ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Midlatency auditory evoked potentials (MLAEP) are a promising tool for monitoring suppression of sensory processing during anaesthesia and might help to avoid awareness. MLAEP in children are different to those in adults and the exact changes during general anaesthesia are unknown. METHODS: In 49 children of age between 2 and 12 yr, MLAEP were recorded before anaesthesia, during tracheal intubation, at steady-state balanced anaesthesia, and after extubation. RESULTS: MLAEP were recordable in all children in the awake (premedicated) state with latencies but not amplitudes dependent on children's age. MLAEP latencies significantly increased during tracheal intubation and steady-state anaesthesia. Changes in amplitudes were inconsistent. All MLAEP variables returned to near baseline values after extubation. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study imply that MLAEP can successfully be recorded during anaesthesia in children above the age of 2 yr. Further studies are necessary before MLAEP might be applicable for monitoring purposes in paediatric anaesthesia.
Subject(s)
Aging/physiology , Anesthesia, General , Evoked Potentials, Auditory/physiology , Monitoring, Intraoperative/methods , Anesthetics, Inhalation/pharmacology , Awareness/drug effects , Awareness/physiology , Child , Child, Preschool , Device Removal , Evoked Potentials, Auditory/drug effects , Female , Humans , Infant , Intubation, Intratracheal , Linear Models , Male , Reaction TimeABSTRACT
Intraoperative wakefulness is not only limited to adults and can also be found at a similar percentage (0.8%) in paediatric anaesthesia. For prevention of awareness neurophysiologic methods like auditory evoked potentials might be helpful. We report a case of a 2-year-old boy receiving balanced anaesthesia with sevoflurane and alfentanil. Midlatency auditory evoked potentials (MLAEPs) were recorded continuously before, during and after the surgical procedure. During the surgical procedure sevoflurane was withdrawn unintentionally. After a short period of time the boy started coughing and moved his legs, which was interpreted as insufficient analgesia. Several boli of alfentanil did not lead to the expected clinical effect on the depth of anaesthesia. After a recheck of the anaesthetic ventilator the error was determined and delivery of the volatile anaesthetic restored. The postoperative evaluation of the MLAEPs revealed the inadequate suppression of auditory processing during this incident with latencies comparable to the awake state. After reapplication of sevoflurane the MLAEPs were almost completely suppressed demonstrating adequate anesthetic depth. Exemplarily this case suggests that MLAEPs could be used to detect intraoperative awareness also in paediatric anaesthesia. Investigations to prove the validity and reproducibility of MLAEPs in children will be necessary.
