Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28486575›Full record

Observational studyBritish journal of anaesthesia2017

Burst-suppression ratio underestimates absolute duration of electroencephalogram suppression compared with visual analysis of intraoperative electroencephalogram.

W G Muhlhofer, R Zak, T Kamal, B Rizvi, L P Sands, M Yuan, X Zhang, J M Leung

Abstract readComparative StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in British journal of anaesthesia, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 57 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
57citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

57 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Investigating how electroencephalogram measures associate with delirium: A systematic review.Clinical neurophysiology : official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2021
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Observational
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

W G MuhlhoferDepartment of Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
R ZakDepartment of Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
T KamalDepartment of Anaesthesia, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
B RizviDepartment of Anaesthesia, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
L P SandsCenter of Gerontology.
M YuanDepartment of Biostatistics, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA, USA.
X ZhangDepartment of Anaesthesia, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
J M LeungDepartment of Anaesthesia, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.

Funding

The Effects of Light vs Deep Anesthesia on Postoperative Cognitive OutcomesR21AG048456 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI LEUNG, JACQUELINE M · 2015 to 2016
$444k
Acute preoperative sleep disruption and postoperative deliriumR21AG053715 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI LEUNG, JACQUELINE M · 2017 to 2018
$439k
NIA NIH HHS R21 AG048456NIA NIH HHS R21 AG053715
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMachine-generated indices based on quantitative electroencephalography (EEG), such as the patient state index (PSI™) and burst-suppression ratio (BSR), are increasingly being used to monitor intraoperative depth of anaesthesia in the endeavour to improve postoperative neurological outcomes, such as postoperative delirium (POD). However, the accuracy of the BSR compared with direct visualization of the EEG trace with regard to the prediction of POD has not been evaluated previously.

methodsForty-one consecutive patients undergoing non-cardiac, non-intracranial surgery with general anaesthesia wore a SedLine ® monitor during surgery and were assessed after surgery for the presence of delirium with the Confusion Assessment Method. The intraoperative EEG was scanned for absolute minutes of EEG suppression and correlated with the incidence of POD. The BSR and PSI™ were compared between patients with and without POD.

resultsVisual analysis of the EEG by neurologists and the SedLine ® -generated BSR provided a significantly different distribution of estimated minutes of EEG suppression ( P =0.037). The Sedline ® system markedly underestimated the amount of EEG suppression. The number of minutes of suppression assessed by visual analysis of the EEG was significantly associated with POD ( P =0.039), whereas the minutes based on the BSR generated by SedLine ® were not associated with POD ( P =0.275).

conclusionsOur findings suggest that SedLine ® (machine)-generated indices might underestimate the minutes of EEG suppression, thereby reducing the sensitivity for detecting patients at risk for POD. Thus, the monitoring of machine-generated BSR and PSI™ might benefit from the addition of a visual tracing of the EEG to achieve a more accurate and real-time guidance of anaesthesia depth monitoring and the ultimate goal, to reduce the risk of POD.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overAlgorithmsCohort StudiesConfusionConsciousness MonitorsData Interpretation, StatisticalDeliriumElectroencephalographyFemaleHumansMaleMental Status and Dementia TestsMiddle AgedMonitoring, IntraoperativePostoperative Complicationsburst-suppression ratioconfusion assessment methoddepth of anaesthesiapatient state indexpostoperative delirium

Identifiers

PMID28486575
PMCPMC6224027

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.