Search

Background: To maintain adequate oxygenation is of utmost importance in intraoperative care. However, clinical evidence supporting specific oxygen levels in distinct surgical settings is lacking. This study aimed to compare the effects of 30% and 80% oxygen in off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (OPCAB). Methods: This multicenter trial was conducted in three tertiary hospitals from August 2019 to August 2021. Patients undergoing OPCAB were cluster-randomized to receive either 30% or 80% oxygen intraoperatively, based on the month when the surgery was performed. The primary endpoint was the length of hospital stay. Intraoperative hemodynamic data were also compared. Results: A total of 414 patients were cluster-randomized. Length of hospital stay was not different in the 30% oxygen group compared to the 80% oxygen group (median, 7.0 days vs 7.0 days; the sub-distribution hazard ratio, 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.83–1.16; P = 0.808). The incidence of postoperative acute kidney injury was significantly higher in the 30% oxygen group than in the 80% oxygen group (30.7% vs 19.4%; odds ratio, 1.94; 95% CI 1.18–3.17; P = 0.036). Intraoperative time-weighted average mixed venous oxygen saturation was significantly higher in the 80% oxygen group (74% vs 64%; P < 0.001). The 80% oxygen group also had a significantly greater intraoperative time-weighted average cerebral regional oxygen saturation than the 30% oxygen group (56% vs 52%; P = 0.002). Conclusions: In patients undergoing OPCAB, intraoperative administration of 80% oxygen did not decrease the length of hospital stay, compared to 30% oxygen, but may reduce postoperative acute kidney injury. Moreover, compared to 30% oxygen, intraoperative use of 80% oxygen improved oxygen delivery in patients undergoing OPCAB. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03945565; April 8, 2019). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Minimalist transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) under monitored anesthesia care (MAC) emphasizes early recovery. Remimazolam is a novel benzodiazepine with a short recovery time. This study hypothesized that remimazolam is non-inferior to dexmedetomidine in terms of recovery after TAVR., Methods: In this retrospective observational study, remimazolam was compared to dexmedetomidine in patients who underwent TAVR under MAC at a tertiary academic hospital between July 2020 and July 2022. The primary outcome was timely recovery after TAVR, defined as discharge from the intensive care unit within the first day following the procedure. Propensity score matching was used to compare timely recovery between remimazolam and dexmedetomidine, applying a non-inferiority margin of -10%., Results: The study included 464 patients, of whom 218 received remimazolam and 246 received dexmedetomidine. After propensity score matching, 164 patients in each group were included in the analysis. Regarding timely recovery after TAVR, remimazolam was non-inferior to dexmedetomidine (152 of 164 [92.7%] in the remimazolam group versus 153 of 164 [93.3%] in the dexmedetomidine group, risk difference [95% CI]: -0.6% [-6.7%, 5.5%]). The use of remimazolam was associated with fewer postoperative vasopressors/inotropes (21 of 164 [12.8%] vs. 39 of 164 [23.8%]) and temporary pacemakers (TPMs) (76 of 164 [46.3%] vs. 108 of 164 [65.9%]) compared to dexmedetomidine., Conclusions: In patients undergoing TAVR under MAC, remimazolam was non-inferior to dexmedetomidine in terms of timely recovery. Remimazolam may be associated with better postoperative recovery profiles, including a lesser need for vasopressors/inotropes and TPMs.