Feasibility of Anesthesia Maintenance With Sevoflurane During Cardiopulmonary Bypass: A Pilot Pharmacokinetics Study

2024 EACTS/EACTAIC/EBCP Guidelines on cardiopulmonary bypass in adult cardiac surgery

Clinical practice guidelines consolidate and evaluate all pertinent evidence on a specific topic available at the time of their formulation. The goal is to assist physicians in determining the most effective management strategies for patients with a particular condition. These guidelines assess the impact on patient outcomes and weigh the risk-benefit ratio of various diagnostic or therapeutic approaches. While not a replacement for textbooks, they provide supplementary information on topics relevant to current clinical practice and become an essential tool to support the decisions made by specialists in daily practice. Nonetheless, it is crucial to understand that these recommendations are intended to guide, not dictate, clinical practice, and should be adapted to each patient's unique needs. Clinical situations vary, presenting a diverse array of variables and circumstances. Thus, the guidelines are meant to inform, not replace, the clinical judgement of healthcare professionals, grounded in their professional knowledge, experience and comprehension of each patient's specific context. Moreover, these guidelines are not considered legally binding; the legal duties of healthcare professionals are defined by prevailing laws and regulations, and adherence to these guidelines does not modify such responsibilities. The European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS), the European Association of Cardiothoracic Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care (EACTAIC) and the European Board of Cardiovascular Perfusion (EBCP) constituted a task force of professionals specializing in cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) management. To ensure transparency and integrity, all task force members involved in the development and review of these guidelines submitted conflict of interest declarations, which were compiled into a single document available on the EACTS website (https://www.eacts.org/resources/clinical-guidelines). Any alterations to these declarations during the development process were promptly reported to the EACTS, EACTAIC and EBCP. Funding for this task force was provided exclusively by the EACTS, EACTAIC and EBCP, without involvement from the healthcare industry or other entities. Following this collaborative endeavour, the governing bodies of EACTS, EACTAIC and EBCP oversaw the formulation, refinement, and endorsement of these extensively revised guidelines. An external panel of experts thoroughly reviewed the initial draft, and their input guided subsequent amendments. After this detailed revision process, the final document was ratified by all task force experts and the leadership of the EACTS, EACTAIC and EBCP, enabling its publication in the European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, the British Journal of Anaesthesia and Interdisciplinary CardioVascular and Thoracic Surgery. Endorsed by the EACTS, EACTAIC and EBCP, these guidelines represent the official standpoint on this subject. They demonstrate a dedication to continual enhancement, with routine updates planned to ensure that the guidelines remain current and valuable in the ever-progressing arena of clinical practice.

Comparison between propofol and total inhalational anaesthesia on cardiovascular outcomes following on-pump cardiac surgery in higher-risk patients: a randomised controlled pilot and feasibility study

OBJECTIVES

Myocardial revascularisation and cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) can cause ischaemia-reperfusion injury, leading to myocardial and other end-organ damage. Volatile anaesthetics protect the myocardium in experimental studies. However, there is uncertainty about whether this translates into clinical benefits because of the coadministration of propofol and its detrimental effects, restricting myocardial protective processes.

METHODS

In this single-blinded, parallel-group randomised controlled feasibility trial, higher-risk patients undergoing elective coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery with an additive European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation ≥5 were randomised to receive either propofol or total inhalational anaesthesia as single agents for maintenance of anaesthesia. The primary outcome was the feasibility of recruiting and randomising 50 patients across two cardiac surgical centres, and secondary outcomes included the feasibility of collecting the planned perioperative data, clinically relevant outcomes and assessments of effective patient identification, screening and recruitment.

RESULTS

All 50 patients were recruited within 11 months in two centres, allowing for a 13-month hiatus in recruitment due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Overall, 50/108 (46%) of eligible patients were recruited. One patient withdrew before surgery and one patient did not undergo surgery. All but one completed in-hospital and 30-day follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

It is feasible to recruit and randomise higher-risk patients undergoing CABG surgery to a study comparing total inhalational and propofol anaesthesia in a timely manner and with high acceptance and completion rates.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04039854.

An innovative technique to improve safety of volatile anesthetics suction from the cardiopulmonary bypass circuit

Context:

Myocardial injury during cardiac surgery on cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) is a major determinant of morbidity and mortality. Preclinical and clinical evidence of dose- and time-related cardioprotective effects of volatile anesthetic drugs exist and their use during the whole surgery duration could improve perioperative cardiac protection. Even if administering volatile agents during CPB are relatively easy, technical problems, such as waste gas scavenging, may prevent safe and manageable administration of halogenated vapors during CPB.

Aims:

The aim of this study is to improve the safe administration of volatile anesthesia during CPB.

Settings and Design:

Tertiary teaching hospital.

Subjects and Methods:

We describe an original device that collects and disposes of any volatile anesthetic vapors present in the exit stream of the oxygenator, hence preventing its dispersal into the operating theatre environment and adaptively regulates pressure of oxygenator chamber in the CPB circuit.

Results:

We have so far applied a prototype of this device in more than 1300 adult cardiac surgery patients who received volatile anesthetics during the CPB phase.

Conclusions:

Widespread implementation of scavenging system like the one we designed may facilitate the perfusionist and the anesthesiologist in delivering these cardioprotective drugs with beneficial impact on patients’ outcome without compromising on safety.