Perioperative angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin II type 1 receptor blockers for preventing mortality and morbidity in adults

The association of withholding or continuing angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin 2 receptor blockers on acute kidney injury after non-cardiac surgery

BACKGROUND

Withholding or continuing angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin 2 receptor blockers peri-operatively in non-cardiac surgery remains controversial as they may result in intra-operative hypotension and postoperative organ damage.

METHODS

We included patients prescribed angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin 2 receptor blockers who underwent surgical procedures > 1 h duration under general or spinal anaesthesia from January 2012 to June 2022 in a single centre. We categorised patients by whether these drugs were withheld for 24 h before surgery. We evaluated the association of withholding these drugs before non-cardiac surgery with creatinine concentrations that increased ≥ 26.4 μmol.l-1 in the first 48 postoperative hours (acute kidney injury). We also analysed changes in creatinine concentrations and estimated glomerular filtration rates.

RESULTS

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin 2 receptor blockers were withheld in 24,285 of 32,933 (74%) patients and continued in 8648 (26%) patients. We used propensity scores for drug discontinuation to match 8631 patient pairs who did or did not continue these drugs: acute kidney injury was recorded for 1791 (21%) patients who continued these drugs vs. 1587 (18%) who did not (OR (95%CI) 1.16 (1.08-1.25), p < 0.001). Intra-operative hypotension was recorded for 3892 (45%) patients who continued drugs vs. 3373 (39%) patients who did not (OR (95%CI) 1.28 (1.21-1.36), p < 0.001). Continuing drugs was independently associated with a mean increase in creatinine of 2.2 μmol.l-1 (p < 0.001) and a mean decrease in estimated glomerular filtration rate of 1.4 ml.min.1.73 m-2 (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Continuing angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin 2 receptor blockers 24 h before non-cardiac surgery was associated with intra-operative hypotension and postoperative acute kidney injury.

Management of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone inhibitors and other antihypertensives and their clinical effects on pre-anesthesia blood pressure

Background

Blood pressure fluctuations appear more significant in patients with poorly controlled hypertension and are known to be associated with adverse perioperative morbidity. In the present study, we aimed to determine the effects of antihypertensive drug treatment strategies on preanesthetic operating room blood pressure measurements.

Methods

A total of 717 patients participated in our study; 383 patients who were normotensive based on baseline measurements and not under antihypertensive therapy were excluded from the analysis. The remaining 334 patients were divided into six groups according to the antihypertensive drug treatment. These six groups were examined in terms of preoperative baseline and pre-anesthesia blood pressure measurements.

Results

As a result of the study, it was observed that 24% of patients had high blood pressure precluding surgery, and patients using renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors (RAASI) had higher pre-anesthesia systolic blood pressure than patients using other antihypertensive drugs. Patients who received beta-blockers were also observed to have the lowest pre-anesthesia systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, and mean blood pressure, compared to others.

Conclusions

Recently, whether RAASI should be continued preoperatively remains controversial. Our study shows that RAASI cannot provide optimal pre-anesthesia blood pressure and lead to an increase in the number of postponed surgeries, probably due to withdrawal of medication before the operation. Therefore, the preoperative discontinuation of RAASI should be reevaluated in future studies.

Guide de Pratique Clinique. Prise en charge de l’hypertension artérielle chez l’adulte en Tunisie

Ce document a été réalisé dans le cadre d'une collaboration entre l'Instance Nationale de l’Évaluation et de l'Accréditation en Santé (INEAS), la Société Tunisienne de Cardiologie et de Chirurgie Cardiovasculaire (STCCCV) et la Caisse Nationale d’Assurance Maladie (CNAM).

Prevention of hemorrhage-induced renal vasoconstriction and hypoxia by angiotensin II type 1 receptor antagonism in pigs

Angiotensin II (ANG II) is a potent vasoconstrictor and may reduce renal blood flow (RBF), causing renal hypoxia. Hypotensive hemorrhage elevates plasma ANG II levels and is associated with increased risk of acute kidney injury. We hypothesized that ANG II antagonism prevents renal vasoconstriction and hypoxia caused by hemorrhage. Pigs were anaesthetized, surgically prepared, and randomized to intravenous losartan (1.5 mg·kg^-1·h^-1, n = 8) or an equal volume of intravenous Ringer acetate (vehicle-treated, n = 8). Hemorrhage was induced by continuous aspiration of blood to reach and sustain mean arterial pressure of <50 mmHg for 30 min. Plasma ANG II levels, hemodynamics and oxygenation were assessed 60 min prehemorrhage, 30-min after the start of hemorrhage, and 60 min posthemorrhage. Erythropoietin mRNA was analyzed in cortical and medullary tissue sampled at the end of the experiment. Hypotensive hemorrhage increased plasma ANG II levels and decreased RBF and oxygen delivery in both groups. Losartan-treated animals recovered in RBF and oxygen delivery, whereas vehicle-treated animals had persistently reduced RBF and oxygen delivery. In accordance, renal vascular resistance increased over time post hemorrhage in vehicle-treated animals but was unchanged in losartan-treated animals. Renal oxygen extraction rate and cortical erythropoietin mRNA levels increased in the vehicle group but not in the losartan group. In conclusion, ANG II antagonism alleviates prolonged renal vasoconstriction and renal hypoxia in a large animal model of hypotensive hemorrhage.

Impact of Renin-Angiotensin System Blockers on Mortality in Veterans Undergoing Cardiac Surgery

Background

Renin‐angiotensin system blockers (RASBs) have well‐validated benefit in patients with hypertension, coronary artery disease, and left ventricular systolic dysfunction. Their use in the perioperative period, however, has been controversial, including in patients undergoing cardiac surgery, who often have a strong indication for their use. In the current study, we explore the impact of RASB use with 30‐day and 1‐year mortality after cardiac surgery.

Methods and Results

The Veterans Affairs Surgical Quality Improvement Program and Corporate Data Warehouse were data sources for this retrospective cohort study. A total of 37 197 veterans undergoing elective coronary artery bypass grafting and or valve repair or replacement over a 10‐year period met inclusion criteria and were stratified into 4 groups by preoperative exposure (preoperative exposure versus no preoperative exposure) and postoperative continuing exposure (current exposure versus no current exposure) to RASBs. After adjusting for all baseline covariates, the preoperative exposure/current exposure group had lower 30‐day and 1‐year mortality than the preoperative exposure/no current exposure (30‐day hazard ratio [HR], 0.25; 95% CI, 0.19–0.33 [P<0.001] and 1‐year HR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.33–0.48 [P<0.001] or no preoperative exposure/no current exposure (30‐day HR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.32–0.60 [P<0.001] and 1‐year HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.62–0.84 [P<0.001] groups. The no preoperative exposure/current exposure group had significantly lower 30‐day (HR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.14–0.71 [P=0.006]) and 1‐year (HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.53–0.77 [P<0.001]) mortality than the no preoperative exposure/no current exposure group.

Conclusions

Continuation of preoperative RASBs and initiation before discharge is associated with decreased mortality in veterans undergoing cardiac surgery. Given these findings, continuation of preoperative RASBs or initiation in the early postoperative period should be considered in patients undergoing cardiac surgery.

Pre-treatment with the angiotensin receptor 1 blocker losartan protects renal blood flow and oxygen delivery after propofol-induced hypotension in pigs

Hypotensive events are strongly correlated to the occurrence of perioperative acute kidney injury, but the underlying mechanisms for this are not completely elucidated. We hypothesised that anaesthesia-induced hypotension causes renal vasoconstriction and decreased oxygen delivery via angiotensin II-mediated renal vasoconstriction. Pigs were anaesthetised, surgically prepared and randomised to vehicle/losartan treatment (0.15 mg*kg⁻¹). A deliberate reduction in arterial blood pressure was caused by infusion of propofol (30 mg*kg⁻¹) for 10 min. Renal function and haemodynamics were recorded 60 min before and after hypotension. Propofol induced hypotension in all animals (p < 0.001). Renal blood flow (RBF) and renal oxygen delivery (RDO₂) decreased significantly regardless of treatment but more so in vehicle-treated compared to losartan-treated (p = 0.001, p = 0.02, respectively). During recovery RBF and RDO₂ improved to a greater extent in the losartan-treated compared to vehicle-treated (+ 28 ml*min⁻¹, 95%CI 8–50 ml*min⁻¹, p = 0.01 and + 3.1 ml*min⁻¹, 95%CI 0.3–5.8 ml*min⁻¹, p = 0.03, respectively). Sixty minutes after hypotension RBF and RDO₂ remained depressed in vehicle-treated, as renal vascular resistance was still increased (p < 0.001). In losartan-treated animals RBF and RDO₂ had normalised. Pre-treatment with losartan improved recovery of renal blood flow and renal oxygen delivery after propofol-induced hypotension, suggesting pronounced angiotensin II-mediated renal vasoconstriction during blood pressure reductions caused by anaesthesia.

Österreichischer Blutdruckkonsens 2019

Erhöhter Blutdruck bleibt eine Hauptursache von kardiovaskulären Erkrankungen, Behinderung und frühzeitiger Sterblichkeit in Österreich, wobei die Raten an Diagnose, Behandlung und Kontrolle auch in rezenten Studien suboptimal sind. Das Management von Bluthochdruck ist eine häufige Herausforderung für Ärztinnen und Ärzte vieler Fachrichtungen. In einem Versuch, diagnostische und therapeutische Strategien zu standardisieren und letztendlich die Rate an gut kontrollierten Hypertoniker/innen zu erhöhen und dadurch kardiovaskuläre Erkrankungen zu verhindern, haben 13 österreichische medizinische Fachgesellschaften die vorhandene Evidenz zur Prävention, Diagnose, Abklärung, Therapie und Konsequenzen erhöhten Blutdrucks gesichtet. Das hier vorgestellte Ergebnis ist der erste Österreichische Blutdruckkonsens. Die Autoren und die beteiligten Fachgesellschaften sind davon überzeugt, daß es einer gemeinsamen nationalen Anstrengung bedarf, die Blutdruck-assoziierte Morbidität und Mortalität in unserem Land zu verringern.

Renin-angiotensin system blocker use and the risk of acute kidney injury after colorectal cancer surgery: a population-based cohort study

OBJECTIVES

It is unknown whether preoperative use of ACE inhibitors (ACE-I) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) affects the risk of acute kidney injury (AKI) after colorectal cancer (CRC) surgery. We assessed the impact of preoperative ACE-I/ARB use on risk of AKI after CRC surgery.

DESIGN

Observational cohort study. Patients were divided into three exposure groups-current, former and non-users-through reimbursed prescriptions within 365 days before the surgery. AKI within 7 days after surgery was defined according to the current Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcome consensus criteria.

SETTING

Population-based Danish medical databases.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 9932 patients undergoing incident CRC surgery during 2005-2014 in northern Denmark were included through the Danish Colorectal Cancer Group Database.

OUTCOME MEASURE

We computed cumulative incidence proportions (risk) of AKI with 95% CIs for current, former and non-users of ACE-I/ARB, including death as a competing risk. We compared current and former users with non-users by computing adjusted risk ratios (aRRs) using log-binomial regression adjusted for demographics, comorbidities and CRC-related characteristics. We stratified the analyses of ACE-I/ARB users to address any difference in impact within relevant subgroups.

RESULTS

Twenty-one per cent were ACE-I/ARB current users, 6.4% former users and 72.3% non-users. The 7-day postoperative AKI risk for current, former and non-users was 26.4% (95% CI 24.6% to 28.3%), 25.2% (21.9% to 28.6%) and 17.8% (17.0% to 18.7%), respectively. The aRRs of AKI were 1.20 (1.09 to 1.32) and 1.16 (1.01 to 1.34) for current and former users, compared with non-users. The relative risk of AKI in current compared with non-users was consistent in all subgroups, except for higher aRR in patients with a history of hypertension.

CONCLUSIONS

Being a current or former user of ACE-I/ARBs is associated with an increased risk of postoperative AKI compared with non-users. Although it may not be a drug effect, users of ACE-I/ARBs should be considered a risk group for postoperative AKI.

Causes and prevention of postoperative myocardial injury

Over the past few years non-cardiac surgery has been recognised as a serious circulatory stress test which may trigger cardiovascular events such as myocardial infarction, in particular in patients at high risk. Detection of these postoperative cardiovascular events is difficult as clinical symptoms often go unnoticed. To improve detection, guidelines advise to perform routine postoperative assessment of cardiac troponin. Troponin elevation - or postoperative myocardial injury - can be caused by myocardial infarction. However, also non-coronary causes, such as cardiac arrhythmias, sepsis and pulmonary embolism, may play a role in a considerable number of patients with postoperative myocardial injury. It is crucial to acquire more knowledge about the underlying mechanisms of postoperative myocardial injury because effective prevention and treatment options are lacking. Preoperative administration of beta-blockers, aspirin, statins, clonidine, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers, and preoperative revascularisation have all been investigated as preventive options. Of these, only statins should be considered as the initiation or reload of statins may reduce the risk of postoperative myocardial injury. There is also not enough evidence for intraoperative measures such blood pressure optimisation or intensified medical therapy once patients have developed postoperative myocardial injury. Given the impact, better preoperative identification of patients at risk of postoperative myocardial injury, for example using preoperatively measured biomarkers, would be helpful to improve cardiac optimisation.

Can ACE-I Be a Silent Killer While Normal Renal Functions Falsely Secure Us?

The current case report represents a warning against serious hyperkalaemia and acidosis induced by ACE-I during surgical stress while normal renal function could deceive the attending anaesthetist. Arterial gas analysis for follow-up of haemoglobin loss accidentally discovered hyperkalaemia and acidosis. Glucose-insulin and furosemide successfully corrected hyperkalaemia after 25 minutes and acidosis after 3 hours. These complications could be explained by a deficient steroid stress response to surgery secondary to suppression by ACE-I. Event analysis and database search found that ACE-I induced aldosterone deficiency aggravated by surgical stress response with an inadequate increase in aldosterone secretion due to angiotensin II deficiency as a sequel of ACE-I leading to defective secretion of H+ and K+. Furosemide is recommended to secrete H+ and K+ compensating for aldosterone deficiency in addition to other antihyperkalaemia measures. Anaesthetising an ACE-I treated patient requires considering ACE-I as a potential cause of hyperkalaemia and acidosis.

Continuation versus discontinuation of antiplatelet therapy for bleeding and ischaemic events in adults undergoing non-cardiac surgery

BACKGROUND

Antiplatelet agents are recommended for people with myocardial infarction and acute coronary syndromes, transient ischaemic attack or stroke, and for those in whom coronary stents have been inserted. People who take antiplatelet agents are at increased risk of adverse events when undergoing non-cardiac surgery because of these indications. However, taking antiplatelet therapy also introduces risk to the person undergoing surgery because the likelihood of bleeding is increased. Discontinuing antiplatelet therapy before surgery might reduce this risk but subsequently it might make thrombotic problems, such as myocardial infarction, more likely.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of continuation versus discontinuation for at least five days of antiplatelet therapy on the occurrence of bleeding and ischaemic events in adults undergoing non-cardiac surgery under general, spinal or regional anaesthesia.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2018, Issue 1), MEDLINE (1946 to January 2018), and Embase (1974 to January 2018). We searched clinical trials registers for ongoing studies, and conducted backward and forward citation searching of relevant articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials of adults who were taking single or dual antiplatelet therapy, for at least two weeks, and were scheduled for elective non-cardiac surgery. Included participants had at least one cardiac risk factor. We planned to include quasi-randomized studies.We excluded people scheduled for minor surgeries under local anaesthetic or sedation in which bleeding that required transfusion or additional surgery was unlikely. We included studies which compared perioperative continuation of antiplatelet therapy versus discontinuation of antiplatelet therapy or versus substitution of antiplatelet therapy with a placebo for at least five days before surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, extracted data, assessed risk of bias and synthesized findings. Our primary outcomes were: all-cause mortality at longest follow-up (up to six months); all-cause mortality (up to 30 days). Secondary outcomes included: blood loss requiring transfusion of blood products; blood loss requiring further surgical intervention; risk of ischaemic events. We used GRADE to assess the quality of evidence for each outcome MAIN RESULTS: We included five RCTs with 666 randomized adults. We identified three ongoing studies.All study participants were scheduled for elective general surgery (including abdominal, urological, orthopaedic and gynaecological surgery) under general, spinal or regional anaesthesia. Studies compared continuation of single or dual antiplatelet therapy (aspirin or clopidogrel) with discontinuation of therapy for at least five days before surgery.Three studies reported adequate methods of randomization, and two reported methods to conceal allocation. Three studies were placebo-controlled trials and were at low risk of performance bias, and three studies reported adequate methods to blind outcome assessors to group allocation. Attrition was limited in four studies and two studies had reported prospective registration with clinical trial registers and were at low risk of selective outcome reporting bias.We reported mortality at two time points: the longest follow-up reported by study authors up to six months, and time point reported by study authors up to 30 days. Five studies reported mortality up to six months (of which four studies had a longest follow-up at 30 days, and one study at 90 days) and we found that either continuation or discontinuation of antiplatelet therapy may make little or no difference to mortality up to six months (risk ratio (RR) 1.21, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.34 to 4.27; 659 participants; low-certainty evidence); the absolute effect is three more deaths per 1000 with continuation of antiplatelets (ranging from eight fewer to 40 more). Combining the four studies with a longest follow-up at 30 days alone showed the same effect estimate, and we found that either continuation or discontinuation of antiplatelet therapy may make little or no difference to mortality at 30 days after surgery (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.34 to 4.27; 616 participants; low-certainty evidence); the absolute effect is three more deaths per 1000 with continuation of antiplatelets (ranging from nine fewer to 42 more).We found that either continuation or discontinuation of antiplatelet therapy probably makes little or no difference in incidences of blood loss requiring transfusion (RR 1.37, 95% CI 0.83 to 2.26; 368 participants; absolute effect of 42 more participants per 1000 requiring transfusion in the continuation group, ranging from 19 fewer to 119 more; four studies; moderate-certainty evidence); and may make little or no difference in incidences of blood loss requiring additional surgery (RR 1.54, 95% CI 0.31 to 7.58; 368 participants; absolute effect of six more participants per 1000 requiring additional surgery in the continuation group, ranging from seven fewer to 71 more; four studies; low-certainty evidence). We found that either continuation or discontinuation of antiplatelet therapy may make little or no difference to incidences of ischaemic events (to include peripheral ischaemia, cerebral infarction, and myocardial infarction) within 30 days of surgery (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.25 to 1.77; 616 participants; absolute effect of 17 fewer participants per 1000 with an ischaemic event in the continuation group, ranging from 39 fewer to 40 more; four studies; low-certainty evidence).We used the GRADE approach to downgrade evidence for all outcomes owing to limited evidence from few studies. We noted a wide confidence in effect estimates for mortality at the end of follow-up and at 30 days, and for blood loss requiring transfusion which suggested imprecision. We noted visual differences in study results for ischaemic events which suggested inconsistency.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found low-certainty evidence that either continuation or discontinuation of antiplatelet therapy before non-cardiac surgery may make little or no difference to mortality, bleeding requiring surgical intervention, or ischaemic events. We found moderate-certainty evidence that either continuation or discontinuation of antiplatelet therapy before non-cardiac surgery probably makes little or no difference to bleeding requiring transfusion. Evidence was limited to few studies with few participants, and with few events. The three ongoing studies may alter the conclusions of the review once published and assessed.

Perioperative management of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and/or angiotensin receptor blockers: a survey of perioperative medicine practitioners

Background

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) are the most commonly prescribed antihypertensive medications in higher-risk surgical patients. However, there is no clinical consensus on their use in the perioperative period, in part, due to an inconsistent evidence-base. To help inform the design of a large multi-centre randomized controlled trial (ISRCTN17251494), we undertook a questionnaire-based survey exploring variability in ACEi/ARB prescribing in perioperative practice.

Methods

The online survey included perioperative scenarios to examine how consistent respondents were with their stated routine preoperative practice. Clinicians with an academic interest in perioperative medicine were primarily targeted between July and September 2017. STROBE guidelines for observational research and ANZCA Trials Group Survey Reporting recommendations were adhered to.

Results

194 responses were received, primarily from clinicians practicing in the UK. A similar minority of respondents continue ACEi (n = 57; 30%) and ARBs (n = 62; 32%) throughout the perioperative period. However, timing of preoperative cessation was highly variable, and rarely influenced by the pharmacokinetics of individual ACE-i/ARBs. Respondents’ stated routine practice was frequently misaligned with their management of common pre- and postoperative scenarios involving continuation or restarting ACE-i/ARBs.

Discussion

This survey highlights many inconsistencies amongst clinicians’ practice in perioperative ACE-i/ARB management. Studies designed to reveal an enhanced understanding of perioperative mechanisms at play, coupled with randomised controlled trials, are required to rationally inform the clinical management of ACE-i/ARBs in patients most at risk of postoperative morbidity.

Incidence of Myocardial Infarction After High-Risk Vascular Operations in Adults

Importance

Advances in perioperative cardiac management and an increase in the number of endovascular procedures have made significant contributions to patients and postoperative myocardial infarction (POMI) risk following high-risk vascular procedures. Whether these changes have translated into real-world improvements in POMI incidence remain unknown.

Objective

To examine the temporal trends of myocardial infarction (MI) following high-risk vascular procedures.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A retrospective cohort study was performed using data collected from January 1, 2005, to December 31, 2013, in the American College of Surgeons National Surgery Quality Improvement Program database, to which participating hospitals across the United States report their preoperative, operative, and 30-day outcome data. A total of 90 303 adults who underwent a high-risk vascular procedure-open aortic surgery or infrainguinal bypass-during the study period were identified. Patients were divided into cohorts based on their year of operation, and their baseline cardiac risk factors and incidence of POMI were compared. Cases from 2005 to 2014 in the database were eligible for inclusion if one of their Current Procedural Terminology codes matched any of the operations identified as a high-risk vascular procedure. Data analysis took place from August 1, 2016, to November 15, 2016.

Exposures

The main exposure was the year of the operation. Other variables of interest included demographics, comorbidities, and other risk factors for MI.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Primary outcome of interest was the incidence of POMI.

Results

Of the 90 303 patients included in the study, 22 836 (25.3%) had undergone open aortic surgery and 67 467 (74.7%) had had infrainguinal bypass. The open aortic cohort comprised 16 391 men (71.9%), had a mean (SD) age of 69.1 (11.5) years, and was predominantly white (18 440 patients [80.8%] self-identified as white race/ethnicity). The infrainguinal bypass cohort included 41 845 men (62.1%), had a mean (SD) age of 66.7 (11.7) years, and had 51 043 patients (75.7%) who self-identified as white race/ethnicity. During the study period, patients who underwent open aortic procedures were more likely to be classified as American Society of Anesthesiologists class IV (7426 patients [32.6%] vs 15 683 [23.3%] for the infrainguinal bypass cohort) or class V (1131 [5.0%] vs 206 [0.3%]; P < .001) and to undergo emergency procedures (4852 [21.3%] vs 4954 [7.3%]; P < .001). The open aortic procedure cohort also experienced significantly higher actual incidence of POMI (464 [3.0%] vs 1270 [1.9%]; P < .001). From 2009 to 2014, the incidence of POMI demonstrated no substantial temporal change (2.7% in 2009 to 3.1% in 2014; P = .64 for trend). Postoperative MI was consistently associated with poor prognosis, with a 3.62-fold (95% CI, 2.25-5.82) to 11.77-fold (95% CI, 6.10-22.72) increased odds of cardiac arrest and a 3.01-fold (95% CI, 2.08-4.36) to 6.66-fold (95% CI, 4.66-9.52) increased odds of mortality.

Conclusions and Relevance

The incidence of MI did not significantly decrease in the past decade and has been consistently associated with worse clinical outcomes. Further inquiry into why advanced perioperative care did not reduce cardiac complications is important to quality improvement efforts.

Perioperative angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin II type 1 receptor blockers for preventing mortality and morbidity in adults

BACKGROUND

Perioperative hypertension requires careful management. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin II type 1 receptor blockers (ARBs) have shown efficacy in treating hypertension associated with surgery. However, there is lack of consensus about whether they can prevent mortality and morbidity.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically assess the benefits and harms of administration of ACEIs or ARBs perioperatively for the prevention of mortality and morbidity in adults (aged 18 years and above) undergoing any type of surgery under general anaesthesia.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the current issue of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2014, Issue 12), Ovid MEDLINE (1966 to 8 December 2014), EMBASE (1980 to 8 December 2014), and references of the retrieved randomized trials, meta-analyses, and systematic reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing perioperative administration of ACEIs or ARBs with placebo in adults (aged 18 years and above) undergoing any type of surgery under general anaesthesia. We excluded studies in which participants underwent procedures that required local anaesthesia only, or participants who had already been on ACEIs or ARBs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently performed study selection, assessed the risk of bias, and extracted data. We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included seven RCTs with a total of 571 participants in the review. Two of the seven trials involved 36 participants undergoing non-cardiac vascular surgery (infrarenal aortic surgery), and five involved 535 participants undergoing cardiac surgery, including valvular surgery, coronary artery bypass surgery, and cardiopulmonary bypass surgery. The intervention was started from 11 days to 25 minutes before surgery in six trials and during surgery in one trial. We considered all seven RCTs to carry a high risk of bias. The effects of ACEIs or ARBs on perioperative mortality and acute myocardial infarction were uncertain because the quality of the evidence was very low. The risk of death was 2.7% in the ACEIs or ARBs group and 1.6% in the placebo group (risk ratio (RR) 1.61; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.44 to 5.85). The risk of acute myocardial infarction was 1.7% in the ACEIs or ARBs group and 3.0% in the placebo group (RR 0.55; 95% CI 0.14 to 2.26). ACEIs or ARBs may improve congestive heart failure (cardiac index) perioperatively (mean difference (MD) -0.60; 95% CI -0.70 to -0.50, very low-quality evidence). In terms of rate of complications, there was no difference in perioperative cerebrovascular complications (RR 0.48; 95% CI 0.18 to 1.28, very low-quality evidence) and hypotension (RR 1.95; 95% CI 0.86 to 4.41, very low-quality evidence). Cardiac surgery-related renal failure was not reported. ACEIs or ARBs were associated with shortened length of hospital stay (MD -0.54; 95% CI -0.93 to -0.16, P value = 0.005, very low-quality evidence). These findings should be interpreted cautiously due to likely confounding by the clinical backgrounds of the participants. ACEIs or ARBs may shorten the length of hospital stay, (MD -0.54; 95% CI -0.93 to -0.16, very low-quality evidence) Two studies reported adverse events, and there was no evidence of a difference between the ACEIs or ARBs and control groups.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Overall, this review did not find evidence to support that perioperative ACEIs or ARBs can prevent mortality, morbidity, and complications (hypotension, perioperative cerebrovascular complications, and cardiac surgery-related renal failure). We found no evidence showing that the use of these drugs may reduce the rate of acute myocardial infarction. However, ACEIs or ARBs may increase cardiac output perioperatively. Due to the low and very low methodology quality, high risk of bias, and lack of power of the included studies, the true effect may be substantially different from the observed estimates. Perioperative (mainly elective cardiac surgery, according to included studies) initiation of ACEIs or ARBs therapy should be individualized.