Design and Evaluation of a Closed-Loop Anesthesia System With Robust Control and Safety System
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Closed-loop control of anesthesia involves continual adjustment of drug infusion rates according to measured clinical effect. The NeuroSENSE monitor provides an electroencephalographic measure of depth of hypnosis (wavelet-based anesthetic value for central nervous system monitoring [WAVCNS]). It has previously been used as feedback for closed-loop control of propofol, in a system designed using robust control engineering principles, which implements features specifically designed to ensure patient safety. Closed-loop control of a second drug, remifentanil, may be added to improve WAVCNS stability in the presence of variable surgical stimulation. The objective of this study was to design and evaluate the feasibility of a closed-loop system for robust control of propofol and remifentanil infusions using WAVCNS feedback, with an infusion safety system based on the known pharmacological characteristics of these 2 drugs. METHODS: With Health Canada authorization, research ethics board approval, and informed consent, American Society of Anesthesiologists I-III adults, requiring general anesthesia for elective surgery, were enrolled in a 2-phase study. In both phases, infusion of propofol was controlled in closed loop during induction and maintenance of anesthesia, using WAVCNS feedback, but bounded by upper- and lower-estimated effect-site concentration limits. In phase I, remifentanil was administered using an adjustable target-controlled infusion and a controller was designed based on the collected data. In phase II, remifentanil was automatically titrated to counteract rapid increases in WAVCNS. RESULTS: Data were analyzed for 127 patients, of median (range) age 64 (22-86) years, undergoing surgical procedures lasting 105 (9-348) minutes, with 52 participating in phase I and 75 in phase II. The overall control performance indicator, global score, was a median (interquartile range) 18.3 (14.2-27.7) in phase I and 14.6 (11.6-20.7) in phase II (median difference, -3.25; 95% confidence interval, -6.35 to -0.52). The WAVCNS was within ±10 of the setpoint for 84.3% (76.6-90.6) of the maintenance of anesthesia in phase I and 88.2% (83.1-93.4) in phase II (median difference, 3.7; 95% confidence interval, 0.1-6.9). The lower propofol safety bound was activated during 30 of 52 (58%) cases in phase I and 51 of 75 (68%) cases in phase II. CONCLUSIONS: Adding closed-loop control of remifentanil improved overall controller performance. This controller design offers a robust method to optimize the control of 2 drugs using a single sensor. The infusion safety system is an important component of a robust automated anesthesia system, but further research is required to determine the optimal constraints for these safe conditions.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».