Neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin prior to cardiac surgery predicts acute kidney injury and mortality.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to investigate whether preoperative serum neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (sNGALpre-op) predicted postoperative acute kidney injury (AKI) during hospitalisation and 1-year cardiovascular and all-cause mortality following adult cardiac surgery. METHODS: This study was a post hoc analysis of the Effect of Remote Ischemic Preconditioning on Clinical Outcomes in Patient Undergoing Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery trial involving adult patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft. Postoperative AKI within 72 hours was defined using the International Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes classification. RESULTS: 1371 out of 1612 patients had data on sNGALpre-op. The overall 1-year cardiovascular and all-cause mortality was 5.2% (71/1371) and 7.7% (105/1371), respectively. There was an observed increase in the incidence of AKI from the first to the third tertile of sNGALpre-op (30.5%, 41.5% and 45.9%, respectively, p220 ng/L) had an estimated twofold increase risk of cardiovascular and all-cause mortality at 1 year. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT101247545; Post-results

Remote Ischemic Preconditioning and Outcomes of Cardiac Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Whether remote ischemic preconditioning (transient ischemia and reperfusion of the arm) can improve clinical outcomes in patients undergoing coronary-artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery is not known. We investigated this question in a randomized trial. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, sham-controlled trial involving adults at increased surgical risk who were undergoing on-pump CABG (with or without valve surgery) with blood cardioplegia. After anesthesia induction and before surgical incision, patients were randomly assigned to remote ischemic preconditioning (four 5-minute inflations and deflations of a standard blood-pressure cuff on the upper arm) or sham conditioning (control group). Anesthetic management and perioperative care were not standardized. The combined primary end point was death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, coronary revascularization, or stroke, assessed 12 months after randomization. RESULTS: We enrolled a total of 1612 patients (811 in the control group and 801 in the ischemic-preconditioning group) at 30 cardiac surgery centers in the United Kingdom. There was no significant difference in the cumulative incidence of the primary end point at 12 months between the patients in the remote ischemic preconditioning group and those in the control group (212 patients [26.5%] and 225 patients [27.7%], respectively; hazard ratio with ischemic preconditioning, 0.95; 95% confidence interval, 0.79 to 1.15; P=0.58). Furthermore, there were no significant between-group differences in either adverse events or the secondary end points of perioperative myocardial injury (assessed on the basis of the area under the curve for the high-sensitivity assay of serum troponin T at 72 hours), inotrope score (calculated from the maximum dose of the individual inotropic agents administered in the first 3 days after surgery), acute kidney injury, duration of stay in the intensive care unit and hospital, distance on the 6-minute walk test, and quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: Remote ischemic preconditioning did not improve clinical outcomes in patients undergoing elective on-pump CABG with or without valve surgery. (Funded by the Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation Program [a Medical Research Council and National Institute of Health Research partnership] and the British Heart Foundation; ERICCA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01247545.)

Effect of Remote Ischaemic preconditioning on Clinical outcomes in patients undergoing Coronary Artery bypass graft surgery (ERICCA study): a multicentre double-blind randomised controlled clinical trial

BackgroundNovel cardioprotective strategies are required to improve clinical outcomes in higher-risk patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) with or without valve surgery. Remote ischaemic preconditioning (RIPC) in which brief episodes of non-lethal ischaemia and reperfusion are applied to the arm or leg has been demonstrated to reduce perioperative myocardial injury (PMI) following CABG with or without valve surgery.ObjectiveTo investigate whether or not RIPC can improve clinical outcomes in this setting in the Effect of Remote Ischaemic preconditioning on Clinical outcomes in patients undergoing Coronary Artery bypass graft surgery (ERICCA) study in patients undergoing CABG surgery.DesignMulticentre, double-blind, randomised sham controlled trial.SettingThe study was conducted across 30 cardiothoracic centres in the UK between March 2010 and March 2015.ParticipantsEligible patients were higher-risk adult patients (aged &gt; 18 years of age; additive European System for Cardiac Operative Risk of ≥ 5) undergoing on-pump CABG with or without valve surgery with blood cardioplegia.InterventionsPatients were randomised to receive either RIPC (four 5-minute inflations/deflations of a standard blood pressure cuff placed on the upper arm) or the sham control procedure (simulated RIPC protocol) following anaesthetic induction and prior to surgical incision. Anaesthetic management and perioperative care were not standardised.Main outcome measuresThe combined primary end point was the rate of major adverse cardiac and cerebral events comprising cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, coronary revascularisation and stroke within 12 months of randomisation. Secondary end points included perioperative myocardial and acute kidney injury (AKI), intensive care unit and hospital stay, inotrope score, left ventricular ejection fraction, changes in quality of life and exercise tolerance.ResultsIn total, 1612 patients (sham control group,n = 811; RIPC group,n = 801) were randomised in 30 cardiac surgery centres in the UK. There was no difference in the primary end point at 12 months between the RIPC group and the sham control group (26.5% vs. 27.7%; hazard ratio 0.95, 95% confidence interval 0.79 to 1.15;p = 0.58). Furthermore, there was no evidence for any differences in either adverse events or the secondary end points of PMI (72-hour area under the curve for serum high-sensitivity troponin T), inotrope score, AKI, intensive therapy unit and hospital stay, 6-minute walk test and quality of life.ConclusionsIn patients undergoing elective on-pump CABG with or without valve surgery, without standardisation of the anaesthetic regimen, RIPC using transient arm ischaemia–reperfusion did not improve clinical outcomes. It is important that studies continue to investigate the potential mechanisms underlying RIPC, as this may facilitate the translation of this simple, non-invasive, low-cost intervention into patient benefit. The limitations of the study include the lack of standardised pre-/perioperative anaesthesia and medication, the level of missing and incomplete data for some of the secondary end points and the incompleteness of the data for the echocardiography substudy.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT01247545.FundingThis project was funded by the Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation programme, a MRC and NIHR partnership, and the British Heart Foundation.</jats:sec

ESC Joint Working Groups on Cardiovascular Surgery and the Cellular Biology of the Heart Position Paper: Perioperative myocardial injury and infarction in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery

International audienc

Effect of a Perioperative, Cardiac Output-Guided Hemodynamic Therapy Algorithm on Outcomes Following Major Gastrointestinal Surgery A Randomized Clinical Trial and Systematic Review

Importance: small trials suggest that postoperative outcomes may be improved by the use of cardiac output monitoring to guide administration of intravenous fluid and inotropic drugs as part of a hemodynamic therapy algorithm.Objective: to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of a perioperative, cardiac output–guided hemodynamic therapy algorithm.Design, setting, and participants: OPTIMISE was a pragmatic, multicenter, randomized, observer-blinded trial of 734 high-risk patients aged 50 years or older undergoing major gastrointestinal surgery at 17 acute care hospitals in the United Kingdom. An updated systematic review and meta-analysis were also conducted including randomized trials published from 1966 to February 2014.Interventions: patients were randomly assigned to a cardiac output–guided hemodynamic therapy algorithm for intravenous fluid and inotrope (dopexamine) infusion during and 6 hours following surgery (n=368) or to usual care (n=366).Main outcomes and measures: the primary outcome was a composite of predefined 30-day moderate or major complications and mortality. Secondary outcomes were morbidity on day 7; infection, critical care–free days, and all-cause mortality at 30 days; all-cause mortality at 180 days; and length of hospital stay.Results: baseline patient characteristics, clinical care, and volumes of intravenous fluid were similar between groups. Care was nonadherent to the allocated treatment for less than 10% of patients in each group. The primary outcome occurred in 36.6% of intervention and 43.4% of usual care participants (relative risk [RR], 0.84 [95% CI, 0.71-1.01]; absolute risk reduction, 6.8% [95% CI, ?0.3% to 13.9%]; P?=?.07). There was no significant difference between groups for any secondary outcomes. Five intervention patients (1.4%) experienced cardiovascular serious adverse events within 24 hours compared with none in the usual care group. Findings of the meta-analysis of 38 trials, including data from this study, suggest that the intervention is associated with fewer complications (intervention, 488/1548 [31.5%] vs control, 614/1476 [41.6%]; RR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.71-0.83]) and a nonsignificant reduction in hospital, 28-day, or 30-day mortality (intervention, 159/3215 deaths [4.9%] vs control, 206/3160 deaths [6.5%]; RR, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.67-1.01]) and mortality at longest follow-up (intervention, 267/3215 deaths [8.3%] vs control, 327/3160 deaths [10.3%]; RR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.74-1.00]).Conclusions and relevance: in a randomized trial of high-risk patients undergoing major gastrointestinal surgery, use of a cardiac output–guided hemodynamic therapy algorithm compared with usual care did not reduce a composite outcome of complications and 30-day mortality. However, inclusion of these data in an updated meta-analysis indicates that the intervention was associated with a reduction in complication rate

Effectiveness of a national quality improvement programme to improve survival after emergency abdominal surgery (EPOCH): a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial

Background: Emergency abdominal surgery is associated with poor patient outcomes. We studied the effectiveness of a national quality improvement (QI) programme to implement a care pathway to improve survival for these patients. Methods: We did a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial of patients aged 40 years or older undergoing emergency open major abdominal surgery. Eligible UK National Health Service (NHS) hospitals (those that had an emergency general surgical service, a substantial volume of emergency abdominal surgery cases, and contributed data to the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit) were organised into 15 geographical clusters and commenced the QI programme in a random order, based on a computer-generated random sequence, over an 85-week period with one geographical cluster commencing the intervention every 5 weeks from the second to the 16th time period. Patients were masked to the study group, but it was not possible to mask hospital staff or investigators. The primary outcome measure was mortality within 90 days of surgery. Analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. This study is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN80682973. Findings: Treatment took place between March 3, 2014, and Oct 19, 2015. 22 754 patients were assessed for elegibility. Of 15 873 eligible patients from 93 NHS hospitals, primary outcome data were analysed for 8482 patients in the usual care group and 7374 in the QI group. Eight patients in the usual care group and nine patients in the QI group were not included in the analysis because of missing primary outcome data. The primary outcome of 90-day mortality occurred in 1210 (16%) patients in the QI group compared with 1393 (16%) patients in the usual care group (HR 1·11, 0·96–1·28). Interpretation: No survival benefit was observed from this QI programme to implement a care pathway for patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery. Future QI programmes should ensure that teams have both the time and resources needed to improve patient care. Funding: National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research Programme

Effectiveness of a national quality improvement programme to improve survival after emergency abdominal surgery (EPOCH): a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial

BACKGROUND: Emergency abdominal surgery is associated with poor patient outcomes. We studied the effectiveness of a national quality improvement (QI) programme to implement a care pathway to improve survival for these patients. METHODS: We did a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial of patients aged 40 years or older undergoing emergency open major abdominal surgery. Eligible UK National Health Service (NHS) hospitals (those that had an emergency general surgical service, a substantial volume of emergency abdominal surgery cases, and contributed data to the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit) were organised into 15 geographical clusters and commenced the QI programme in a random order, based on a computer-generated random sequence, over an 85-week period with one geographical cluster commencing the intervention every 5 weeks from the second to the 16th time period. Patients were masked to the study group, but it was not possible to mask hospital staff or investigators. The primary outcome measure was mortality within 90 days of surgery. Analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. This study is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN80682973. FINDINGS: Treatment took place between March 3, 2014, and Oct 19, 2015. 22 754 patients were assessed for elegibility. Of 15 873 eligible patients from 93 NHS hospitals, primary outcome data were analysed for 8482 patients in the usual care group and 7374 in the QI group. Eight patients in the usual care group and nine patients in the QI group were not included in the analysis because of missing primary outcome data. The primary outcome of 90-day mortality occurred in 1210 (16%) patients in the QI group compared with 1393 (16%) patients in the usual care group (HR 1·11, 0·96-1·28). INTERPRETATION: No survival benefit was observed from this QI programme to implement a care pathway for patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery. Future QI programmes should ensure that teams have both the time and resources needed to improve patient care. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research Programme