MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156683284 · doi:10.1097/aln.0b013e3182395dcb

Relationship between Bispectral Index Values and Volatile Anesthetic Concentrations during the Maintenance Phase of Anesthesia in the B-Unaware Trial

2011· article· en· W2156683284 on OpenAlexaff
Elizabeth L. Whitlock, Alexander Villafranca, Nan Lin, Ben Julian A. Palanca, Eric Jacobsohn, Kevin J. Finkel, Lini Zhang, Beth Burnside, Heiko A. Kaiser, Alex S. Evers, Michael S. Avidan

Bibliographic record

VenueAnesthesiology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Sedative Agents
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNational Center for Research ResourcesNational Institutes of HealthFoundation for Barnes-Jewish Hospital
KeywordsMedicineBispectral indexAnestheticMidazolamAnesthesiaInterquartile rangePopulationMinimum alveolar concentrationLogistic regressionSedationSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Hypnotic depth during anesthesia affects electroencephalography waveforms and electroencephalogram-derived indices, such as the bispectral index (BIS). Titrating anesthetic administration against the BIS assumes reliable relationships between BIS values, electroencephalogram waveforms, and effect site concentration, beyond loss of responsiveness. Associations among BIS, end-tidal anesthetic concentrations (ETAC), and patient characteristics were examined during anesthetic maintenance, using B-Unaware trial data. METHODS: Pharmacokinetically stable ETAC epochs during intraoperative anesthetic maintenance were analyzed. A generalized estimating equation determined independent relationships among BIS, ETAC (in age-adjusted minimum alveolar concentration equivalents), patient characteristics, and 1-yr mortality. Further individual and population characteristics were explored graphically. RESULTS: A total of 3,347,523 data points from 1,100 patients were analyzed over an ETAC range from 0.42 to 1.51 age-adjusted minimum alveolar concentration. A generalized estimating equation yielded a best predictive equation: BIS = 62.9-1.6 (if age younger than 60 yr) -1.6 (if female) -2.5 (if American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status more than 3) -2.6 (if deceased at 1 yr) -2.5 (if N2O was not used) -1.4 (if midazolam dose more than 2 mg) -1.3 (if opioid dose more than 50 morphine equivalents) -15.4 × age-adjusted minimum alveolar concentration. Although a population relationship between ETAC and BIS was apparent, interindividual variability in the strength and reliability of this relationship was large. Decreases in BIS with increasing ETAC were not reliably observed. Individual-patient linear regression yielded a median slope of -8 BIS/1 age-adjusted minimum alveolar concentration (interquartile range -30, 0) and a median correlation coefficient of -0.16 (interquartile range -0.031, -0.50). CONCLUSIONS: Independent of pharmacokinetic confounding, BIS frequently correlates poorly with ETAC, is often insensitive to clinically significant changes in ETAC, and is vulnerable to interindividual variability. BIS is therefore incapable of finely guiding volatile anesthetic titration during anesthetic maintenance.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.074
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.244 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations142
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnesthesiologySame topicAnesthesia and Sedative AgentsFrench-language works237,207