraoperative antinociceptive effect of propofol and sevoflurane during clinical and experimental noxious stimulus in patients under general anesthesia.

STUDY: Propofol and sevoflurane are two anesthetic agents widely used to induce and maintain general anesthesia (GA). Their intrinsic antinociceptive properties remain unclear and are still debated. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether propofol presents stronger antinociceptive properties than sevoflurane using intraoperative clinical and experimental noxious stimulations and evaluating postoperative pain outcomes. DESIGN: A prospective randomized monocentric trial. SETTING: Perioperative care. PATIENTS: 60 adult patients with ASA status I to III who underwent elective abdominal laparoscopic surgery under GA were randomized either in propofol or sevoflurane group to induce and maintain GA. INTERVENTIONS: We used clinical and experimental noxious stimulations (intubation, tetanic stimulation) to assess the antinociceptive properties of propofol and sevoflurane in patients under GA and monitored using the NOL index, BIS index, heart rate, and mean arterial blood pressure. MEASUREMENTS: We measured the difference in the NOL index alterations after intubation and tetanic stimulation during either intravenous anesthesia (propofol) or inhaled anesthesia (sevoflurane). We also intraoperatively measured the NOL index and remifentanil consumption and recorded postoperative pain scores and opioid consumption in the post-anesthesia care unit. Intraoperative management was standardized by targeting similar values of depth of anesthesia (BIS index), hemodynamic (HR and MAP), NOL index values (below the threshold of 20), same multimodal analgesia and type of surgery. MAIN RESULTS: We found the antinociceptive properties of propofol and sevoflurane similar. The only minor difference was after tetanic stimulation: the delta NOL was higher in the sevoflurane group (39 ± 13 for the propofol group versus 47 ± 15 for sevoflurane; P = 0.04). Intraoperative and postoperative pain outcomes and opioid consumption were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a precise intraoperative experimental and clinical protocol using the NOL index, propofol does not provide a higher level of antinociception during anesthesia or analgesia after surgery when compared to sevoflurane. Anesthesiologists may prefer propofol over sevoflurane to reduce PONV or anesthesia-related pollution, but not for superior antinociceptive properties.

Prediction of acute postoperative pain based on intraoperative nociception level (NOL) index values: the impact of machine learning-based analysis.

The relationship between intraoperative nociception and acute postoperative pain is still not well established. The nociception level (NOL) Index (Medasense, Ramat Gan, Israel) uses a multiparametric approach to provide a 0-100 nociception score. The objective of the ancillary analysis of the NOLGYN study was to evaluate the ability of a machine-learning aglorithm to predict moderate to severe acute postoperative pain based on intraoperative NOL values. Our study uses the data from the NOLGYN study, a randomized controlled trial that evaluated the impact of NOL-guided intraoperative administration of fentanyl on overall fentanyl consumption compared to standard of care. Seventy patients (ASA class I-III, aged 18-75 years) scheduled for gynecological laparoscopic surgery were enrolled. Variables included baseline demographics, NOL reaction to incision or intubation, median NOL during surgery, NOL time-weighted average (TWA) above or under manufacturers' recommended thresholds (10-25), and percentage of surgical time spent with NOL > 25 or < 10. We evaluated different machine learning algorithms to predict postoperative pain. Performance was assessed using cross-validated area under the ROC curve (CV-AUC). Of the 66 patients analyzed, 42 (63.6%) experienced moderate to severe pain. NOL post-intubation (42.8 (31.8-50.6) vs. 34.8 (25.6-41.3), p = 0.05), median NOL during surgery (13 (11-15) vs. 11 (8-13), p = 0.027), percentage of surgical time spent with NOL > 25 (23% (18-18) vs. 20% (15-24), p = 0.036), NOL TWA < 10 (2.54 (2.1-3.0) vs. 2.86 (2.48-3.62), p = 0.044) and percentage of surgical time spent with NOL < 10 (41% (36-47) vs. 47% (40-55), p = 0.022) were associated with moderate to severe PACU pain. Corresponding ROC AUC for the prediction of moderate to severe PACU pain were 0.65 [0.51-0.79], 0.66 [0.52-0.81], 0.66 [0.52-0.79], 0.65 [0.51-0.79] and 0.67 [0.53-0.81]. Penalized logistic regression achieved the best performance with a 0.753 (0.718-0.788) CV-AUC. Our results, even if limited by the small number of patients, suggest that acute postoperative pain is better predicted by a multivariate machine-learning algorithm rather than individual intraoperative nociception variables. Further larger multicentric trials are highly recommended to better understand the relationship between intraoperative nociception and acute postoperative pain.Trial registration Registered on ClinicalTrials.gov in October 2018 (NCT03776838).

Identification of the intraoperative antinociceptive effect of intravenous fentanyl using the Nociception Level (NOL) index versus clinical parameters in patients undergoing gynecological laparoscopic surgery: A secondary analysis of the NOLGYN study.

BACKGROUND: While we typically assess nociception balance during general anesthesia through clinical parameters such as heart rate (HR) and mean arterial pressure (MAP) variation, these parameters are not specific to nociception. OBJECTIVE: We hypothesized that using the Nociception Level (NOL) index to assess the analgesic effect of a fentanyl bolus would be superior to standard clinical parameters. DESIGN: Ancillary study of the NOLGYN study, a randomized controlled trial comparing intraoperative NOL-guided administration of fentanyl (NOL group) versus standardized care (SC group). SETTING: University hospital in Montréal, Canada between November 2018, and December 2019. PATIENTS: Women undergoing gynecological laparoscopic surgery. INTERVENTION: In our evaluation of intraoperative nociception, we analyzed the analgesic effect of fentanyl using three parameters: MAP, HR, and the Nociception Level (NOL) index. All fentanyl injection events were extracted from the database. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The primary endpoint was the difference between values before and after each injection. RESULTS: The median of the NOL index before fentanyl injection was 30.5 (IQR 19.4 to 40.7) versus 18.9 (IQR 11.5 to 27.4) after (P < 0.001). The median of MAP was 106.4 mmHg (IQR 99.9 to 113.4) before injection versus 103.2 mmHg (IQR 97.5-110.7) after (P < 0.001). The median of HR before injection was 74.2 (IQR 64.2-83.8) versus 72.4 (IQR 63.4-81.3) after (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The NOL index, HR, and MAP all statistically discriminated the analgesic effect of fentanyl but only the NOL index proved clinically relevant to identify the analgesic effect of one fentanyl injection. TRIAL REGISTRATION: www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov (NCT03776838) registered in October 2018.

Effect of combined intraoperative use of the Nociception Level (NOL) and bispectral (BIS) indexes on desflurane administration.

BACKGROUND: Currently, nociception monitors are not part of standard anaesthesia care. We investigated whether combined intraoperative nociception (NOL index) and anaesthesia (BIS index) monitoring during general anaesthesia would reduce anaesthetics consumption and enhance intraoperative safety and postoperative recovery when compared to standard of care monitoring (SOC). METHODS: In this randomised study, we included 60 patients undergoing colonic surgery under desflurane/remifentanil anaesthesia and epidural analgesia. Patients received either standard monitoring or combined BIS + NOL index monitoring. In the monitored group, remifentanil infusion was titrated to achieve a NOL index below 20. Desflurane was adjusted to BIS values (45-55). In the SOC group, remifentanil and desflurane were titrated on vital signs and MAC. The primary outcome was intraoperative desflurane consumption. RESULTS: Fifty-five patients were analysed. Desflurane administration was reduced in the monitored group from 0.25 ± 0.05 to 0.20 ± 0.06 mL kg-1 h-1 (p < 0.001). The cumulative time with a BIS under 40 was significantly higher in the SOC group with a median time of 12.6 min (95% CI: 0.6-80.0) versus 2.0 min (95% CI: 0.3-5.83) (p = 0.023). Time for extubation was significantly shorter in the monitored group: 4.4 min (95% CI: 2.4-4.9) versus 6.28 min (95% IC: 5.0-8.2) (p = 0.003). We observed no differences in remifentanil or phenylephrine requirements during anaesthesia or in postoperative outcome measures, such as postoperative pain, opioid consumption, neurocognitive recovery. CONCLUSION: Combined intraoperative monitoring of anaesthesia and nociception during colonic surgery resulted in less desflurane consumption and quicker extubation time compared to standard clinical care monitoring.

Intrapandemic regional anesthesia as practice: a historical cohort study in patients undergoing breast cancer surgery.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has markedly increased delays in oncologic surgeries because of the virus's impact on traditional anesthetic management. Novel protocols, developed to protect patients and medical professionals, have altered the ways and instances in which general anesthesia (GA) can be safely performed. To reduce virus exposure related to aerosol-generating procedures, it is now recommended to avoid GA when feasible and promote regional anesthesia instead. At our institution, we observed faster postoperative recovery in patients who received paravertebral blocks for breast cancer surgery instead of GA. This led us to formally evaluate whether regional anesthesia instead of GA helped improve time to hospital discharge. METHODS: We conducted a historical cohort study to retrospectively analyze two cohorts of patients: prepandemic vs intrapandemic. We obtained approval from our institutional ethics committee to review files of consecutive patients who underwent breast cancer surgery between 30 March 2020 and 30 June 2020 (intrapandemic group; N = 106) and consecutive patients-moving backwards-from 28 February 2020 to 6 December 2019 (prepandemic group; N = 104). The primary outcome was the length of time between the end of surgery to readiness for hospital discharge. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), the need for postoperative analgesia, and the duration of stay in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU). RESULTS: The median [interquartile range (IQR)] time to readiness for hospital discharge was significantly lower in patients who received paravertebral blocks for breast cancer surgery compared with GA (intrapandemic group, 119 [99-170] min vs prepandemic group, 191 [164-234] min; P < 0.001) as was the incidence of PONV (3% vs 11%; P = 0.03) and median [IQR] PACU durations of stay (29 [21-39] min vs 46 [37-63] min; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who received paravertebral blocks for breast cancer surgery in the intrapandemic group were ready for hospital discharge earlier, spent less time in the PACU, and experienced less PONV than those who received GA in the prepandemic group. With growing surgical wait times, concerns related to aerosol-generating procedures, and recommendations to avoid GA when feasible, paravertebral blocks as the principal anesthetic modality for breast cancer surgery offered benefits for patients and medical teams.

RéSUMé: CONTEXTE: La pandémie de COVID-19 a considérablement augmenté les retards dans les chirurgies oncologiques en raison de l'impact du virus sur la prise en charge anesthésique traditionnelle. De nouveaux protocoles, mis au point pour protéger les patients et les professionnels de la santé, ont modifié les façons et les cas dans lesquels une anesthésie générale (AG) peut être réalisée en toute sécurité. Afin de réduire l'exposition au virus liée aux interventions génératrices d'aérosols, il est maintenant recommandé d'éviter l'AG lorsque possible et de privilégier l'anesthésie régionale. Dans notre établissement, nous avons observé une récupération postopératoire plus rapide chez les patientes ayant reçu des blocs paravertébraux pour une chirurgie de cancer du sein au lieu d'une AG. Cela nous a menés à évaluer de façon formelle si l'anesthésie régionale au lieu de l'AG avait contribué à réduire les délais jusqu'au congé de l'hôpital. MéTHODE: Nous avons réalisé une étude de cohorte historique afin d'analyser rétrospectivement deux cohortes de patientes : prépandémie vs intrapandémie. Nous avons obtenu l'approbation de notre comité d'éthique institutionnel pour examiner les dossiers de patientes consécutives ayant bénéficié d'une chirurgie de cancer du sein entre le 30 mars 2020 et le 30 juin 2020 (groupe intrapandémie; n = 106) et des patientes consécutives ­ en reculant ­ du 28 février 2020 au 6 décembre 2019 (groupe prépandémie; n = 104). Le critère d'évaluation principal était le délai entre la fin de la chirurgie et le moment où les patientes étaient prêtes à recevoir leur congé de l'hôpital. Les critères d'évaluation secondaires comprenaient l'incidence de nausées et vomissements postopératoires (NVPO), la nécessité d'une analgésie postopératoire et la durée de séjour en salle de réveil (SDR). RéSULTATS: Le délai médian [écart interquartile (ÉIQ)] jusqu'à la disposition au congé de l'hôpital était significativement plus court chez les patientes ayant reçu des blocs paravertébraux pour une chirurgie de cancer du sein plutôt qu'une AG (groupe intrapandémie, 119 [99-170] min vs groupe prépandémie, 191 [164­234] min; P < 0,001), tout comme l'incidence de NVPO (3 % vs 11 %; P = 0,03) et les durées médianes [ÉIQ] de séjour en salle de réveil (29 [21­39] min vs 46 [37­63] min; P < 0,001). CONCLUSION: Les patientes qui ont reçu des blocs paravertébraux pour une chirurgie de cancer du sein dans le groupe intrapandémie étaient prêtes à quitter l'hôpital plus tôt, ont passé moins de temps en salle de réveil et ont ressenti moins de NVPO que celles qui ont reçu une AG dans le groupe prépandémie. Avec des temps d'attente pour accès à la chirurgie de plus en plus longs, des préoccupations liées aux interventions génératrices d'aérosols et les recommandations d'éviter l'AG lorsque possible, les blocs paravertébraux ont offert des avantages aux patientes et aux équipes médicales en tant que principale modalité anesthésique pour la chirurgie de cancer du sein.

Impact of chronic treatment by ß1-adrenergic antagonists on Nociceptive-Level (NOL) index variation after a standardized noxious stimulus under general anesthesia: a cohort study.

During the perioperative period, nociception control is certainly one of the anesthesiologist's main objectives when assuming care of a patient. There exists some literature demonstrating that the nociceptive stimuli experienced during surgery are responsible for peripheral and central sensitization phenomena, which can in turn lead to persistent postsurgical pain. An individualized approach to the evaluation and treatment of perioperative nociception is beneficial in order to avoid the sensitization phenomena that leads to prolonged postoperative pain and to minimize the consumption of opiates and their adverse effects. In terms of sensitivity, specificity, and positive/negative predictive values when compared to heart rate (HR) and mean arterial pressure (MAP), recent literature has shown that the NOL variation (ΔNOL) is the best index to distinguish noxious from non-noxious stimuli. Chronic treatment with ß1-adrenergic antagonists may constitute a limitation to the use of the NOL index. ß1-adrenergic antagonists induce a depressive action on the heart rate, which results in a limitation of its variability after a noxious stimulus. Since heart rate and heart rate variability are two parameters integrated into the NOL index, the validity of the NOL index in a population of patients receiving ß1-adrenergic antagonists has not yet been determined. Our study sought to explore the NOL index, the BIS, and the heart rate variation in a group of patients under chronic treatment with ß1-adrenergic antagonists submitted to standardized noxious stimulus under general anesthesia. We then compared those results to a control group of patients from our previous study (CJA group) that received no ß1-adrenergic antagonist chronic treatment. The patients in this study were subjected to a standardized anesthetic protocol from induction up to 3 min after a standardized tetanic stimulus to the ulnar nerve at a frequency of 100 Hz and an amperage of 70 mA, for a duration of 30 s. Data were electronically recorded to obtain NOL, BIS, and heart rate values every 5 s for the duration of the protocol. The NOL maximal mean value reached after noxious stimulation was not different between our two cohorts (CJA: 30(14) versus BETANOL: 36(14) (p = 0.12)). There was no statistically significant difference between our cohorts in regards of the NOL AUC representing the variation of the NOL over a 180 s period (CJA: 595(356) versus BETANOL: 634(301) (p = 0.30)). However, a repeated measurement ANCOVA identified slight statistically significant differences between our cohorts in the peak of variation of the NOL index between 20 and 65 s after noxious stimulation, the NOL index of the cohort of beta-blocked patients being higher than the CJA patients. Moreover, the time to reach the maximum value was not different (CJA: 73(37) versus BETANOL: 63(41) (p = 0.35)). NOL sensitivity and specificity to detect a noxious stimulus under general anesthesia were similar in patients taking beta-blockers or not, and were better than those of heart rate and Bispectral index (AUC NOL 0.97, CI(0.92-1), versus AUC BIS 0.78, CI(0.64-0.89) and AUC HR 0.66, CI(0.5-0.8)). In conclusion, the NOL index is a reliable monitor to assess nociception in a population of patients under chronic beta-blocker therapy. Patients under such therapy achieve similar maximal NOL values over a 180 s period after a standardized noxious stimulus and the NOL variation over time, represented by the AUC is not significantly different from a cohort of non-beta-blocked patients. Whether the patient takes beta-blockers or not, sensitivity of the NOL index is greater than that seen for BIS index or heart rate to detect an experimental noxious stimulus under general anesthesia.

"Impact of Nociception Level (NOL) index intraoperative guidance of fentanyl administration on opioid consumption, postoperative pain scores and recovery in patients undergoing gynecological laparoscopic surgery. A randomized controlled trial".

STUDY OBJECTIVE: The Nociception Level (NOL) index uses a multiparametric approach to measure the balance between sympathetic and parasympathetic systems activity. Recently, a strong correlation between the NOL index response to nociceptive stimuli and the level of opioid analgesia during surgery was reported. Others observed that intraoperative doses of remifentanil and sufentanil were reduced when the NOL index was used. So far, no study has evaluated the impact of NOL-guided fentanyl antinociception in laparoscopic gynecological surgery. The primary hypothesis of this present study was to evaluate whether intraoperative NOL-guided fentanyl administration would reduce intra-operative opioid consumption. Secondary hypotheses were to assess whether this would lead to lower postoperative opioid consumption and pain scores, as well as improved postoperative outcomes. SETTING: University hospital, operating room. PATIENTS: 70 adult patients, ASA 1-3, scheduled for total laparoscopic hysterectomy. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized into 2 groups: SOC (standardization of care) and NOL (using the NOL index to guide the administration of fentanyl). The depth of anesthesia was monitored with BIS™. Intraoperative fentanyl boluses were administered based on heart rate and mean arterial pressure variations in the SOC group, and NOL index for the NOL group. MEASUREMENTS: Fentanyl total intraoperative dose administered was collected and also averaged per hour. Pain scores and hydromorphone consumption were assessed in the post-anesthesia care unit and up to 24 h. MAIN RESULTS: Sixty-six patients completed the study, 33 in each group. Total intraoperative fentanyl administration was not different between the two groups (217 (70) in the NOL group vs 280 (210) in the SOC group (P = 0.11)). Nevertheless, intraoperative fentanyl administration per hour was reduced by 25% in the NOL-guided group compared to the SOC group: 81 (24) vs 108 (66) µg.h-1, respectively (P = 0.03). Hydromorphone consumption and pain scores in the post-anesthesia care unit and at 24 h were not significantly different between the two groups. CONCLUSION: NOL-guided analgesia allowed for a 22% reduction of the total amount of intraoperative fentanyl which was not significant. Nevertheless, results reported a significant reduction by 25% in the doses of fentanyl averaged per hour of surgery and administered in the NOL-guided group compared with the standardized practice in laparoscopic gynecological surgery. The pain measured postoperatively was similar in the two groups while the average postoperative consumption of opioids to achieve the same level of pain scores in post-anesthesia care unit and at 24 h was not significantly reduced. Further larger multicenter studies centered towards postoperative outcomes are needed.

The impact of bolus versus continuous infusion of intravenous ketamine on bispectral index variations and desflurane administration during major surgery: The KETABIS study.

BACKGROUND: Although ketamine, a NMDA-receptor antagonist, tends to increase the bispectral index (BIS), it remains a widely used analgesic whenever administered in low doses during major surgery. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare the impact of intravenous ketamine (given either as a continuous infusion or as a bolus) on BIS and to compare desflurane administration and postoperative outcomes between the groups. DESIGN: Prospective, randomised, parallel-group, open-label study. SETTING: University hospital, operating room. PARTICIPANTS: Fifty patients, scheduled for major abdominal surgery. INTERVENTIONS AND MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: Patients were randomised into two groups: ketamine by intravenous continuous infusion - group (KI) and ketamine by i.v. bolus - group (KB). In the KI group, ketamine at a rate of 0.25 mg kg-1 h-1 was commenced at skin incision (T0) and maintained at this rate for the duration of surgery. In group KB, a ketamine bolus of 0.25 mg kg-1was administered at T0 and repeated every hour. The difference in BIS between the groups was compared from T0 onwards. The amount of desflurane administered to keep BIS within the usual recommended range (40-60) was compared, as were the doses of phenylephrine and remifentanil. Postoperative pain and recovery outcomes were also assessed. RESULTS: After T0, the BIS increased significantly from baseline in group KB compared with group KI: the rise in BIS was 20 ±â€Š8 vs. 11 ±â€Š6, respectively (P = 0.0001). The between-group mean difference (95% confidence interval (CI), was 9 (5 to 13). In group KB, desflurane administration significantly increased for the first 15 min after T0: 6.3 ±â€Š1.8 vs. 3.8 ±â€Š1.3 ml (P < 0.0001) with a mean intergroup group difference (95% CI) of 2.4 (1.5 to 3.4) ml. There was no difference in desflurane administration when considering the full hour from T0 to T60 min: 16 ±â€Š9 vs. 15 ±â€Š5 ml (P = 0.63) with a mean intergroup difference (95% CI) of 1 (-3 to 5) ml. After surgery, pain scores, opioid consumption, incidence of nausea and vomiting and recovery scores were similar between groups. CONCLUSION: Compared with a continuous ketamine infusion, a ketamine bolus significantly increased the BIS after T0. In order to keep the BIS below 60, significantly more desflurane was administered from T0 to T15 min in group KB. To prevent such higher desflurane administration and its related atmospheric pollution, our results suggest administering intra-operative intravenous ketamine as an infusion rather than a bolus. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov registration identifier: NCT03781635.

Effect of electroencephalography-guided anesthesia on neurocognitive disorders in elderly patients undergoing major non-cardiac surgery: A trial protocol The POEGEA trial (POncd Elderly GEneral Anesthesia).

INTRODUCTION: The number of elderly patients undergoing major surgery is rapidly increasing. They are particularly at risk of developing postoperative neurocognitive disorders (NCD). Earlier studies suggested that processed electroencephalographic (EEG) monitors may reduce the incidence of postoperative NCD. However, none of these studies controlled for intraoperative nociception levels or personalized blood pressure targets. Their results remain unclear if the reduction in the incidence of postoperative NCD relates to avoidance of any electroencephalographic pattern suggesting excessive anesthesia depth. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this trial is to investigate-in patients ≥ 70 years old undergoing major non-cardiac surgery-the effect of EEG-guided anesthesia on postoperative NCD while controlling for intraoperative nociception, personalized blood pressure targets, and using detailed information provided by the EEG monitor (including burst suppression ratio, density spectral array, and raw EEG waveform). MATERIAL AND METHODS: This prospective, randomized, controlled trial will be conducted in a single Canadian university hospital. Patients ≥ 70 years old undergoing elective major non-cardiac surgery will be included in the trial. The administration of sevoflurane will be adjusted to maintain a BIS index value between 40 and 60, to keep a Suppression Ratio (SR) at 0%, to keep a direct EEG display without any suppression time and a spectrogram with most of the EEG wave frequency within the alpha, theta, and delta frequencies in the EEG-guided group. In the control group, sevoflurane will be administered to achieve an age-adjusted minimum alveolar concentration of [0.8-1.2]. In both groups, a nociception monitor will guide intraoperative opioid administration, individual blood pressure targets will be used, and cerebral oximetry used to tailor intraoperative hemodynamic management. The primary endpoint will be the incidence of NCD at postoperative day 1, as evaluated by the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). Secondary endpoints will include the incidence of postoperative NCD at different time points and the evaluation of cognitive trajectories up to 90 days after surgery among EEG-guided and control groups. STUDY REGISTRATION: NCT04825847 on ClinicalTrials.gov.

Face transplantation: anesthesia and other organizational considerations.

In 2005, the first facial vascularized composite allotransplant was performed in France. In May 2018, our team at Maisonneuve-Rosemont Hospital, Montreal, Quebec, had the privilege to participate in the first facial transplant in Canada. Interdisciplinary collaboration, coordination, and communication formed the cornerstone of this medical undertaking and, ultimately, its success. This report details the anesthetic and organizational considerations of our experience.

RéSUMé: En 2005, la première allogreffe de tissu composite vascularisée faciale était réalisée en France. En mai 2018, notre équipe à l'Hôpital Maisonneuve-Rosemont, à Montréal, au Québec, a eu le privilège de participer à la première greffe faciale au Canada. La collaboration, la coordination et la communication interdisciplinaires ont constitué les pierres angulaires de ce projet médical et, ultimement, de son succès. Ce compte-rendu détaille les considérations anesthésiques et organisationnelles de notre expérience.

A randomized controlled trial comparing nociception level (NOL) index, blood pressure, and heart rate responses to direct laryngoscopy versus videolaryngoscopy for intubation: the NOLint project.

PURPOSE: The effect of direct laryngoscopy using a Macintosh blade (MAC) vs GlideScope™ videolaryngoscopy using a Spectrum LoPro blade (GVL) on nociceptive stimulation has not been quantitatively studied. This study used the new nociception level (NOL) index to compare the nociceptive response induced by GVL or MAC during laryngoscopy with or without intubation. METHODS: Patients underwent two laryngoscopies at four-minute intervals (L1, L2), one with GVL and the other with MAC (first randomization). A third laryngoscopy (L3) followed by tracheal intubation was performed four minutes after L2 (GVL or MAC, second randomization). Nociception was quantitatively assessed by NOL and standard hemodynamic parameters (heart rate [HR] and mean arterial pressure). For the crossover design, blade comparisons accounted for sequence and blade type. A possible carryover effect between laryngoscopies was assessed. RESULTS: In the 50 patients randomized, there was no carryover effect from one laryngoscopy to the next for all analyzed parameters. Nociception level index peak values were higher with MAC than GVL. Analysis of ΔNOL showed a lower nociceptive response with GVL for L1+L2 combined. Mean peak NOL values were significantly higher after L3+intubation than after L1+L2, for both GVL and MAC groups. Analysis of ΔHR values did not show a significant difference between GVL and MAC for any laryngoscopy. CONCLUSION: Laryngoscopy alone with GVL induces less nociception than with MAC. The NOL was more sensitive than HR at detecting nociceptive responses to MAC vs GVL. Additionally, and irrespective of which technique/blade was used, the combination of laryngoscopy + tracheal intubation produced a much greater nociceptive response than the laryngoscopy alone. TRIAL REGISTRATION: www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03277872); registered 29 August 2017.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: L'effet de la laryngoscopie directe avec une lame Macintosh (MAC) par rapport à la vidéolaryngoscopie à l'aide d'un GlideScope™ avec lame Spectrum LoPro (GVL) sur la stimulation nociceptive n'a pas été quantitativement étudié. Cette étude a utilisé le nouvel indice de niveau de nociception (NOL) pour comparer la réponse nociceptive induite par une laryngoscopie avec GVL ou MAC avec ou sans intubation. MéTHODE: Les patients ont subi deux laryngoscopies à des intervalles de quatre minutes (L1, L2), l'une par GVL et l'autre par MAC (première randomisation). Une troisième laryngoscopie (L3) suivie d'une intubation trachéale a été effectuée quatre minutes après L2 (GVL ou MAC, deuxième randomisation). La nociception a été quantitativement évaluée à l'aide de l'indice NOL, et les paramètres hémodynamiques standard (fréquence cardiaque [FC] et pression artérielle moyenne) ont été mesurés. Dans le volet croisé de l'étude, les comparaisons de lames ont tenu compte de la séquence et du type de lame. La possibilité d'un effet de persistance entre les laryngoscopies a été évaluée. RéSULTATS: Chez les 50 patients randomisés, il n'y a eu aucun effet de persistance d'une laryngoscopie à la suivante pour tous les paramètres analysés. Les valeurs maximales de l'indice de nociception étaient plus élevées avec les lames MAC qu'avec la vidéolaryngoscopie GVL. L'analyse de ΔNOL a montré une réponse nociceptive inférieure avec la vidéolaryngoscopie GVL pour L1+L2 combinés. Les valeurs maximales moyennes de NOL étaient significativement plus élevées après L3+intubation qu'après L1+L2, tant pour les groupes GVL que MAC. L'analyse des valeurs ΔFC n'a pas montré de différence significative entre les techniques GVL et MAC pour quelque laryngoscopie que ce soit. CONCLUSION: La laryngoscopie seule avec le GlideScope induit moins de nociception qu'avec une lame MAC. L'indice NOL était plus sensible que les FC pour détecter les réponses nociceptives à la laryngoscopie MAC vs GVL. En outre, et indépendamment de la technique/lame utilisée, la combinaison de laryngoscopie + intubation trachéale a produit une réponse nociceptive beaucoup plus importante que la laryngoscopie seule. ENREGISTREMENT DE L'éTUDE: www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03277872); enregistrée le 29 août 2017.

Assessing the antinociceptive effect of nitrous oxide to tetanic stimulation in anaesthetised patients with new intra-operative nociception monitors: An observational study.

BACKGROUND: Nitrous oxide (N2O) has been used since the 19th century for its analgesic, antinociceptive and anxiolytic effects during surgical procedures in awake and anaesthetised patients. However, quantification of noxious stimuli that occur under general anaesthesia is a constant challenge for anaesthesiologists, and recently two new indices have been developed to assess intra-operative nociception. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to quantify with new indices as well as with more classical clinical parameters the antinociceptive effect of N2O during general anaesthesia. DESIGN: Prospective, open label, patient-blinded, observational and descriptive trial. SETTING: Single-centre academic hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Forty American Society of Anesthesiologists' physical status 1 to 3 patients undergoing general anaesthesia for elective abdominal surgery via laparotomy were recruited. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: Intra-operative pain was assessed using a standardised electrical stimulation of the forearm (tetanic stimulation at 70 mA, 100 Hz for 30 s), at 0, 25 and 50% inhaled N2O/O2. Heart rate (HR), mean arterial blood pressure, bispectral index, the analgesia nociception index and the nociception level (NOL) index were used to evaluate intra-operative nociception before and after each standardised tetanic stimulation. RESULTS: There was a 16% reduction of the analgesia nociception index reaction, a 31% reduction of the NOL reaction and a 51% reduction of the HR reaction to a standardised electrical tetanic nociceptive stimulation during administration of 50% N2O. Administration of 50 or 25% inhaled N2O produced the same quality of antinociception based on HR and NOL index analyses. HR and the NOL index were the best parameters to identify the antinociceptive effect of intra-operatively administered N2O. CONCLUSION: In anaesthetised patients, our study demonstrated clinically significant antinociceptive properties of N2O. Our results showed that low concentrations of N2O (25%) are as effective as higher concentrations (50%) to achieve a significant antinociceptive effect. These findings may help decrease negative effects of using higher concentrations of N2O, including its side effects and its environmental pollution. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov registration identifier: NCT02701478.

Impact of intravenous phenylephrine bolus administration on the nociceptive level index (NOL).

Recently, the nociceptive level index (NOL) was shown to more specifically and sensitively detect noxious stimuli during anesthesia, in comparison to previous methods that relied on such parameters as heart rate (HR) and mean blood pressure (MAP). An ongoing study (NCT#03410485) evaluates the intraoperative combination of both NOL and bispectral (BIS) indices to improve quality of recovery after colorectal surgery. Our ethical committee (REB approval #CER15083) initially agreed on an interim analysis of the data from the first 30 patients. More specifically, this present report analyzed all the intravenous phenylephrine (PE) boluses administered during anesthesia as part of our study protocol to see whether they had a significant impact on NOL values as well as other parameters: HR, MAP, BIS index. For this trial, remifentanil and phenylephrine were given in both groups based on a specific algorithm. All study parameters were recorded electronically. Our analysis for the present specific outcome evaluated NOL index for 30 s before the intravenous PE bolus (1 µg kg-1) was given and until 5 min afterwards. The average NOL values after PE bolus, as well as MAP, HR and BIS indices, were recorded and analyzed. A total of 178 events of PE boluses were identified for 28 patients (two were excluded). Median baseline NOL was 3 (1.8-8.3) CI 95% 5.7-8.7; post-PE bolus: 5.3 (2.7-9.9) (95% CI 6.6-8.9; Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank test (WMPSRT), P = 0.0003). When analyzing delta NOL (difference between pre- and post-PE bolus in NOL values) for each patient, the median delta NOL was 2.9 (1.2-6.1) (95% CI 3.6-5.5) with 95% of the subjects keeping a delta NOL under 10. MAP and HR values showed expected significant variations after PE bolus: a slight increase and slight decrease, respectively. BIS index values did not change after PE bolus. Our present results demonstrate that intravenous phenylephrine boluses of 1 µg kg-1 had the expected impact on hemodynamic parameters: a significant but very slight increase in MAP and decrease in HR, which might lack clinical relevance. Our report also demonstrates that these same phenylephrine boluses induce a statistically significant increase of the NOL index which does not seem to have much of a clinical relevance for the novel NOL index used to monitor intraoperative nociception as well as for the more classical BIS index for depth of anesthesia. Nevertheless, doses of intravenous PE bolus used in the present study (1 µg kg-1) might be regarded as smaller than more conventional ones (100-200 µg per bolus). Further studies need to be done with the latter doses.

Impact of anesthesia management during cytoreductive surgery plus hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for the treatment of colorectal peritoneal carcinomatosis on intra- and postoperative outcomes: A systematic review protocol.

BACKGROUND: The impact of the anesthesia management during cytoreductive surgery (CRS) plus hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for the treatment of colorectal peritoneal carcinomatosis (CRPC) on postoperative outcomes might be of major importance in the process of postoperative recovery. It might have a significant impact on intra- and postoperative outcomes, but the evaluation of this impact seems to be under-reported. To investigate the question whether the anesthesia management was reported in previous studies done in this population and if it had any impact on postoperative outcomes, we propose to conduct a systematic review of the published literature. METHODS: For this review, we will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols (PRISMA-P). Medline/PubMed, Embase, EBM Reviews and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) will be systematically consulted for eligible studies without age, gender, ethnic, and language restriction. The goal of this review will be to assess whether anesthesia monitoring, dosing, and analgesia protocols were reported in this literature on this specific procedure and whether the impact of the anesthesia management on intraoperative safety and postoperative recovery was evaluated. RESULTS: The results of this systematic review will allow to answer the initial question: has the impact of anesthesia management on intraoperative safety and patients' postoperative recovery already been studied and reported in the past for this type of major surgery? And does anesthesia have any impact on postoperative outcomes? DISCUSSION: In the hypothesis that the impact of anesthesia management on patients' postoperative recovery has never been studied, or very little reported in previous studies in this type of major surgery, it would be justified to conduct a randomized controlled trial on this specific objective. REGISTRATION: This systematic review protocol was registered in PROSPERO, under the registration number CRD42019124162.

Correlation between incremental remifentanil doses and the Nociception Level (NOL) index response after intraoperative noxious stimuli.

BACKGROUND: The Pain Monitoring Device (PMD) monitor (Medasense Biometrics Ltd., Ramat Gan, Israel) uses the Nociception Level (NOL) index, a multiple parameter-derived index that has recently shown a good sensitivity and specificity to detect noxious stimuli. The aim of this study was to assess the latest version of the device (PMD200TM) on variations of the NOL response after standardized tetanic stimuli to study the correlation between remifentanil doses and NOL. METHODS: Data from 26 patients undergoing midline laparotomy and receiving a desflurane-remifentanil-based anesthetic coupled with low thoracic epidural analgesia were analyzed. A standardized tetanic stimulus was applied to the forearm of the patients at different remifentanil infusion rates. The primary aim was to evaluate the correlation between post-tetanic stimulation NOL values from the PMD200 and remifentanil doses. The NOL index variations after experimental and clinical stimuli were also compared with heart rate (HR), mean arterial pressure (MAP), and Bispectral Index™ (BIS). RESULTS: A correlation between post-tetanic stimulation NOL values and remifentanil doses was found (r = -0.56; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.70 to -0.44; P < 0.001). The NOL discriminated noxious from non-noxious states with the maximal Youden's index value of the NOL receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve showing a specificity of 88% (95% CI, 69.0 to 100) and sensitivity of 79.1% (95% CI, 56.2 to 95.5). The area under the NOL ROC curve (AUC, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.84 to 0.95) was significantly different from the other variables (P < 0.001 vs HR; P < 0.001 vs MAP; P < 0.001 vs BIS). CONCLUSIONS: The NOL value after noxious stimulus decreased with incremental remifentanil doses, showing a significant inverse correlation between the NOL index and opioid doses. The sensitivity and specificity of NOL to discriminate between noxious and non-noxious stimuli suggests its interesting potential as a monitor of nociception intensity during anesthesia. TRIAL REGISTRATION: www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02884778); 27 July, 2016.

Dexmedetomidine Versus Remifentanil for Monitored Anesthesia Care During Endobronchial Ultrasound-Guided Transbronchial Needle Aspiration: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: We hypothesized that, compared to remifentanil, dexmedetomidine used for endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) performed under monitored anesthesia care (MAC) in nonintubated patients would result in fewer episodes of major respiratory adverse events (number of episodes of bradypnea, apnea or desaturation) but no difference in satisfaction with perioperative conditions. METHODS: Sixty (American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I-III) patients scheduled to undergo EBUS-TBNA under MAC were randomized to receive either remifentanil (0.5 µg/kg IV bolus) in 10 minutes, followed by 0.05-0.25 µg/kg/min, or dexmedetomidine (0.4 µg/kg IV bolus) in 10 minutes, followed by 0.5-1.0 µg/kg/h. The primary outcome was the number of major respiratory adverse events (bradypnea, apnea, or hypoxia). The secondary outcomes included hemodynamic variables, discharge time from the postanesthesia care unit, endotracheal lidocaine use, patient's sedation using the Observer Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Scale, operative conditions, operator and patient satisfaction, pain, coughing, vocal cord mobility, recall, and nausea/vomiting. RESULTS: Dexmedetomidine produced significantly fewer episodes of major respiratory events (bradypnea, apnea, or desaturation), with 0 [0-0.5] episodes versus 2 [0-5] (median [interquartile range]) (P = .001), than did remifentanil. Fewer episodes of bradypnea or apnea (dexmedetomidine: 0 [0-0] versus remifentanil: 0 [0-0.5]; P = .031), and fewer episodes of desaturation (dexmedetomidine: 0 [0-0.5] versus remifentanil: 1 [0-4]; P = .039) were recorded in the dexmedetomidine group. The time needed for patients to meet postanesthesia care unit discharge criteria (Aldrete score: 9) after EBUS-TBNA was longer in the dexmedetomidine group (10 [3-37.5] minutes) versus the remifentanil group (3 [3-5] minutes) (P < .001). No differences were observed in the 2 groups for sedation depth (Observer Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Scale), endotracheal lidocaine use, operative conditions, operator and patient satisfaction, pain, coughing, vocal cord mobility, recall, and nausea/vomiting episodes. CONCLUSIONS: Dexmedetomidine resulted in fewer respiratory adverse events during EBUS-TBNA under MAC, when compared to remifentanil, with no difference in overall operative conditions. However, dexmedetomidine use was associated with delayed postoperative discharge.

Validation of the PMD100 and its NOL Index to detect nociception at different infusion regimen of remifentanil in patients under general anesthesia.

BACKGROUND: The NOL index is based on multiparametric analysis of heart rate (HR), skin conductance, wave plethysmography, and their time derivative. The aim of this study was to evaluate the NOL to detect standardized nociceptive stimuli with various remifentanil dosages under general anesthesia. METHODS: A prospective, observational study at a single center (NCT02602379) included 40 ASA I to III patients undergoing laparotomy under remifentanil-desflurane anesthesia with epidural analgesia. A tetanic stimulation was applied (forearm) at remifentanil intravenous (IV) infusion of 0.005, 0.05, 0.1, and 0.15 µg/kg/min. NOL and its variations were compared with other parameters namely heart rate, mean arterial pressure, Bispectral Index, and Analgesia Nociception Index (ANI). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were plotted to assess the response to both intubation and standardized stimulus under remifentanil infusion of 0.005 µg/kg/min. RESULTS: The post-stimulation NOL values at remifentanil doses of 0.005, 0.05, 0.1 and 0.15 µg/kg/min (39 [23-55], 15 [7-30], 8 [4-14] and 8.5 [4-15]) were significantly higher than pre-stimulation counterparts (P<0.0001). For all other parameters, there was also significant difference between pre- and post-stimulation values at all remifentanil dosages (P<0.0001). Area under the ROC curve (AUC) for the NOL during standardized stimulation was larger than for all other parameters at the exception of ANI (P=0.94). The AUC of NOL for nociception during tracheal intubation was greater (0.93 vs. 0.84 and 0.64 for ANI and HR, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: NOL monitoring is a promising index to assess the level of nociception in patients under general anesthesia.