Despite the large number of pigs involved in translational studies, no gold standard depth of anaesthesia indicators are available. We undertook a scoping review to investigate and summarize the evidence that sustains or contradicts the use of depth of anaesthesia indicators in this species.
METHODS
Medline, Embase and CAB abstract were searched up to September 22nd 2022. No limits were set for time, language and study type. Only original articles of in vivo studies using pigs or minipigs undergoing general anaesthesia were included. The depth of anaesthesia indicators reported in the selected papers were divided in two categories: A, indicators purposely investigated as method to assess depth of anaesthesia; B, indicators reported but not investigated as method to assess depth of anaesthesia.
RESULTS
Out of 13792 papers found, 105 were included after the screening process. Category A: 17 depth of anaesthesia indicators were found in 19 papers. Studies were conducted using inhalant anaesthetics as the main anaesthetic agent in the majority of the cases (13/19 = 68.4%), while 3/19 (15.8%) used propofol. The most investigated depth of anaesthesia indicators were bispectral index (8/19 = 42.1%) and spectral edge frequency 95% (5/19 = 26.3%). Contrasting results about the specific usefulness of each depth of anaesthesia indicators were reported. Category B: 23 depth of anaesthesia indicators were found in 92 papers. The most reported depth of anaesthesia indicators were: motor response following a stimulus (37/92 = 40.2%), depth of anaesthesia scores (21/92 = 23.3%), bispectral index (16/92 = 17.8%) and spectral edge frequency 95% (9/92 = 9.8%).
CONCLUSION
Results highlight the lack of scientifically valid and reliable indicators to ensure adequate depth of anaesthesia in pigs.
