Comparison of closed loop vs. manual administration of propofol using the Bispectral index in cardiac surgery

BACKGROUND: In recent years, electroencephalographic indices of anaesthetic depth have facilitated automated anaesthesia delivery systems. Such closed-loop control of anaesthesia has been described in various surgical settings in ASA I-II patients (1-4), but not in open heart surgery characterized by haemodynamic instability and higher risk of intra-operative awareness. Therefore, a newly developed closed-loop anaesthesia delivery system (CLADS) to regulate propofol infusion by the Bispectral index (BIS) was compared with manual control during open heart surgery. METHODS: Forty-four adult ASA II-III patients undergoing elective cardiac surgery under cardiopulmonary bypass were enrolled. The study participants were randomized to two groups: the CLADS group received propofol delivered by the CLADS, while in the manual group, propofol delivery was adjusted manually. The depth of anaesthesia was titrated to a target BIS of 50 in both the groups. RESULTS: During induction, the CLADS group required lower doses of propofol (P<0.001), resulting in lesser overshoots of BIS (P<0.001) and mean arterial blood pressure (P=0.004). Subsequently, BIS was maintained within +/- 10 of the target for a significantly longer time in the CLADS group (P=0.01). The parameters of performance assessment, median absolute performance error (P=0.01), wobble (P=0.04) and divergence (P<0.001), were all significantly better in the CLADS group. Haemodynamic stability was better in the CLADS group and the requirement of phenylephrine in the pre-cardiopulmonary bypass period as well as the cumulative dose of phenylephrine used were significantly higher in the manual group. CONCLUSION: The automated delivery of propofol using CLADS was safe, efficient and performed better than manual administration in open heart surgery.