Effect of Volatile Anesthetics on Myocardial Infarction After Coronary Artery Surgery: A Post Hoc Analysis of a Randomized Trial

Objective: To investigate the effect of volatile anesthetics on the rates of postoperative myocardial infarction (MI) and cardiac death after coronary artery bypass graft (CABG). Design: A post hoc analysis of a randomized trial. Setting: Cardiac surgical operating rooms. Participants: Patients undergoing elective, isolated CABG. Interventions: Patients were randomized to receive a volatile anesthetic (desflurane, isoflurane, or sevoflurane) or total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA). The primary outcome was hemodynamically relevant MI (MI requiring high-dose inotropic support or prolonged intensive care unit stay) occurring within 48 hours from surgery. The secondary outcome was 1-year death due to cardiac causes. Measurements and Main Results: A total of 5,400 patients were enrolled between April 2014 and September 2017 (2,709 patients randomized to the volatile anesthetics group and 2,691 to TIVA). The mean age was 62 ± 8.4 years, and the median baseline ejection fraction was 57% (50-67), without differences between the 2 groups. Patients in the volatile group had a lower incidence of MI with hemodynamic complications both in the per-protocol (14 of 2,530 [0.6%] v 27 of 2,501 [1.1%] in the TIVA group; p = 0.038) and as-treated analyses (16 of 2,708 [0.6%] v 29 of 2,617 [1.1%] in the TIVA group; p = 0.039), but not in the intention-to-treat analysis (17 of 2,663 [0.6%] v 28 of 2,667 [1.0%] in the TIVA group; p = 0.10). Overall, deaths due to cardiac causes were lower in the volatile group (23 of 2,685 [0.9%] v 40 of 2,668 [1.5%] than in the TIVA group; p = 0.03). Conclusions: An anesthetic regimen, including volatile agents, may be associated with a lower rate of postoperative MI with hemodynamic complication in patients undergoing CABG. Furthermore, it may reduce long-term cardiac mortality

Worldwide Opinion on Multicenter Randomized Interventions Showing Mortality Reduction in Critically Ill Patients: A Democracy-Based Medicine Approach

Objectives Democracy-based medicine is a combination of evidence-based medicine (systematic review), expert assessment, and worldwide voting by\ua0physicians to express their opinions and self-reported practice via the Internet. The authors applied democracy-based medicine to key trials in critical care medicine. Design and Setting A systematic review of literature followed by web-based voting on findings of a consensus conference. Participants A total of 555 clinicians from 61 countries. Interventions The authors performed a systematic literature review (via searching MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, and Embase) and selected all multicenter randomized clinical trials in critical care that reported a significant effect on survival and were endorsed by expert clinicians. Then they solicited voting and self-reported practice on such evidence via an interactive Internet questionnaire. Relationships among trial sample size, design, and respondents\u2019 agreement were investigated. The gap between agreement and use/avoidance and the influence of country origin on physicians\u2019 approach to interventions also were investigated. Measurements and Main Results According to 24 multicenter randomized controlled trials, 15 interventions affecting mortality were identified. Wide variabilities in both the level of agreement and reported practice among different interventions and countries were found. Moreover, agreement and reported practice often did not coincide. Finally, a positive correlation among agreement, trial sample size, and number of included centers was found. On the contrary, trial design did not influence clinicians\u2019 agreement. Conclusions Physicians\u2019 clinical practice and agreement with the literature vary among different interventions and countries. The role of these interventions in affecting survival should be further investigated to reduce both the gap between evidence and clinical practice and transnational differences

Acute normovolemic hemodilution in cardiac surgery: rationale and design of a multicenter randomized trial

Background: Minimizing the use of blood component can reduce known and unknown blood transfusion risks, preserve blood bank resources, and decrease healthcare costs. Red Blood Cell (RBC) transfusion is common after cardiac surgery and associated with adverse perioperative outcomes, including mortality. Acute normovolemic hemodilution (ANH) may reduce bleeding and the need for blood product transfusion after cardiac surgery. However, its blood-saving effect and impact on major outcomes remain uncertain. Methods: This is a single-blinded, multinational, pragmatic, randomized controlled trial with a 1:1 allocation ratio conducted in Tertiary and University hospitals. The study is designed to enroll patients scheduled for elective cardiac surgery with planned cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). Patients are randomized to receive ANH before CPB or the best available treatment without ANH. We identified an ANH volume of at least 650 ml as the critical threshold for clinically relevant benefits. Larger ANH volumes, however, are allowed and tailored to the patient's characteristics and clinical conditions. Results: The primary outcome is the percentage of patients receiving RBCs transfusion from randomization until hospital discharge, which we hypothesize will be reduced from 35% to 28% with ANH. Secondary outcomes are all-cause 30-day mortality, acute kidney injury, bleeding complications, and ischemic complications. Conclusion: The trial is designed to determine whether ANH can safely reduce RBC transfusion after elective cardiac surgery with CPB. Study registration: This trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov in April 2019 with the trial identification number NCT03913481