Automated "Robotic" Anesthesia Closed Loop System RCT - Thoughts?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
I love the concept of robust closed loop systems for anesthetic depth and even hemodynamics like automated pressors and vasodilators. I especially love the idea for a continuous paralytic infusion controlled by a quantitative paralysis monitor. That would be great.

Fluid administration I would personally never automate even if there was a system available. These devices that claim to monitor cardiac output or fluid responsiveness based on a waveform analysis are such garbage.
 
What happen to mcsleepy robot propofol gi sedation? That died as well. Didn’t it even with fda approval.
 
I read the article last week. A lot of assumptions made when deciding the outcome measured. We are assuming depth of prop/Remi intraoperative will have a measurable outcome on date of postop cognitive disorders. Assuming that using an art line with flowtrac and colloid boluses will somehow affect post of neuro status. Assuming making more ventilator changes will somehow affect the outcome as well. I don’t think any of these assumptions are really a slam dunk, and so the trial doesn’t make much sense to me. Perhaps this was the only measurable outcome they could find that was any different between the groups.
 
Takes 30min to set up, the more loops you have the more room for error/ malfunction.
Just set the propofol and paralytics at x ml/mg per hour and call it a day
 
Cue @Newtwo in 5, 4, 3, 2 . . .
Well the control group used Schneider/minto TCI algorithms. Since y'all have declared these algorithms are buffoonery and beneath you there is nothing to discuss about this paper.😉
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It would be very easy to have a closed loop feedback system whereby you take analog input to a controller from, say, a twitch monitor. Output could easily drive an infusion of a paralytic. Issue is that it's just too easy to do it manually. Automation simply does not lend very well to certain tasks. Others, it does exceptionally well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dhb
Well the control group used Schneider/minto TCI algorithms. Since y'all have declared these algorithms are buffoonery and beneath you there is nothing to discuss about this paper.😉
There was no difference in outcome in the 2 groups so the algorithms aren't very important 😉
 
It would be very easy to have a closed loop feedback system whereby you take analog input to a controller from, say, a twitch monitor. Output could easily drive an infusion of a paralytic. Issue is that it's just too easy to do it manually. Automation simply does not lend very well to certain tasks. Others, it does exceptionally well.

We used that system in residency during the 1990s. The computer was better at maintaining a constant level of NMB when monitoring MMEPs.

 
Last edited:
I love the idea of a computer controlled level of NMB, I hate having to think about Redosing paralytics
 
There was no difference in outcome in the 2 groups so the algorithms aren't very important 😉
Sorry what? Did we read the same study?
I mean maybe you or anyone else really doesnt care about the outcomes but there definitely was a difference.
 
Sorry what? Did we read the same study?
I mean maybe you or anyone else really doesnt care about the outcomes but there definitely was a difference.
"Whether a 1-point decrease in the 30-item cognition score is meaningful remains an open question. "...

Reading the link i couldn't find out how the points were distributed: did one patient have a big cognitive decline or where all of the patients in the control group lower.
 
Last edited:
I just want pulse oximetry that comes with a propofol concentration addon. We could call it "Pro-ximetry"
 
Top