Extubation time, hemodynamic stability, and postoperative pain control in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery: an evaluation of fentanyl, remifentanil, and nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs with propofol for perioperative and postoperative management

Efficacy of Remifentanil in Patients Undergoing Cardiac Surgery: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Remifentanil, characterized by its ultra-short action duration and nonorgan-dependent metabolism, is applied in postcardiac surgery settings worldwide. While previous studies have compared its efficacy with that of other opioids, it has never been compared to a single specific opioid. Here, we evaluated whether remifentanil shortens mechanical ventilation (MV) times in patients after cardiac surgery. We identified randomized controlled trials that compared various opioids in adults (≥18 years) admitted to the intensive care unit after cardiac surgery. The primary outcome was the duration of MV, expressed as the mean difference (MD) in minutes, with a 95% confidence interval (CI). A 60-min reduction was considered significant based on prior research. Data were sourced from MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Platforms Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov, and a frequentist network meta-analysis was conducted. The eight identified studies indicate no differences in the duration of MV between remifentanil and fentanyl (MD 0.09 min; 95%CI -36.89-37.08), morphine (MD -19 min; 95%CI -55.86-16.21), or sufentanil (MD -2.44 min; 95%CI -67.52-62.55). Our study revealed that remifentanil did not reduce MV times in patients after cardiac surgery. The study protocol was registered with the Open Science Forum (https://osf.io/) (DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/YAHW2).

Remi-fent 1-A pragmatic randomised controlled study to evaluate the feasibility of using remifentanil or fentanyl as sedation adjuncts in mechanically ventilated patients

Objective

To evaluate the feasibility of conducting a prospective randomised controlled trial (pRCT) comparing remifentanil and fentanyl as adjuncts to sedate mechanically ventilated patients.

Design

Single-center, open-labelled, pRCT with blinded analysis.

Setting

Australian tertiary intensive care unit (ICU).

Participants

Consecutive adults between June 2020 and August 2021 expected to receive invasive ventilation beyond the next day and requiring opioid infusion were included. Exclusion criteria were pregnant/lactating women, intubation >12 h, or study-drug hypersensitivity.

Interventions

Open-label fentanyl and remifentanil infusions per existing ICU protocols.

Outcomes

Primary outcomes were feasibility of recruiting ≥1 patient/week and >90 % compliance, namely no other opioid infusion used during the study period. Secondary outcomes included complications, ICU-, ventilator- and hospital-free days, and mortality (ICU, hospital). Blinded intention-to-treat analysis was performed concealing the allocation group.

Results

208 patients were enrolled (mean 3.7 patients/week). Compliance was 80.6 %. More patients developed complications with fentanyl than remifentanil: bradycardia (n = 44 versus n = 21; p < 0.001); hypotension (n = 78 versus n = 53; p < 0.01); delirium (n = 28 versus n = 15; p = 0.001). No differences were seen in ICU (24.3 % versus 27.6 %,p = 0.60) and hospital mortalities (26.2 % versus 30.5 %; p = 0.50). Ventilator-free days were higher with remifentanil (p = 0.01).

Conclusions

We demonstrated the feasibility of enrolling patients for a pRCT comparing remifentanil and fentanyl as sedation adjuncts in mechanically ventilated patients. We failed to attain the study-opioid compliance target, likely because of patients with complex sedative/analgesic requirements. Secondary outcomes suggest that remifentanil may reduce mechanical ventilation duration and decrease the incidence of complications. An adequately powered multicentric phase 2 study is required to evaluate these results.

Pain management after cardiac surgery via median sternotomy: A systematic review with procedure-specific postoperative pain management (PROSPECT) recommendations

BACKGROUND

Pain after cardiac surgery via median sternotomy can be difficult to treat, and if inadequately managed can lead to respiratory complications, prolonged hospital stays and chronic pain.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate available literature and develop recommendations for optimal pain management after cardiac surgery via median sternotomy.

DESIGN

A systematic review using PROcedure-SPECific Pain Management (PROSPECT) methodology.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials and systematic reviews published in the English language until November 2020 assessing postoperative pain after cardiac surgery via median sternotomy using analgesic, anaesthetic or surgical interventions.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Databases.

RESULTS

Of 319 eligible studies, 209 randomised controlled trials and three systematic reviews were included in the final analysis. Pre-operative, intra-operative and postoperative interventions that reduced postoperative pain included paracetamol, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), intravenous magnesium, intravenous dexmedetomidine and parasternal block/infiltration.

CONCLUSIONS

The analgesic regimen for cardiac surgery via sternotomy should include paracetamol and NSAIDs, unless contraindicated, administered intra-operatively and continued postoperatively. Intra-operative magnesium and dexmedetomidine infusions may be considered as adjuncts particularly when basic analgesics are not administered. It is not clear if combining dexmedetomidine and magnesium would provide superior pain relief compared with either drug alone. Parasternal block/surgical site infiltration is also recommended. However, no basic analgesics were used in the studies assessing these interventions. Opioids should be reserved for rescue analgesia. Other interventions, including cyclo-oxygenase-2 specific inhibitors, are not recommended because there was insufficient, inconsistent or no evidence to support their use and/or due to safety concerns.

Opioid-free anesthesia versus opioid-based anesthesia in patients undergoing cardiovascular and thoracic surgery: a meta-analysis and systematic review

BACKGROUND

Despite their extensive clinical use, opioids are characterized by several side effects. These complications, coupled with the ongoing opioid epidemic, have favored the rise of opioid-free-anesthesia (OFA). Herein, we perform the first pairwise meta-analysis of clinical outcomes for OFA vs opioid-based anesthesia (OBA) in patients undergoing cardiovascular and thoracic surgery.

METHODS

We comprehensively searched medical databases to identify studies comparing OFA and OBA in patients undergoing cardiovascular or thoracic surgery. Pairwise meta-analysis was performed using the Mantel-Haenszel method. Outcomes were pooled as risk ratios (RR) or standard mean differences (SMD) and their 95% confidence intervals (95% CI).

RESULTS

Our pooled analysis included 919 patients (8 studies), of whom 488 underwent surgery with OBA and 431 with OFA. Among cardiovascular surgery patients, compared to OBA, OFA was associated with significantly reduced post-operative nausea and vomiting (RR, 0.57; P = .042), inotrope need (RR .84, P = .045), and non-invasive ventilation (RR, .54; P = .028). However, no differences were observed for 24hr pain score (SMD, -.35; P = .510) or 48hr morphine equivalent consumption (SMD, -1.09; P = .139). Among thoracic surgery patients, there was no difference between OFA and OBA for any of the explored outcomes, including post-operative nausea and vomiting (RR, 0.41; P = .025).

CONCLUSION

Through the first pooled analysis of OBA vs OFA in a cardiothoracic-exclusive cohort, we found no significant difference in any of the pooled outcomes for thoracic surgery patients. Although limited to 2 cardiovascular surgery studies, OFA was associated with significantly reduced postoperative nausea and vomiting, inotrope need, and non-invasive ventilation in these patients. With growing use of OFA in invasive operations, further studies are needed to assess their efficacy and safety in cardiothoracic patients.

Systemic Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatories for Analgesia in Postoperative Critical Care Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Control Trials

While opioids are part of usual care for analgesia in the ICU, there are concerns regarding excess use. This is a systematic review of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) use in postoperative critical care adult patients.

DATA SOURCES

We searched Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online, Excerpta Medica database, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Cochrane Library, trial registries, Google Scholar, and relevant systematic reviews through March 2023.

STUDY SELECTION

Titles, abstracts, and full texts were reviewed independently and induplicate by two investigators to identify eligible studies. We included randomized control trials (RCTs) that compared NSAIDs alone or as an adjunct to opioids for systemic analgesia. The primary outcome was opioid utilization.

DATA EXTRACTION

In duplicate, investigators independently extracted study characteristics, patient demographics, intervention details, and outcomes of interest using predefined abstraction forms. Statistical analyses were conducted using Review Manager software Version 5.4. (The Cochrane Collaboration, Copenhagen, Denmark).

DATA SYNTHESIS

We included 15 RCTs (n = 1,621 patients) for admission to the ICU for postoperative management after elective procedures. Adjunctive NSAID therapy to opioids reduced 24-hour oral morphine equivalent consumption by 21.4 mg (95% CI, 11.8-31.0 mg reduction; high certainty) and probably reduced pain scores (measured by Visual Analog Scale) by 6.1 mm (95% CI, 12.2 decrease to 0.1 increase; moderate certainty). Adjunctive NSAID therapy probably had no impact on the duration of mechanical ventilation (1.6 hr reduction; 95% CI, 0.4 hr to 2.7 reduction; moderate certainty) and may have no impact on ICU length of stay (2.1 hr reduction; 95% CI, 6.1 hr reduction to 2.0 hr increase; low certainty). Variability in reporting adverse outcomes (e.g., gastrointestinal bleeding, acute kidney injury) precluded their meta-analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

In postoperative critical care adult patients, systemic NSAIDs reduced opioid use and probably reduced pain scores. However, the evidence is uncertain for the duration of mechanical ventilation or ICU length of stay. Further research is required to characterize the prevalence of NSAID-related adverse outcomes.

Practice Advisory for Preoperative and Intraoperative Pain Management of Cardiac Surgical Patients: Part 2

Pain after cardiac surgery is of moderate to severe intensity, which increases postoperative distress and health care costs, and affects functional recovery. Opioids have been central agents in treating pain after cardiac surgery for decades. The use of multimodal analgesic strategies can promote effective postoperative pain control and help mitigate opioid exposure. This Practice Advisory is part of a series developed by the Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists (SCA) Quality, Safety, and Leadership (QSL) Committee's Opioid Working Group. It is a systematic review of existing literature for various interventions related to the preoperative and intraoperative pain management of cardiac surgical patients. This Practice Advisory provides recommendations for providers caring for patients undergoing cardiac surgery. This entails developing customized pain management strategies for patients, including preoperative patient evaluation, pain management, and opioid use-focused education as well as perioperative use of multimodal analgesics and regional techniques for various cardiac surgical procedures. The literature related to this field is emerging, and future studies will provide additional guidance on ways to improve clinically meaningful patient outcomes.

Guidelines on enhanced recovery after cardiac surgery under cardiopulmonary bypass or off-pump

OBJECTIVE

To provide recommendations for enhanced recovery after cardiac surgery (ERACS) based on a multimodal perioperative medicine approach in adult cardiac surgery patients with the aim of improving patient satisfaction, reducing postoperative mortality and morbidity, and reducing the length of hospital stay.

DESIGN

A consensus committee of 20 experts from the French Society of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine (Société française d'anesthésie et de réanimation, SFAR) and the French Society of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery (Société française de chirurgie thoracique et cardio-vasculaire, SFCTCV) was convened. A formal conflict-of-interest policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. The entire guideline process was conducted independently of any industry funding. The authors were advised to follow the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to guide the assessment of the quality of evidence.

METHODS

Six fields were defined: (1) selection of the patient pathway and its information; (2) preoperative management and rehabilitation; (3) anaesthesia and analgesia for cardiac surgery; (4) surgical strategy for cardiac surgery and bypass management; (5) patient blood management; and (6) postoperative enhanced recovery. For each field, the objective of the recommendations was to answer questions formulated according to the PICO model (Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome). Based on these questions, an extensive bibliographic search was carried out and analyses were performed using the GRADE approach. The recommendations were formulated according to the GRADE methodology and then voted on by all the experts according to the GRADE grid method.

RESULTS

The SFAR/SFCTCV guideline panel provided 33 recommendations on the management of patients undergoing cardiac surgery under cardiopulmonary bypass or off-pump. After three rounds of voting and several amendments, a strong agreement was reached for the 33 recommendations. Of these recommendations, 10 have a high level of evidence (7 GRADE 1+ and 3 GRADE 1-); 19 have a moderate level of evidence (15 GRADE 2+ and 4 GRADE 2-); and 4 are expert opinions. Finally, no recommendations were provided for 3 questions.

CONCLUSIONS

Strong agreement existed among the experts to provide recommendations to optimise the complete perioperative management of patients undergoing cardiac surgery.

Comparison between remifentanil and other opioids in adult critically ill patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

To identify the efficacy and safety of remifentanil when compared with other opioids in adult critically ill patients.

METHODS

We searched for studies in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, and EMBASE that had been published up to May 31st, 2019. Randomized clinical trials using remifentanil comparing with other opioids for analgesia were included. Two reviewers independently applied eligibility criteria, assessed quality, and extracted data. Duration of mechanical ventilation was the primary outcome, and secondary outcomes included weaning time, intensive care unit (ICU), length of stay (LOS), hospital LOS, mortality, side effects, and costs.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies with 1233 patients were included. Remifentanil was associated with a significant reduction in the duration of mechanical ventilation in the adult ICU patients when compared with other opioids (P = .01). Remifentanil also reduced the weaning time (P = .02) and the ICU LOS when compared with other opioids (P = .01). There was no difference in the hospital LOS (P = .15), side effects (P = .39), and mortality (P = .79) between remifentanil and other opioids, what's more, remifentanil increased the costs of anesthesia (P < .001) but did not increase cost of hospitalization (P = .30) when comparing with other opioids.

CONCLUSIONS

Remifentanil reduced the duration of mechanical ventilation, weaning time, and ICU LOS when compared with other opioids in adult critically ill patients. Higher quality RCTs are necessary to prove our findings.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42016041438.

Malewicz N, Ebel M, K. Zahn P, H. Meyer-Frießem C. Pupillometric Monitoring of Nociception in Cardiac Anesthesia

BACKGROUND

High-dose opioids are conventionally used for cardiac anesthesia, but without monitoring of nociception. In non-cardiac surgical procedures the intra - operative dose of opioids can be individualized and reduced with pupillometric monitoring of the pupillary pain index (PPI; scale 1-9). A randomized controlled trial was carried out to explore whether pupillometry can be used for nociception monitoring in cardiac anesthesia and whether it leads to opioid reduction.

METHODS

A sample of 57 cardiac surgery patients receiving continuously administered sufentanil (initial dosage 0.7 μg*kg-¹*h-¹) was divided into a PPI group (sufentanil reduction if PPI<3 up to a minimum of 0.15 μg*kg-¹*h-¹, n=32) and a control group (standard anesthesia; n = 25). The primary outcome was the time from the end of anesthesia to extubation. The secondary outcomes were total intraoperative dose of sufentanil/noradrenaline, postoperative pain intensity (numeric rating scale [NRS] 0-10) and intraoperative awareness. German Clinical Trials Registry no. DRKS 00012329.

RESULTS

The primary outcome, extubation time, did not differ between the two groups (1.14 h, 95% confidence interval [-0.99; 3.27], p = 0.592). Compared with the control patients (68% male, age 70 ± 10.4 years, PPI 1.1 ± 0.2), the mean sufentanil infusion rate in the PPI patients (81% male, age 68 ± 10.3 years, PPI 1.1 ± 0.2) decreased by 81.8% (-0.68 μg*kg-¹*h-¹ [-0,7; -0.67], p<0.001) to the predetermined minimum level, without intraoperative awareness. Moreover, the noradrenaline dose was reduced by 56% (1235.51 μg [321.91; 2149.12], p = 0.005) and the postoperative pain intensity by 45% (2.11 NRS [0.93; 3.3] after 24 h, p = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

Pupillometry is appropriate for nociception monitoring in cardiac anesthesia. Thereby a considerable reduction of intraoperative opioids as well as increased intraoperative hemodynamic stability was achieved and postoperative opioid-induced hyperalgesia was prevented. The consistently low PPI scores, indicating adequate analgesia, suggest that further reduction of opioid doses is feasible.

Intraoperative Remifentanil Infusion and Postoperative Pain Outcomes After Cardiac Surgery-Results from Secondary Analysis of a Randomized, Open-Label Clinical Trial

DESIGN

Report of secondary pain outcomes from a prospective, randomized, open-label clinical trial that compared remifentanil and fentanyl on perioperative hyperglycemic response in cardiac surgery.

SETTING

Single institution, tertiary university hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

The study comprised 116 adult elective cardiac surgical patients.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants were randomly assigned to receive either intermittent fentanyl boluses (F) or continuous remifentanil infusion (R) intraoperatively.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Postoperative pain was evaluated with pain scores every 6 hours for 48 hours. Pain threshold to mechanical stimuli was measured around the sternotomy incision at 48 and 96 hours. The development of chronic pain was assessed using the numeric rating scale at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after discharge. The final analysis included 106 patients. Pain scores and wound hyperalgesia were not significantly different postoperatively between the groups. The incidence of chronic pain at 3 months was comparable in both groups (61% in group F v 58% in group R; p = 0.79). Pain of more-than-mild degree was seen in 13 (32%) patients in group F and 8 (19%) in group R (p = 0.25) at 3 months. Median pain scores were not significantly different between the groups at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after discharge from the hospital.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study's findings suggested that intraoperative remifentanil infusion does not significantly worsen pain outcomes in patients undergoing elective cardiac surgery.

Effectiveness of wound infusion of 0.2% ropivacaine by patient control analgesia pump after minithoracotomy aortic valve replacement: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Local anesthetic wound infusion has become an invaluable technique in multimodal analgesia. The effectiveness of wound infusion of 0.2% ropivacaine delivered by patient controlled analgesia (PCA) pump has not been evaluated in minimally invasive cardiac surgery. We tested the hypothesis that 0.2% ropivacaine wound infusion by PCA pump reduces the cumulative dose of opioid needed in the first 48 h after minithoracothomy aortic valve replacement (AVR).

METHODS

In this prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, 70 adult patients (31 female and 39 male) were analyzed. Patients were randomized to receive 0.2% ropivacaine or 0.9% saline wound infusion by PCA pump for 48 h postoperatively. PCA pump was programmed at 5 ml h^- 1 continuously and 5 ml of bolus with 60 min lockout. Pain levels were assessed and recorded hourly by Numeric Rating Scale (NRS). If NRS score was higher than three the patient was administered 3 mg of opioid piritramide repeated and titrated as needed until pain relief was achieved. The primary outcome was the cumulative dose of the opioid piritramide in the first 48 h after surgery. Secondary outcomes were frequency of NRS scores higher than three, patient's satisfaction with pain relief, hospital length of stay, side effects related to the local anesthetic and complications related to the wound catheter.

RESULTS

The cumulative dose of the opioid piritramide in the first 48 h after minithoracotomy AVR was significantly lower (p < 0.001) in the ropivacaine (R) group median 3 mg (IQR 6 mg) vs. 9 mg (IQR 9 mg). The number of episodes of pain where NRS score was greater than three median 2 (IQR 2), vs 3 (IQR 3), (p = 0.002) in the first 48 h after surgery were significantly lower in the ropivacaine group, compared to control. Patient satisfaction with pain relief in our study was high. There were no wound infections and no side-effects from the local anesthetic.

CONCLUSIONS

Wound infusion of local anesthetic by PCA pump significantly reduced opioid dose needed and improves pain control postoperatively. We have also shown that it is a feasible method of analgesia and it should be considered in the multimodal pain control strategy following minimally invasive cardiac surgery.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03079830 , date of registration: March 15, 2017. Retrospecitvely registered.

Comparing the effects of ketorolac and Paracetamol on postoperative pain relief after coronary artery bypass graft surgery. A randomized clinical trial

Introduction

Pain management after coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery remains challenging.

Objective

This study aimed to compare the effects of Ketorolac and Paracetamol on postoperative CABG pain relief.

Method

This double-blind randomized clinical trial study was conducted in Ahvaz, Iran, from September 2018–December 2019. Two consecutive groups of 60 patients undergoing elective on-pump coronary artery bypass graft surgery.

Intervention

The patients were divided into 0.5 mg/kg of ketorolac mg/dl and 10 mg/kg of Paracetamol after surgery for pain management. Primary outcomes were: visual analog pain scale (VAS) at the time point immediately after extubation (baseline) and at 6, 12, 24 and 48 h and the total dose of morphine consumption. Secondary outcomes included the hemodynamic variables, weaning time, chest tube derange, in-hospital mortality and myocardial infarction.

Statistical analysis: The data were analyzed using SPSS version 22(SPSS, Chicago, IL). The Mann-Whitney U-test was used to compare demographic data, VAS scores, vital signs, and side effects. Repeated measurements were tested within groups using Friedman’s ANOVA and the Wilcoxon rank-sum test. Values were expressed as means ± standard deviations. Statistical significance was defined as a p-value < 0.05.

Results

Compared with baseline scores, there were significant declines in VAS scores in both groups throughout the time sequence (P< 0.05). The statistical VAS score was slightly higher in the Paracetamol group at most time points, except for the time of 6 h. However, at 24 and 48 h, the VAS score in group Paracetamol was significantly higher than in group Ketorolac. There were no significant differences between groups about hemodynamic variables.

Conclusion

The efficacy of ketorolac is comparable to that of Paracetamol in postoperative CABG pain relief.

Trial registry

IRCT20150216021098N5. Registered at 2019-09-12.

Ultra-fast-track extubation vs. conventional extubation after cardiac surgery in a cardiovascular reference centre in Colombia. A longitudinal study

INTRODUCTION

The fast track / ultra-fast-track protocols are techniques used to optimise the patient care process and a quick recovery after cardiac surgery. They are one of the mainstays of efficient practice. With their use, the length of hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) stays are reduced, with a direct impact on costs and the quality of the health service.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the length of stay in the ICU, length of hospital stay, and post-operative mortality in ultra-fast-track extubated (uFTE) patients and those with conventional extubation (CE) after cardiac surgery.

METHODS

Longitudinal, analytical, retrospective study was conducted, with the period between the time of surgery and discharge being included as the study period.

RESULTS

A total of 396 patients older than 18 years who required cardiac surgery were included, of whom 207 patients had (uFTE) and 189 had CE. Although the groups were not comparable due to the statistical differences found, when performing the multivariate adjustment, uFTE maintained its statistical independence and was associated with lower cardiovascular morbidity, such as myocardial ischaemia (95% CI: 0.37-0.86; P = .01) and lower post-surgical vasopressor requirement (95% CI: 0.18-0.49; P < .01). No significant differences were found in the length of hospital stay, ICU stay, or post-operative mortality in the ICU.

CONCLUSION

Implementing the uFTE strategy, decreases cardiovascular morbidity and vasopressor requirement. The change to uFTE should be accompanied by changes in models and practices in patient recovery to standardised protocols. This study shows that uFTE did not reduce the length of ICU stay, hospital stay, or mortality.

Could remifentanil reduce duration of mechanical ventilation in comparison with other opioids for mechanically ventilated patients? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Sedation and analgesia are commonly required to relieve anxiety and pain in mechanically ventilated patients. Fentanyl and morphine are the most frequently used opioids. Remifentanil is a selective μ-opioid receptor that is metabolized by unspecific esterases and eliminated independently of liver or renal function. Remifentanil has a rapid onset and offset and a short context-sensitive half-life regardless of the duration of infusion, which may lead to reductions in weaning and extubation. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of remifentanil to that of other opioids in mechanically ventilated patients.

Methods

We conducted a search to identify relevant randomized controlled studies (RCTs) in the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and SinoMed databases that had been published up to 31 December 2016. The results were analysed using weighted mean differences (WMDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

Results

Twenty-three RCTs with 1905 patients were included. Remifentanil was associated with reductions in the duration of mechanical ventilation (mean difference -1.46; 95% CI -2.44 to -0.49), time to extubation after sedation cessation (mean difference -1.02; 95% CI -1.59 to -0.46), and ICU-LOS (mean difference -0.10; 95% CI -0.16 to -0.03). No significant differences were identified in hospital-LOS (mean difference -0.05; 95% CI -0.25 to 0.15), costs (mean difference -709.71; 95% CI -1590.98 to 171.55; I² 88%), mortality (mean difference -0.64; 95% CI -1.33 to 0.06; I² 87%) or agitation (mean difference -0.71; 95% CI -1.80 to 0.37; I² 93%).

Conclusions

Remifentanil seems to be associated with reductions in the duration of mechanical ventilation, time to extubation after cessation of sedation, and ICU-LOS. No significant differences were identified between remifentanil and other opioids in terms of hospital-LOS, costs, mortality or agitation.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13054-017-1789-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Fast-track cardiac care for adult cardiac surgical patients

BACKGROUND

Fast-track cardiac care is a complex intervention involving several components of care during cardiac anaesthesia and in the postoperative period, with the ultimate aim of early extubation after surgery, to reduce length of stay in the intensive care unit and in the hospital. Safe and effective fast-track cardiac care may reduce hospital costs. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2003, updated in 2012 and updated now in 2016.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the safety and effectiveness of fast-track cardiac care compared with conventional (not fast-track) care in adult patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Fast-track cardiac care intervention includes administration of low-dose opioid-based general anaesthesia or use of a time-directed extubation protocol, or both.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2015, Issue 5), MEDLINE (January 2012 to May 2015), Embase (January 2012 to May 2015), the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL; January 2012 to May 2015) and the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) Web of Science (January 2012 to May 2015), along with reference lists of articles, to identify additional trials. We applied no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomized controlled trials of adult cardiac surgical patients (coronary artery bypass grafts, aortic valve replacement, mitral valve replacement) that compared fast-track cardiac care and conventional (not fast-track) care groups. We focused on the following fast-track interventions, which were designed for early extubation after surgery: administration of low-dose opioid-based general anaesthesia during cardiac surgery and use of a time-directed extubation protocol after surgery. The primary outcome was risk of mortality. Secondary outcomes included postoperative complications, reintubation within 24 hours of surgery, time to extubation, length of stay in the intensive care unit and in the hospital, quality of life after surgery and hospital costs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted study data. We contacted study authors for additional information. We calculated a Peto odds ratio (OR) for risk of mortality and used a random-effects model to report risk ratio (RR), mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) for all secondary outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 28 trials (4438 participants) in the updated review. We considered most participants to be at low to moderate risk of death after surgery. We assessed two studies as having low risk of bias and 11 studies high risk of bias. Investigators reported no differences in risk of mortality within the first year after surgery between low-dose versus high-dose opioid-based general anaesthesia groups (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.25 to 1.12; eight trials, 1994 participants, low level of evidence) and between a time-directed extubation protocol versus usual care (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.45; 10 trials, 1802 participants, low level of evidence).Researchers noted no significant differences between low-dose and high-dose opioid-based anaesthesia groups in the following postoperative complications: myocardial infarction (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.99; eight trials, 1683 participants, low level of evidence), stroke (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.36 to 3.78; five trials, 562 participants, low level of evidence) and tracheal reintubation (RR 1.77, 95% CI 0.38 to 8.27; five trials, 594 participants, low level of evidence).Comparisons with usual care revealed no significant differences in the risk of postoperative complications associated with a time-directed extubation protocol: myocardial infarction (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.31; eight trials, 1378 participants, low level of evidence), stroke (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.33 to 2.16; 11 trials, 1646 participants, low level of evidence) and tracheal reintubation (RR 1.34, 95% CI 0.74 to 2.41; 12 trials, 1261 participants, low level of evidence).Although levels of heterogeneity were high, low-dose opioid anaesthesia was associated with reduced time to extubation (reduction of 4.3 to 10.5 hours, 14 trials, 2486 participants, low level of evidence) and length of stay in the intensive care unit (reduction of 0.4 to 7.0 hours, 12 trials, 1394 participants, low level of evidence). Use of a time-directed extubation protocol was associated with reduced time to extubation (reduction of 3.7 to 8.8 hours, 16 trials, 2024 participants, low level of evidence) and length of stay in the intensive care unit (reduction of 3.9 to 10.5 hours, 13 trials, 1888 participants, low level of evidence). However, these two fast-track care interventions were not associated with reduced total length of stay in the hospital (low level of evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Low-dose opioid-based general anaesthesia and time-directed extubation protocols for fast-track interventions have risks of mortality and major postoperative complications similar to those of conventional (not fast-track) care, and therefore appear to be safe for use in patients considered to be at low to moderate risk. These fast-track interventions reduced time to extubation and shortened length of stay in the intensive care unit but did not reduce length of stay in the hospital.

Pain and Agitation Management in Critically Ill Patients

Pain and agitation may be difficult to assess in a critically ill patient. Pain is best assessed by self-reporting pain scales; but in patients who are unable to communicate, behavioral pain scales seem to have benefit. Patients' sedation level should be assessed each shift and preferably by a validated ICU tool, such as the RASS or SAS scale. Pain is most appropriately treated with the use of opiates, and careful consideration should be given to the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of various analgesics to determine the optimal agent for each individual patient. Sedation levels should preferably remain light or with the use of a daily awakening trial. Preferred treatment of agitation is analgosedation with the addition of nonbenzodiazepine sedatives if necessary. There are risks associated with each agent used in the treatment of pain and agitation, and it is important to monitor patients for effectiveness, signs of toxicity, and adverse drug reactions.

Pathophysiology, assessment, and management of pain in critically ill adults

PURPOSE

The pathophysiology of pain in critically ill patients, the role of pain assessment in optimal pain management, and pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic strategies for pain prevention and treatment are reviewed.

SUMMARY

There are many short- and long-term consequences of inadequately treated pain, including hyperglycemia, insulin resistance, an increased risk of infection, decreased patient comfort and satisfaction, and the development of chronic pain. Clinicians should have an understanding of the basic physiology of pain and the patient populations that are affected. Pain should be assessed using validated pain scales that are appropriate for the patient's communication status. Opioids are the cornerstone of pain treatment. The use of opioids, administered via bolus dosing or continuous infusion, should be guided by patient-specific goals of care in order to avoid adverse events. A multimodal approach to pain management, including the use of regional analgesia, may improve patient outcomes and decrease opioid-related adverse events, though there are limited relevant data in adult critically ill patient populations. Nonpharmacologic strategies have been shown to be effective adjuncts to pharmacologic regimens that can improve patient-reported pain intensity and reduce analgesic requirements. Analgesic regimens need to take into account patient-specific factors and be closely monitored for safety and efficacy.

CONCLUSION

Acute pain management in the critically ill is a largely underassessed and undertreated area of critical care. Opioids are the cornerstone of treatment, though a multimodal approach may improve patient outcomes and decrease opioid-related adverse events.

A Randomized Controlled Trial of Adaptive Support Ventilation Mode to Wean Patients after Fast-track Cardiac Valvular Surgery

Background:

Adaptive support ventilation can speed weaning after coronary artery surgery compared with protocolized weaning using other modes. There are no data to support this mode of weaning after cardiac valvular surgery. Furthermore, control group weaning times have been long, suggesting that the results may reflect control group protocols that delay weaning rather than a real advantage of adaptive support ventilation.

Methods:

Randomized (computer-generated sequence and sealed opaque envelopes), parallel-arm, unblinded trial of adaptive support ventilation versus physician-directed weaning after adult fast-track cardiac valvular surgery. The primary outcome was duration of mechanical ventilation. Patients aged 18 to 80 yr without significant renal, liver, or lung disease or severe impairment of left ventricular function undergoing uncomplicated elective valve surgery were eligible. Care was standardized, except postoperative ventilation. In the adaptive support ventilation group, target minute ventilation and inspired oxygen concentration were adjusted according to blood gases. A spontaneous breathing trial was carried out when the total inspiratory pressure of 15 cm H2O or less with positive end-expiratory pressure of 5 cm H2O. In the control group, the duty physician made all ventilatory decisions.

Results:

Median duration of ventilation was statistically significantly shorter (P = 0.013) in the adaptive support ventilation group (205 [141 to 295] min, n = 30) than that in controls (342 [214 to 491] min, n = 31). Manual ventilator changes and alarms were less common in the adaptive support ventilation group, and arterial blood gas estimations were more common.

Conclusion:

Adaptive support ventilation reduces ventilation time by more than 2 h in patients who have undergone fast-track cardiac valvular surgery while reducing the number of manual ventilator changes and alarms.

Risk factors and early pharmacological interventions to prevent chronic postsurgical pain following cardiac surgery

Chronic postsurgical pain (CPSP) after cardiac surgery represents a significant clinical problem. The prevalence of CPSP varies widely between studies, but severe CPSP is present in less than 10% of the patients. Important differential diagnoses for CPSP after cardiac surgery are myocardial ischemia, sternal instability and mediastinitis. CPSP after cardiac surgery may be thoracic pain present at the site of the sternotomy or leg pain due to vein-graft harvesting. The CPSP can be neuropathic pain, visceral pain, somatic pain or mixed pain. Potential risk factors for CPSP are young age, female gender, overweight, psychological factors, preoperative pain, surgery-related factors and severe postoperative pain. In addition to standard postoperative analgesics, the use of N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) antagonists, alpha-2 agonists, local anesthetics, gabapentinoids, and corticosteroids are all proposed to reduce the risk for CPSP after cardiac surgery. Still, no specific pharmacological therapy, cognitive therapy or physical therapy is established to protect against CPSP. The only convincing prevention of CSPS is adequate treatment of acute postoperative pain irrespective of method. Hence, interventions against acute pain, preferably in a step-wise approach titrating the interventions for each patient's individual needs, are essential concerning prevention of CPSP after cardiac surgery. It is also important that surgeons consider the risk for CPSP as a part of the basis for decision-making around performing a surgical procedure and that patients are informed of this risk.

Palliative care in the ICU: relief of pain, dyspnea, and thirst--a report from the IPAL-ICU Advisory Board

PURPOSE

Pain, dyspnea, and thirst are three of the most prevalent, intense, and distressing symptoms of intensive care unit (ICU) patients. In this report, the interdisciplinary Advisory Board of the Improving Palliative Care in the ICU (IPAL-ICU) Project brings together expertise in both critical care and palliative care along with current information to address challenges in assessment and management.

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive review of literature focusing on intensive care and palliative care research related to palliation of pain, dyspnea, and thirst.

RESULTS

Evidence-based methods to assess pain are the enlarged 0-10 Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) for ICU patients able to self-report and the Critical Care Pain Observation Tool or Behavior Pain Scale for patients who cannot report symptoms verbally or non-verbally. The Respiratory Distress Observation Scale is the only known behavioral scale for assessment of dyspnea, and thirst is evaluated by patient self-report using an 0-10 NRS. Opioids remain the mainstay for pain management, and all available intravenous opioids, when titrated to similar pain intensity end points, are equally effective. Dyspnea is treated (with or without invasive or noninvasive mechanical ventilation) by optimizing the underlying etiological condition, patient positioning and, sometimes, supplemental oxygen. Several oral interventions are recommended to alleviate thirst. Systematized improvement efforts addressing symptom management and assessment can be implemented in ICUs.

CONCLUSIONS

Relief of symptom distress is a key component of critical care for all ICU patients, regardless of condition or prognosis. Evidence-based approaches for assessment and treatment together with well-designed work systems can help ensure comfort and related favorable outcomes for the critically ill.

Considerations for the use of short-acting opioids in general anesthesia

Anesthesiologists play a critical role in facilitating a positive perioperative experience and early recovery for patients. Depending on the kind of procedure or surgery, a wide variety of agents and techniques are currently available to anesthesiologists to administer safe and efficacious anesthesia. Notably, the fast-track or ambulatory surgery environment requires the use of agents that enable rapid induction, maintenance, and emergence combined with minimal adverse effects. Short-acting opioids demonstrate a safe and rapid onset/offset of effect; that short effect is both predictable and precise. It also ensures easier titration and reduced or rapidly reversed side effects. Due to their distinct pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties, and, in one case, rapid extra-hepatic clearance of remifentanil, these agents have several applications in general anesthesia.

Clinical practice guidelines for the management of pain, agitation, and delirium in adult patients in the intensive care unit

OBJECTIVE

To revise the "Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Sustained Use of Sedatives and Analgesics in the Critically Ill Adult" published in Critical Care Medicine in 2002.

METHODS

The American College of Critical Care Medicine assembled a 20-person, multidisciplinary, multi-institutional task force with expertise in guideline development, pain, agitation and sedation, delirium management, and associated outcomes in adult critically ill patients. The task force, divided into four subcommittees, collaborated over 6 yr in person, via teleconferences, and via electronic communication. Subcommittees were responsible for developing relevant clinical questions, using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation method (http://www.gradeworkinggroup.org) to review, evaluate, and summarize the literature, and to develop clinical statements (descriptive) and recommendations (actionable). With the help of a professional librarian and Refworks database software, they developed a Web-based electronic database of over 19,000 references extracted from eight clinical search engines, related to pain and analgesia, agitation and sedation, delirium, and related clinical outcomes in adult ICU patients. The group also used psychometric analyses to evaluate and compare pain, agitation/sedation, and delirium assessment tools. All task force members were allowed to review the literature supporting each statement and recommendation and provided feedback to the subcommittees. Group consensus was achieved for all statements and recommendations using the nominal group technique and the modified Delphi method, with anonymous voting by all task force members using E-Survey (http://www.esurvey.com). All voting was completed in December 2010. Relevant studies published after this date and prior to publication of these guidelines were referenced in the text. The quality of evidence for each statement and recommendation was ranked as high (A), moderate (B), or low/very low (C). The strength of recommendations was ranked as strong (1) or weak (2), and either in favor of (+) or against (-) an intervention. A strong recommendation (either for or against) indicated that the intervention's desirable effects either clearly outweighed its undesirable effects (risks, burdens, and costs) or it did not. For all strong recommendations, the phrase "We recommend …" is used throughout. A weak recommendation, either for or against an intervention, indicated that the trade-off between desirable and undesirable effects was less clear. For all weak recommendations, the phrase "We suggest …" is used throughout. In the absence of sufficient evidence, or when group consensus could not be achieved, no recommendation (0) was made. Consensus based on expert opinion was not used as a substitute for a lack of evidence. A consistent method for addressing potential conflict of interest was followed if task force members were coauthors of related research. The development of this guideline was independent of any industry funding.

CONCLUSION

These guidelines provide a roadmap for developing integrated, evidence-based, and patient-centered protocols for preventing and treating pain, agitation, and delirium in critically ill patients.

Fast-track cardiac care for adult cardiac surgical patients

BACKGROUND

Fast-track cardiac care is a complex intervention involving several components of care during cardiac anaesthesia and in the postoperative period, all with the ultimate aim of early extubation after surgery, to reduce the length of stay in the intensive care unit and in the hospital. Safe and effective fast-track cardiac care may reduce hospital costs. This is an update of a Cochrane review published in 2003.

OBJECTIVES

To update the evidence on the safety and effectiveness of fast-track cardiac care compared to conventional (not fast-track) care in adult patients undergoing cardiac surgery.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2012, Issue 3), MEDLINE (January 1966 to April 2012), EMBASE (January 1980 to April 2012), CINAHL (January 1982 to April 2012), and ISI Web of Science (January 2003 to April 2012). We searched reference lists of articles and contacted experts in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomized controlled trials of adult cardiac surgical patients (coronary artery bypass grafts, aortic valve replacement, mitral valve replacement) that compared fast-track cardiac care and conventional (not fast-track) care groups were included. We focused on the following fast-track interventions that were designed for early extubation after surgery, administration of low-dose opioid based general anaesthesia during cardiac surgery and the use of a time-directed extubation protocol after surgery. The primary outcome was the risk of mortality. Secondary outcomes included postoperative complications, reintubation within 24 hours of surgery, time to extubation, length of stay in the intensive care unit and in the hospital, quality of life after surgery and hospital costs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted the data. Study authors were contacted for additional information. We used a random-effects model and reported relative risk (RR), mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI).

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-five trials involving 4118 patients were included in the review. There were two studies with a low risk of bias and nine studies with a high risk of bias. There were no differences in the risk of mortality within the first year after surgery between low-dose versus high-dose opioid based general anaesthesia groups (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.28 to 1.18) and between early extubation protocol versus usual care groups (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.75).There were no significant differences between low-dose versus high-dose opioid based anaesthesia groups for postoperative complications: myocardial infarction (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.99), reintubation (RR 1.77, 95% CI 0.38 to 8.27), acute renal failure (RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.33 to 4.33), major bleeding (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.44), and stroke (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.36 to 3.78). Compared to the usual care, there were no significant differences in the risk of postoperative complications associated with early extubation: myocardial infarction (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.60), reintubation (RR 1.91, 95% CI 0.90 to 4.07), acute renal failure (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.19 to 3.10), major bleeding (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.44), stroke (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.31 to 2.46), major sepsis (RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.08 to 19.75) and wound infection (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.25 to 1.83).Although there were high levels of heterogeneity, both low-dose opioid anaesthesia and the use of time-directed extubation protocols were associated with reductions in the time to extubation (3.0 to 10.5 hours) and in the length of stay in the intensive care unit (0.4 to 8.7 hours). However, these fast-track care interventions were not associated with reductions in the total length of stay in hospital. One high quality cost-effectiveness analysis included in a randomized controlled trial showed that early extubation was likely to be cost-effective.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The use of low-dose opioid based general anaesthesia and time-directed protocols for fast-track interventions have similar risks of mortality and major postoperative complications to conventional (not fast-track) care, and therefore appear to be safe in patients considered to be at low to moderate risk. These fast-track interventions reduced the time to extubation and shortened the length of stay in the intensive care unit, but did not reduce the length of stay in the hospital.

Remifentanil in cardiac surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

The authors conducted a review of randomized controlled trials to identify advantages in clinically relevant outcomes in patients undergoing cardiac surgery with remifentanil.

DESIGN

Meta-analysis.

SETTING

Hospitals.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 1,473 patients from 16 randomized trials.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULT

PubMed, BioMedCentral, and conference proceedings were searched (updated May 2010) for randomized trials that compared remifentanil with fentanyl or sufentanil in cardiac anesthesia. Four independent reviewers performed data extraction, with divergences resolved by consensus. Overall analysis showed that the use of remifentanil was associated with a significant reduction in postoperative mechanical ventilation (WMD = -139 min [-244, -32], p for effect = 0.01, p for heterogeneity < 0.001, I(2) = 89%); length of hospital stay (WMD = -1.08 days [-1.60, -0.57], p for effect < 0.0001, p for heterogeneity = 0.004, I(2) = 71%); and cardiac troponin-I release (WMD = -2.08 ng/mL [-3.93, -0.24], p for effect = 0.03, p for heterogeneity < 0.02, I(2) = 74%). No difference was noted in mortality (3/344 [0.87%] in the remifentanil group vs [1.06%] the control group, OR 0.76 [0.17-3.38], p for effect = 0.72, p for heterogeneity = 0.35, I(2) = 5%).

CONCLUSIONS

Remifentanil reduces cardiac troponin release, time of mechanical ventilation, and length of hospital stay in patients undergoing cardiac surgery.

Factors that influence awakening in coronary artery bypass graft using propofol and remifentanil

BACKGROUND

The development of total intravenous anesthesia in coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery has led to increased interest in the use of combination of propofol and remifentanil. Early extubation in post-cardiac surgery reduces the length of stay in intensive care unit and hospital and costs. The purpose of this study is to evaluate which anesthetic factors affect awakening time after anesthesia.

METHODS

We enrolled twenty patients of ASA physical status II or III, scheduled for CABG in this study. All patients received a standardized propofol/remifentanil anesthesia as an effect site target controlled infusion. We recorded times to awakening and tracheal extubation, duration of cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) period, total time of anesthesia and operation. Also, we recorded dose of propofol, remifentanil, fentanyl and minimum body temperature during CPB. To predict the factors that affect awakening time as a dependent variable, we considered all measured parameters as independent variables, and analyzed multiple linear regressions.

RESULTS

The mean time responded to verbal command was 216.5 +/- 124.8 minutes after end of surgery. Among several parameters, minimum body temperature during CPB (P = 0.001) and total time of anesthesia (P = 0.003) were considered as significant factors that influence awakening time after CABG.

CONCLUSIONS

Minimum body temperature during CPB and the duration of anesthesia influence awakening time after CABG, significantly.