Tj. Sieber et al., Model-based automatic feedback control versus human control of end-tidal isoflurane concentration using low-flow anaesthesia, BR J ANAEST, 85(6), 2000, pp. 818-825
Citations number
22
Categorie Soggetti
Aneshtesia & Intensive Care","Medical Research Diagnosis & Treatment
We studied the clinical use of an automatic feedback control system to adju
st the end-tidal anaesthetic concentration with a low-flow method. The end-
tidal controller uses two input signals (the end-tidal and inspiratory conc
entrations) to control the isoflurane concentration in the fresh gas flow,
using a model-based algorithm. We studied 22 ASA I-III patients during elec
tive surgery lasting more than 2 h. The anaesthetist was asked to make four
step changes of the target end-tidal concentration (+0.3, +0.6, -0.3, -0.6
vol%), either manually (Group A) or by setting the target value for the fe
edback controller (Group B), and then the control was changed and the step
changes were repeated, in a crossover design. Eighty step changes with each
control method were compared in terms of response time, maximal overshoot
and stability. The automatic control system was more accurate and stable th
an the human controller for step increases and step decreases, with less ov
ershoot/undershoot and greater stability [e.g. maximal overshoot 14.7 (SD 3
.7)% and 18 (8.1)% respectively for +0.6 vol% step changes, and 19.8 (3.7)%
and 30.7 (13.2)% respectively for +0.3 vol% step changes]. However, the au
tomatic control system showed a faster response time than the manual method
only with large increasing steps (e.g. 149 (32) s and 205 (57) s respectiv
ely for +0.6 vol% step changes) and was not different from manual control f
or decreasing steps. Automatic control of the end-tidal isoflurane concentr
ation can be better than human control in a clinical setting, and this task
could be done automatically