AI Chat Paper
Note: Please note that the following content is generated by AMiner AI. SciOpen does not take any responsibility related to this content.
{{lang === 'zh_CN' ? '文章概述' : 'Summary'}}
{{lang === 'en_US' ? '中' : 'Eng'}}
Chat more with AI
PDF (743.2 KB)
Collect
Submit Manuscript AI Chat Paper
Show Outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Publishing Language: Chinese

Application of surgical pleth index in monitoring nociceptive stimulation in patients with total intravenous anesthesia

Huawei LIUFeng CHENJinping DINGQin CHENDukun ZUOYukun RENTaotao PENGZhenxin DUANHong LI( )
Department of Anesthesiology, Second Affiliated Hospital, Army Medical University (Third Military Medical University), Chongqing, 400037, China
Show Author Information

Abstract

Objective

To investigate the accuracy of surgical pleth index (SPI) in monitoring patients with nociceptive stimulation and its predictability for cardiovascular response to nociceptive stimulation in total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA).

Methods

A total of 102 patients (aged 18 to 65 years, ASA Ⅰ to Ⅱ, and BMI of 18.5 to 30 kg/m2) who underwent elective thyroid surgery in our hospital from February to June 2022 were enrolled in this study. Each patient was induced by intravenous anesthesia, maintained by target-controlled infusion of propofol and remifentanil, and monitored by SPI for analgesia depth. The absolute values of SPI, heart rate (HR) and mean arterical pressure (MAP) of patients 2 min before and during nociceptive stimulation and the maximum values of SPI, HR and MAP within 2 min after nociceptive stimulation were recorded. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to analyze the accuracy of SPI, HR and MAP in monitoring nociceptive stimulation and the predictability of SPI in cardiovascular response to nociceptive stimulation.

Results

ROC curve analysis indicated that SPI (AUC=0.931, Cutoff value=30) was superior to HR (AUC=0.804, Cutoff value=68) and MAP (AUC=0.759, Cutoff value=80) in monitoring accuracy of tracheal intubation stimulation, ΔSPI (AUC=0.990, Cutoff value=4) was better than ΔHR (AUC=0.972, Cutoff value=3) and ΔMAP (AUC=0.854, Cutoff value=3), ΔSPI was better than SPI, ΔHR was better than HR, and ΔMAP was better than MAP, with their AUC values statistically different (P<0.05). In terms of monitoring the accuracy of skin incisions, SPI (AUC=0.925, Cutoff value=43) was superior to HR (AUC=0.587, Cutoff value=65) and MAP (AUC=0.804, Cutoff value=76), ΔSPI (AUC=0.998, Cutoff value=7) was better than ΔHR (AUC=0.833, Cutoff value=1) and ΔMAP (AUC=0.943, Cutoff value=3), ΔSPI was better than SPI, ΔHR was better than HR, and ΔMAP was better than MAP, and the above AUC differences were statistically significant (P<0.05); SPI had predictive value for the cardiovascular response stimulated by tracheal intubation (AUC=0.662, Cutoff value=17, P<0.05), but had no predictive significance for the cardiovascular response stimulated by skin incisions (P>0.05).

Conclusion

The absolute value and change of SPI are better than the traditional hemodynamic indexes HR and MAP in monitoring the accuracy of nociceptive stimulation, which can accurately monitor nociceptive stimulation during operation. SPI has predictive value for the cardiovascular response stimulated by intubation stimulation, and has important clinical significance for judging the appropriate timing of intubation.

CLC number: R181.32;R444;R614.24 Document code: A

References

【1】
【1】
 
 
Journal of Army Medical University
Pages 1757-1763

{{item.num}}

Comments on this article

Go to comment

< Back to all reports

Review Status: {{reviewData.commendedNum}} Commended , {{reviewData.revisionRequiredNum}} Revision Required , {{reviewData.notCommendedNum}} Not Commended Under Peer Review

Review Comment

Close
Close
Cite this article:
LIU H, CHEN F, DING J, et al. Application of surgical pleth index in monitoring nociceptive stimulation in patients with total intravenous anesthesia. Journal of Army Medical University, 2022, 44(17): 1757-1763. https://doi.org/10.16016/j.2097-0927.202205088

715

Views

8

Downloads

0

Crossref

0

Scopus

0

CSCD

Received: 16 May 2022
Revised: 24 June 2022
Published: 15 September 2022
© 2022 Journal of Army Medical University