Analyzing Electroencephalography (EEG) Waves Provides a Reliable Tool to Assess the Depth of Sevoflurane Anesthesia in Pediatric Patients.

BACKGROUND Studies have reported that BIS is unreliable in children because its algorithm provides misleading information about the actual depth of anesthesia. Raw EEG analysis provides direct neurophysiologic measurement of cerebral activity. The relationship between age and EEG has rarely been reported, thus the aim of the present study was to compare raw electroencephalography (EEG) among different age groups of surgical patients under general anesthesia with 1.0 MAC sevoflurane. MATERIAL AND METHODS We enrolled 135 patients aged 0-80 years old (ASA physical status I or II) undergoing surgery, who were divided into 6 groups: 1-12 months old (group 1), 1-3 years old (group 2), 3-6 years old (group 3), 6-18 years old (group 4), 18-65 years old (group 5), and 65-80 years old (group 6). Different raw EEG waves (alpha, delta, and theta) were compared for all subjects. RESULTS The BIS values in groups 1 to 6 were 52.2±12.7, 55.0±8.0, 44.5±7.3, 43.8±7.3, 44.2±6.2, and 49.1±6.2 respectively. Compared with groups 1 and 2 (52.2±12.7, 55.0±8.0), BIS values of groups 3, 4, and 5 (44.5±7.3, 43.8±7.3, 44.2±6.2, respectively) were lower (P<0.05). Theta frequency was observed in the 6 groups. The EEG frequencies in groups 1 to 6 were 6.0 (5.5-6.0), 6.0 (5.5-6.0), 6.0 (5.5-6.0), 6.0 (6.0-7.0), 6.3 (6.0-7.0), and 6.0 (5.1-6.0), respectively. Compared with group 6, EEG frequencies in groups 4 and 5 were higher (P<0.05). BIS value was significantly correlated with EEG frequency (R²=0.063, P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS Analyzing raw EEG waves provides more accurate judgement of depth of anesthesia, especially in pediatric cases in which monitors often provide misleading values.

Dorsal Penile Nerve Block via Perineal Approach, an Alternative to a Caudal Block for Pediatric Circumcision: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: General anesthesia combining with a caudal block (CB) has been commonly performed in pediatric patients undergoing circumcision surgeries. However, some severe complications have been suspected of a caudal block in the combined use. To avoid these issues of a caudal block, this study introduces a novel dorsal penile nerve block (DPNB) via perineum guided by ultrasound as an alternative to a caudal block in pediatric circumcision surgeries. METHODS: A total of 104 pediatric patients scheduled for circumcision surgeries were involved and randomly divided into 2 groups: the CB group (n=52) and the DPNB group (n=52). A laryngeal mask was inserted followed by induction and maintenance anesthesia of inhaled sevoflurane. In the DPNB group, a dorsal penile nerve block (DPNB) guided by a real-time ultrasonography was performed by a single injection via perineum of 0.25% ropivacaine plus 0.8% lidocaine with total injection volume of 3-5ml. In the CB group, a dose of 0.5 ml/kg was given via the caudal canal following the same general anesthesia with that of Group DPNB. The time to the first analgesic demand after surgery is the key data collected for comparing between the two study groups. Heart rates and respiratory rates changes before and during the surgical procedure, pain score when leaving the PACU, and the time taken for the first micturition after a surgery were also recorded to analyze the differences in analgesic effects between the CB and DPNB groups. RESULTS: No significant difference in heart rates and respiratory rates was found between the two groups before and during the surgery. Pain scores were similar before pediatric patients leave the PACU. However, the time taken for the first micturition after a surgery in Group DPNB is shorter than Group CB. The patients in Group DPNB asked for analgesics later than those in Group CB. Additionally, no significant differences in adverse effects were noted between two groups except the numbness of the lower limbs occurring less in Group DPNB. CONCLUSIONS: The ultrasound-guided dorsal penile nerve block via perineal approach can basically act as a safe and effective alternative to the caudal block in pediatric patients undergoing circumcision surgeries. Clinical Trials identifier is ChiCTR-IPR-15006670. Protocol is available at http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=11319.