The clinical benefits to be expected from intraoperative nociception monitors are currently under investigation. Among these devices, the Analgesia Nociception-Index (ANI) has shown promising results under sevoflurane anesthesia. Our study investigated ANI-guided remifentanil administration under propofol anesthesia. We hypothesized that ANI guidance would result in reduced remifentanil consumption compared with standard management. This prospective, randomized, controlled, single-blinded, bi-centric study included women undergoing elective gynecologic surgery under target-controlled infusion of propofol and remifentanil. Patients were randomly assigned to an ANI or Standard group. In the ANI group, remifentanil target concentration was adjusted by 0.5 ng mL⁻¹ steps every 5 min according to the ANI value. In the Standard group, remifentanil was managed according to standard practice. Our primary objective was to compare remifentanil consumption between the groups. Our secondary objectives were to compare the quality of anesthesia, postoperative analgesia and the incidence of chronic pain. Eighty patients were included. Remifentanil consumption was lower in the ANI group: 4.4 (3.3; 5.7) vs. 5.8 (4.9; 7.1) µg kg⁻¹ h⁻¹ (difference = −1.4 (95% CI, −2.6 to −0.2), p = 0.0026). Propofol consumption was not different between the groups. Postoperative pain scores were low in both groups. There was no difference in morphine consumption 24 h after surgery. The proportion of patients reporting pain 3 months after surgery was 18.8% in the ANI group and 30.8% in the Standard group (difference = −12.0 (95% CI, −32.2 to 9.2)). ANI guidance resulted in lower remifentanil consumption compared with standard practice under propofol anesthesia. There was no difference in short- or long-term postoperative analgesia.

BACKGROUND: The pupillary pain index (PPI) is a novel pupillometric index, designed to assess intraoperative analgesia. It is based on the evaluation of the pupillary response to electrical stimuli of increasing intensity. It ranges from 1 (low level of pupillary reactivity, high level of analgesia) to 10 (high level of pupillary reactivity, low level of analgesia). In this first evaluation of the PPI, our objective was to investigate the PPI changes after a bolus of 10 µg·kg ⁻¹ of alfentanil in children under sevoflurane general anesthesia. METHODS: After ethics committee approval and informed consent, 20 healthy children (9 ± 5 years) undergoing elective surgery under general anesthesia were included in this prospective, open, registered pilot study (NCT02646592). Anesthetic induction was standardized with sevoflurane 6% and propofol 1 mg·kg ⁻¹ . After tracheal intubation, sevoflurane concentration was maintained at 2% for 10 minutes. A first PPI measurement was performed (PPI-1), and a bolus of 10 µg·kg ⁻¹ was administered. Two minutes after this bolus, a second PPI measurement was performed (PPI-2). Heart rate, blood pressure, and bispectral index were recorded before and after each PPI measurement. Resting pupillary diameter was recorded before each PPI measurement. PPI scores before and after the bolus of alfentanil were compared using a Wilcoxon signed rank test. RESULTS: PPI scores decreased after administration of a bolus of alfentanil (median difference: −3 [95% confidence interval, −4 to −2]). The median (quartiles) of PPI-1 (baseline, before alfentanil) was 6 (4, 7), and the median (quartiles) of PPI-2 (after alfentanil) was 2 (2, 3) ( P < .001). No difference was found in resting pupillary diameter before PPI-1 and PPI-2 (2.2 ± 0.2 and 2.2 ± 0.3 mm, respectively; P = .86). There were no significant changes in heart rate or blood pressure after PPI measurements ( P = .46 and .49, respectively). Bispectral index was slightly increased after PPI measurements ( P = .01; mean bispectral index increase <5%). No withdrawal movements occurred during PPI measurements. CONCLUSIONS: There was a significant decrease in PPI after alfentanil administration. The results of this pilot study suggest that PPI score decreases when the level of analgesia increases. PPI measurement was not associated with a clinical or hemodynamic nociceptive response. This new index might provide useful information to individually adapt opioid administration before nociceptive stimuli under general anesthesia.

Purpose of review: Monitoring of intraoperative nociception has made substantial progress in adult anesthesia during the last 10 years. Several monitors have been validated and their use has been associated with intraoperative or postoperative benefits in the adult population. In pediatric anesthesia, less data are available. However, several recent publications have assessed the performance of nociception monitors in children, and investigated their potential benefits in this context. This review will describe the main validated intraoperative nociception monitors, summarize adult findings and describe the available pediatric data. Recent findings: Six intraoperative nociception indices were included in this review. Among them, four have shown promising results in children: Surgical Pleth Index (GE-Healthcare, Helsinki, Finland), Analgesia-Nociception Index (Mdoloris Medical Systems, Loos, France), Newborn-Infant Parasympathetic Evaluation (Mdoloris Medical Systems), and Pupillometry (IDMED, Marseille, France). The relevance of Skin Conductance (MedStorm innovations, AS, Oslo, Norway) under general anesthesia could not be established. Finally, the Nociception Level (Medasense, Ramat Gan, Israel) still requires to be investigated in children. Summary: To date, four monitors may provide a relevant assessment of intraoperative nociception in children. However, the potential clinical benefits associated with their use to guide analgesia remain to be demonstrated.