ArticleJournal of clinical monitoring and computing2026
Contact heat evoked potentials as a measure of the analgesic component of anesthesia - a patient study.
Article in Journal of clinical monitoring and computing, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To assess the applicability of contact heat evoked potentials (CHEPs) as a direct measure of analgesia, we analyzed the following endpoints. (1) Correlation between remifentanil-induced changes in VAS and CHEP amplitudes. (2) Correlation between CHEP amplitude reduction and remifentanil infusion rate. Furthermore, we investigated the sedative effects of remifentanil and the effect of propofol-induced loss of responsiveness (PI-LOR) on CHEPs. After determination of the individual pain threshold (visual analog scale (VAS) of 10), 120 adult ASA physical status I or II patients randomly received remifentanil in one of four predefined infusion rates (0.05, 0.1, 0.2, or 0.4 [Formula: see text]g/kg/min). After equilibration, a heat stimulus 20% above the individual pain threshold was applied to the volar forearm. Eventually, propofol was infused until LOR, and the heat stimulus was applied again. CHEPs, VAS, and the Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation (OAA/S) scale, as well as middle latency auditory evoked potentials (MLAEPs), were assessed. A total of 119 patients were included in the analysis. CHEP amplitudes could not be detected for all patients at all times. Remifentanil dosage and VAS showed a strong inverse correlation (r=-0.46; p<0.001). We also detected a correlation between remifentanil dosage and CHEP amplitudes (r=0.29; p=0.003) but not between VAS and CHEPs (r=-0.17; p=0.868). Both the OAA/S score and MLAEPs indicated a correlation between remifentanil dosage and degree of sedation. After PI-LOR, CHEPs were no longer detectable. The exact mechanism for the detected CHEP reduction remains to be determined. CHEPs monitoring appears unsuitable for direct assessment of the analgesic component of general anesthesia.Trial registration: German Clinical Trials Register ID DRKS00003300, Oct 24, 2011.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42753105What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.