Search

Objective To assess whether the administration of the ultra-short–acting β-blocker esmolol in cardiac surgery could have a cardioprotective effect that translates into improved postoperative outcomes. Design Single-center, double-blinded, parallel-group randomized controlled trial. Setting A tertiary care referral center. Participants Patients undergoing elective cardiac surgery with preoperative evidence of left ventricular end-diastolic diameter >60 mm and/or left ventricular ejection fraction Interventions Patients were assigned randomly to receive either esmolol (1 mg/kg as a bolus before aortic cross-clamping and 2 mg/kg mixed in the cardioplegia solution) or placebo in a 1:1 allocation ratio. Measurements and Main Results The primary composite endpoint of prolonged intensive care unit stay and/or in-hospital mortality occurred in 36/98 patients (36%) in the placebo group versus 27/102 patients (27%) in the esmolol group (p = 0.13). In the esmolol group, a reduction in the maximum inotropic score during the first 24 postoperative hours was observed (10 [interquartile range 5-15] v 7 [interquartile range 5-10.5]; p = 0.04), as well as a trend toward a reduction in postoperative low-cardiac-output syndrome (13/98 v 6/102; p = 0.08) and the rate of hospital admission at one year (26/95 v 16/96; p = 0.08). A trend toward an increase in the number of patients with ejection fraction ≥60% at hospital discharge also was observed (4/95 v 11/92; p = 0.06). Conclusions In the present trial, esmolol as a cardioplegia adjuvant enhanced postoperative cardiac performance but did not reduce a composite endpoint of prolonged intensive care unit stay and/or mortality.

Background Delirium after cardiac surgery is associated with adverse outcomes, including prolonged hospital stay, prolonged intensive care unit stay, and increased mortality. Effective preventive interventions and treatments still are largely unknown. Aim This systematic review aimed to gather and summarize the existing evidence from randomized trials concerning interventions studied in the prevention or treatment of delirium in adult patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Methods A systematic review of the literature using a key word strategy and Boolean operators was performed. PubMed and the Cochrane and Scopus databases were searched for pertinent studies until July 2018 (no inception limit). Results Of 2,556 articles identified, 56 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review—39 addressed pharmacologic strategies and 17 nonpharmacologic interventions. Interestingly, 51 (91%) trials focused on delirium prevention and only 5 (9%) on delirium treatment. Most of the analyzed studies were recent double-blind, single-center trials conducted in Europe or North America, with a low risk of bias. Overall, 38 different interventions were identified: 15 (26%) interventions were performed before surgery, 20 (36%) in the operating room, and 21 (38%) after surgery. The most frequently analyzed strategies were the administration of dexmedetomidine, ketamine, antipsychotics, glucocorticoids, propofol, opioids, volatile anesthetics, local anesthetics, and remote ischemic preconditioning. The analyzed strategies were extremely heterogenous, and dexmedetomidine was the most promising measure able to prevent the development of postoperative delirium. Conclusions In the present systematic review of 56 randomized controlled trials that examined 38 interventions, the authors found that dexmedetomidine was the most frequently studied agent and that it might reduce the occurrence of delirium after cardiac surgery.

Objective: A careful choice of perioperative care strategies is pivotal to improve survival in cardiac surgery. However, there is no general agreement or particular attention to which nonsurgical interventions can reduce mortality in this setting. The authors sought to address this issue with a consensus-based approach. Design: A systematic review of the literature followed by a consensus-based voting process. Setting: A web-based international consensus conference. Participants: More than 400 physicians from 52 countries participated in this web-based consensus conference. Interventions: The authors identified all studies published in peer-reviewed journals that reported on interventions with a statistically significant effect on mortality in the setting of cardiac surgery through a systematic Medline/PubMed search and contacts with experts. These studies were discussed during a consensus meeting and those considered eligible for inclusion in this study were voted on by clinicians worldwide. Measurements and Main Results: Eleven interventions finally were selected: 10 were shown to reduce mortality (aspirin, glycemic control, high-volume surgeons, prophylactic intra-aortic balloon pump, levosimendan, leuko-depleted red blood cells transfusion, noninvasive ventilation, tranexamic acid, vacuum-assisted closure, and volatile agents), whereas 1 (aprotinin) increased mortality. A significant difference in the percentages of agreement among different countries and a variable gap between agreement and clinical practice were found for most of the interventions. Conclusions: This updated consensus process identified 11 nonsurgical interventions with possible survival implications for patients undergoing cardiac surgery. This list of interventions may help cardiac anesthesiologists and intensivists worldwide in their daily clinical practice and can contribute to direct future research in the field. Orion Pharma ; Abbott Laboratories ; Pall ; Tenax

Objective Of the 230 million patients undergoing major surgical procedures every year, more than 1 million will die within 30 days. Thus, any nonsurgical interventions that help reduce perioperative mortality might save thousands of lives. The authors have updated a previous consensus process to identify all the nonsurgical interventions, supported by randomized evidence, that may help reduce perioperative mortality. Design and Setting A web-based international consensus conference. Participants The study comprised 500 clinicians from 61 countries. Interventions A systematic literature search was performed to identify published literature about nonsurgical interventions, supported by randomized evidence, showing a statistically significant impact on mortality. A consensus conference of experts discussed eligible papers. The interventions identified by the conference then were submitted to colleagues worldwide through a web-based survey. Measurements and Main Results The authors identified 11 interventions contributing to increased survival (perioperative hemodynamic optimization, neuraxial anesthesia, noninvasive ventilation, tranexamic acid, selective decontamination of the gastrointestinal tract, insulin for tight glycemic control, preoperative intra-aortic balloon pump, leuko-depleted red blood cells transfusion, levosimendan, volatile agents, and remote ischemic preconditioning) and 2 interventions showing increased mortality (beta-blocker therapy and aprotinin). Interventions then were voted on by participating clinicians. Percentages of agreement among clinicians in different countries differed significantly for 6 interventions, and a variable gap between evidence and clinical practice was noted. Conclusions The authors identified 13 nonsurgical interventions that may decrease or increase perioperative mortality, with variable agreement by clinicians. Such interventions may be optimal candidates for investigation in high-quality trials and discussion in international guidelines to reduce perioperative mortality.

Objectives Democracy-based medicine is a combination of evidence-based medicine (systematic review), expert assessment, and worldwide voting by physicians 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’ agreement were investigated. The gap between agreement and use/avoidance and the influence of country origin on physicians’ 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’ agreement. Conclusions Physicians’ 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.