Phrenic nerve stimulation experiences. A single centre, controlled, prospective study.

Patients with central apnoea may use electro ventilation, provided their phrenic nerves and diaphragm muscles are normal. A tendency towards better survival has been found, and both an improved quality of life and facilitated nursing have been claimed with electro ventilation compared to mechanical ventilation. The high investment for the device may form a hurdle for fund providers like our hospital administration board. We, therefore, from our first patient onwards, collected clinically meaningful data in a special register of all patients using electro ventilation and their controls on mechanical ventilation. Since 1988 172 patients left our institution dependent on a respiratory device. Of these, all 48 patients with preserved phrenic nerves chose phrenic nerve stimulation. A patient on mechanical ventilation who agreed to participate was chosen as a control (n = 44). All patients were seen at least once a year. 90 patients suffered high tetraplegia, and 2 suffered central apnoea for other reasons. There is a tendency towards better survival, and there is a lower frequency of decubital ulcers (0.02) and respiratory tract infections (p0.000) with electro than with mechanical ventilation. The frequency of respiratory infections turned out to be a better measure of the quality of respiratory care than survival. The resulting decrease in the need for airway nursing, and the reduced incidence of respiratory infections repaid the high investment in electro ventilation within one year in our setting. Informed patients prefer electro to mechanical ventilation; fund providers might also agree with this preference.

Threshold currents of platinum electrodes used for functional electrical stimulation of the phrenic nerves for treatment of central apnea.

BACKGROUND: Stability of threshold currents during long-term use of phrenic nerve stimulation has been questioned. METHODS AND RESULTS: Between January 5, 1988, and March 5, 2008, 49 patients with functional C2-tetraplegia received an Atrostim PNS (Atrotech Ltd., Tampere, Finland) as treatment of their respiratory insufficiency; a follow-up of 35 of such patients was carried out exclusively in our institution for 6.3 (4.44) 0.04-15.75 years (mean [standard deviation (SD)] range). The device employed four-pole sequential nerve stimulation, which provided four threshold currents subsequently evaluated for each phrenic nerve. Stimulation data were prospectively recorded. The differences between threshold currents recorded 1 year after implantation and the last recorded values were 0.33-0.43 (0.44-0.63) 0-2.9 mA. After having excluded the data of eight patients with values >1 mA (= mean + SD), we registered the differences for the remaining patients of 0.15-0.24 (0.14-0.24) 0-0.95 mA, which is just twice the adjustment accuracy of the device. Out of the eight problem cases one had, and two were suspected to have, surgical trauma; all three nerves recovered. In two cases the values steadily increasing over years might have been caused by unspecific foreign body reaction. Two cases with values >1 mA for different durations at different electrodes might be caused by biofilm, and one patient displaying steadily increasing values lived, unwilling to live, only 2 years after the implantation. CONCLUSION: Thus, there was no permanent nerve injury and in 77% of the presented cases threshold currents remained stable.

Electroencephalographic burst suppression versus loss of reflexes anesthesia with propofol or thiopental: differences of variance in the catecholamine and cardiovascular response to tracheal intubation.

UNLABELLED: The electroencephalographic burst suppression pattern (BSP) might indicate the brain's effect-site concentration of anesthetics more precisely than clinical signs and thus eliminate bias from studies on the reaction to tracheal intubation after different induction drugs. To test this hypothesis, we compared the catecholamine and cardiovascular responses and their variances to tracheal intubation when either BSP was induced by infusion of propofol (30 mg x kg(-1) x h(-1); n = 14) or thiopental (75 mg x kg(-1) x h(-1); n = 14) or anesthesia by repeated bolus doses until loss of reflexes (LR), initially of propofol 2.5 mg/kg (n = 15) or thiopental 5 mg/kg (n = 15). The standard deviations were more often smaller in the BSP than in the LR groups, but the results of Levene's test for differences of variance were insignificant. At the LR level, propofol attenuated catecholamine, arterial blood pressure, and heart rate responses to intubation better than thiopental, but at the BSP level, only the norepinephrine response was better attenuated. Cp50 concentrations of propofol and thiopental at the onset of BSP were 9.65 and 31.60 micro g/mL, respectively. IMPLICATIONS: Our results did not support the hypothesis that the responses to tracheal intubation can be more accurately predicted when unconsciousness is controlled with the aid of an electroencephalographic burst suppression pattern. Significant differences were found in the reactions between propofol and thiopental. At the burst suppression level, the catecholamine response was abolished with propofol.