The Discovery of Myocardial Preconditioning Using Volatile Anesthetics: A History and Contemporary Clinical Perspective

Myocardial protection in cardiac surgery: a comprehensive review of current therapies and future cardioprotective strategies

Cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass results in global myocardial ischemia-reperfusion injury, leading to significant postoperative morbidity and mortality. Although cardioplegia is the cornerstone of intraoperative cardioprotection, a number of additional strategies have been identified. The concept of preconditioning and postconditioning, despite its limited direct clinical application, provided an essential contribution to the understanding of myocardial injury and organ protection. Therefore, physicians can use different tools to limit perioperative myocardial injury. These include the choice of anesthetic agents, remote ischemic preconditioning, tight glycemic control, optimization of respiratory parameters during the aortic unclamping phase to limit reperfusion injury, appropriate choice of monitoring to optimize hemodynamic parameters and limit perioperative use of catecholamines, and early reintroduction of cardioprotective agents in the postoperative period. Appropriate management before, during, and after cardiopulmonary bypass will help to decrease myocardial damage. This review aimed to highlight the current advancements in cardioprotection and their potential applications during cardiac surgery.

Mortality and morbidity after total intravenous anaesthesia versus inhalational anaesthesia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

General anaesthesia is provided to more than 300 million surgical patients worldwide, every year. It is administered either through total intravenous anaesthesia, using only intravenous agents, or through inhalational anaesthesia, using volatile anaesthetic agents. The debate on how this affects postoperative patient outcome is ongoing, despite an abundance of published trials. The relevance of this topic has grown by the increasing concern about the contribution of anaesthetic gases to the environmental impact of surgery. We aimed to summarise all available evidence on relevant patient outcomes with total intravenous anaesthesia versus inhalational anaesthesia.

Methods

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched PubMed/Medline, Embase and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled trials for works published from January 1, 1985 to August 1, 2023 for randomised controlled trials comparing total intravenous anaesthesia using propofol versus inhalational anaesthesia using the volatile anaesthetics sevoflurane, desflurane or isoflurane. Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts and full text articles, and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane Collaboration tool. Outcomes were derived from a recent series of publications on consensus definitions for Standardised Endpoints for Perioperative trials (StEP). Primary outcomes covered mortality and organ-related morbidity. Secondary outcomes were related to anaesthetic and surgical morbidity. This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023430492).

Findings

We included 317 randomised controlled trials, comprising 51,107 patients. No difference between total intravenous and inhalational anaesthesia was seen in the primary outcomes of in-hospital mortality (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.67-1.66, 27 trials, 3846 patients), 30-day mortality (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.70-1.36, 23 trials, 9667 patients) and one-year mortality (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.88-1.48, 13 trials, 9317 patients). Organ-related morbidity was similar between groups except for the subgroup of elderly patients, in which total intravenous anaesthesia was associated with a lower incidence of postoperative cognitive dysfunction (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.40-0.97, 11 trials, 3834 patients) and a better score on postoperative cognitive dysfunction tests (standardised mean difference 1.68, 95% CI 0.47-2.88, 9 trials, 4917 patients). In the secondary outcomes, total intravenous anaesthesia resulted in a lower incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.56-0.67, 145 trials, 23,172 patients), less emergence delirium (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.29-0.56, 32 trials, 4203 patients) and a higher quality of recovery score (QoR-40 mean difference 6.45, 95% CI 3.64-9.25, 17 trials, 1835 patients).

Interpretation

The results indicate that postoperative mortality and organ-related morbidity was similar for intravenous and inhalational anaesthesia. Total intravenous anaesthesia offered advantages in postoperative recovery.

Funding

Dutch Society for Anaesthesiology (NVA).

Impact of anesthesia on postoperative breast cancer prognosis: A narrative review

The incidence of breast cancer has exhibited an annually increasing trend, and the disease has become the most common malignant tumour worldwide. Currently, the primary treatment for breast cancer is surgical resection. However, metastatic recurrence is the main cause of cancer-related death in this patient population. Various factors are associated with breast cancer prognosis, and anaesthesia-induced changes in the tumour microenvironment have attracted increasing attention. To date, however, it remains unclear whether anaesthetic drugs have a positive or negative impact on cancer outcomes after surgery. The present article reviews the effects of different anaesthetics on the postoperative prognosis of breast cancer surgery to guide the choice of anaesthetic technique(s) and agents for such patients.

A Multimodal Cardioprotection Strategy During Cardiac Surgery: The ProCCard Study

OBJECTIVE

The ProCCard study tested whether combining several cardioprotective interventions would reduce the myocardial and other biological and clinical damage in patients undergoing cardiac surgery.

DESIGN

Prospective, randomized, controlled trial.

SETTING

Multicenter tertiary care hospitals.

PARTICIPANTS

210 patients scheduled to undergo aortic valve surgery.

INTERVENTIONS

A control group (standard of care) was compared to a treated group combining five perioperative cardioprotective techniques: anesthesia with sevoflurane, remote ischemic preconditioning, close intraoperative blood glucose control, moderate respiratory acidosis (pH 7.30) just before aortic unclamping (concept of the "pH paradox"), and gentle reperfusion just after aortic unclamping.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The primary outcome was the postoperative 72-h area under the curve (AUC) for high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I (hsTnI). Secondary endpoints were biological markers and clinical events occurring during the 30 postoperative days and the prespecified subgroup analyses. The linear relationship between the 72-h AUC for hsTnI and aortic clamping time, significant in both groups (p < 0.0001), was not modified by the treatment (p = 0.57). The rate of adverse events at 30 days was identical. A non-significant reduction of the 72-h AUC for hsTnI (-24%, p = 0.15) was observed when sevoflurane was administered during cardiopulmonary bypass (46% of patients in the treated group). The incidence of postoperative renal failure was not reduced (p = 0.104).

CONCLUSION

This multimodal cardioprotection has not demonstrated any biological or clinical benefit during cardiac surgery. The cardio- and reno-protective effects of sevoflurane and remote ischemic preconditioning therefore remain to be demonstrated in this context.

Acute Lung Injury in aortic dissection : new insights in anesthetic management strategies

Acute aortic dissection (AAD) is a severe cardiovascular disease characterized by rapid progress and a high mortality rate. The incidence of acute aortic dissection is approximately 5 to 30 per 1 million people worldwide. In clinical practice, about 35% of AAD patients are complicated with acute lung injury (ALI). AAD complicated with ALI can seriously affect patients' prognosis and even increase mortality. However, the pathogenesis of AAD combined with ALI remains largely unknown. Given the public health burden of AAD combined with ALI, we reviewed the anesthetic management advances and highlighted potential areas for clinical practice.

Volatile Anaesthesia versus Total Intravenous Anaesthesia for Cardiac Surgery—A Narrative Review

Recent research has contested the previously accepted paradigm that volatile anaesthetics improve outcomes in cardiac surgery patients when compared to intravenous anaesthesia. In this review we summarise the mechanisms of myocardial ischaemia/reperfusion injury and cardioprotection in cardiac surgery. In addition, we make a comprehensive analysis of evidence comparing outcomes in patients undergoing cardiac surgery under volatile or intravenous anaesthesia, in terms of mortality and morbidity (cardiac, neurological, renal, pulmonary).

Safe sedation management using volatile anesthetics during cardiopulmonary bypass

Several pieces of evidence suggest that volatile anesthetics (VAs), which were originally used as sedatives, have myocardial protective effects against cardiac ischemia-reperfusion injury. In Europe and the United States, the use of VAs during cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) is widespread, as 2019 European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS)/European Association of Cardiothoracic Anaesthesiology/European Board of Cardiovascular Perfusion, 2011 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association, and 2017 EACTS guidelines recommend their use in cardiovascular surgery, based on their potential myocardial protective effects. In other countries, including Japan, the use of VAs is gradually increasing. Therefore, it is important to be aware of the risks and possible adverse events associated with VA use during CPB to ensure safe sedation management. Herein, we describe in detail issues such as intraoperative awareness, air pollution, and damage to oxygenators due to VA use and propose precautions.

Heart Failure after Cardiac Surgery: The Role of Halogenated Agents, Myocardial Conditioning and Oxidative Stress

Heart disease requires a surgical approach sometimes. Cardiac-surgery patients develop heart failure associated with ischemia induced during extracorporeal circulation. This complication could be decreased with anesthetic drugs. The cardioprotective effects of halogenated agents are based on pre- and postconditioning (sevoflurane, desflurane, or isoflurane) compared to intravenous hypnotics (propofol). We tried to put light on the shadows walking through the line of the halogenated anesthetic drugs’ effects in several enzymatic routes and oxidative stress, waiting for the final results of the ACDHUVV-16 clinical trial regarding the genetic modulation of this kind of drugs.

Effect of Volatile Anesthetics on Myocardial Infarction After Coronary Artery Surgery: A Post Hoc Analysis of a Randomized Trial

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effect of volatile anesthetics on the rates of postoperative myocardial infarction (MI) and cardiac death after coronary artery bypass graft (CABG).

DESIGN

A post hoc analysis of a randomized trial.

SETTING

Cardiac surgical operating rooms.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients undergoing elective, isolated CABG.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomized to receive a volatile anesthetic (desflurane, isoflurane, or sevoflurane) or total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA). The primary outcome was hemodynamically relevant MI (MI requiring high-dose inotropic support or prolonged intensive care unit stay) occurring within 48 hours from surgery. The secondary outcome was 1-year death due to cardiac causes.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

A total of 5,400 patients were enrolled between April 2014 and September 2017 (2,709 patients randomized to the volatile anesthetics group and 2,691 to TIVA). The mean age was 62 ± 8.4 years, and the median baseline ejection fraction was 57% (50-67), without differences between the 2 groups. Patients in the volatile group had a lower incidence of MI with hemodynamic complications both in the per-protocol (14 of 2,530 [0.6%] v 27 of 2,501 [1.1%] in the TIVA group; p = 0.038) and as-treated analyses (16 of 2,708 [0.6%] v 29 of 2,617 [1.1%] in the TIVA group; p = 0.039), but not in the intention-to-treat analysis (17 of 2,663 [0.6%] v 28 of 2,667 [1.0%] in the TIVA group; p = 0.10). Overall, deaths due to cardiac causes were lower in the volatile group (23 of 2,685 [0.9%] v 40 of 2,668 [1.5%] than in the TIVA group; p = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

An anesthetic regimen, including volatile agents, may be associated with a lower rate of postoperative MI with hemodynamic complication in patients undergoing CABG. Furthermore, it may reduce long-term cardiac mortality.

Inhaled Anesthetics: Environmental Role, Occupational Risk, and Clinical Use

Inhaled anesthetics have been in clinical use for over 150 years and are still commonly used in daily practice. The initial view of inhaled anesthetics as indispensable for general anesthesia has evolved during the years and, currently, its general use has even been questioned. Beyond the traditional risks inherent to any drug in use, inhaled anesthetics are exceptionally strong greenhouse gases (GHG) and may pose considerable occupational risks. This emphasizes the importance of evaluating and considering its use in clinical practices. Despite the overwhelming scientific evidence of worsening climate changes, control measures are very slowly implemented. Therefore, it is the responsibility of all society sectors, including the health sector to maximally decrease GHG emissions where possible. Within the field of anesthesia, the potential to reduce GHG emissions can be briefly summarized as follows: Stop or avoid the use of nitrous oxide (N2O) and desflurane, consider the use of total intravenous or local-regional anesthesia, invest in the development of new technologies to minimize volatile anesthetics consumption, scavenging systems, and destruction of waste gas. The improved and sustained awareness of the medical community regarding the climate impact of inhaled anesthetics is mandatory to bring change in the current practice.

Effect of remote ischaemic preconditioning on mortality and morbidity after non-cardiac surgery: meta-analysis

Background

Remote ischaemic preconditioning (RIPC) has been shown to have a protective role on vital organs exposed to reperfusion injury. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the effects of non-invasive RIPC on clinical and biochemical outcomes in patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery

Methods

A systematic literature search of PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and Cochrane databases was carried out in February 2020. RCTs investigating the effect of non-invasive RIPC in adults undergoing non-cardiac surgery were included. Meta-analyses and trial sequential analyses (TSAs) were performed on cardiovascular events, acute kidney injury, and short- and long-term mortality.

Results

Some 43 RCTs including 3660 patients were included. The surgical areas comprised orthopaedic, vascular, abdominal, pulmonary, neurological, and urological surgery. Meta-analysis showed RIPC to be associated with fewer cardiovascular events in non-cardiac surgery (13 trials, 1968 patients, 421 events; odds ratio (OR) 0.68, 95 per cent c.i. 0.47 to 0.96; P = 0.03). Meta-analyses of the effect of RIPC on acute kidney injury (12 trials, 1208 patients, 211 events; OR 1.14, 0.78 to 1.69; P = 0.50; I² = 9 per cent), short-term mortality (7 trials, 1239 patients, 65 events; OR 0.65, 0.37 to 1.12; P = 0.12; I² = 0 per cent), and long-term mortality (4 trials, 1167 patients, 9 events; OR 0.67, 0.18 to 2.55; P = 0.56; I² = 0 per cent) showed no significant differences for RIPC compared with standard perioperative care in non-cardiac surgery. However, TSAs showed that the required information sizes have not yet been reached.

Conclusion

Application of RIPC to non-cardiac surgery might reduce cardiovascular events, but not acute kidney injury or all-cause mortality, but currently available data are inadequate to confirm or reject an assumed intervention effect.

Pharmacological preconditioning protects from ischemia/reperfusion-induced apoptosis by modulating Bcl-xL expression through a ROS-dependent mechanism

Myocardial ischemia/reperfusion (I/R) injury is a frequent perioperative threat, with numerous strategies developed to limit and/or prevent it. One interesting axis of research is the anesthetic preconditioning (APc) agent's hypothesis (such as sevoflurane, SEV). However, APc's mode of action is still poorly understood and volatile anesthetics used as preconditioning agents are often not well suited in clinical practice. Here, in vitro using H9C2 cells lines (in myeloblast state or differentiated toward cardiomyocytes) and in vivo in mice, we identified that SEV-induced APc is mediated by a mild induction of reactive oxygen species (ROS) that activates Akt and induces the expression of the anti-apoptotic protein B-cell lymphoma-extra large (Bcl-xL), therefore protecting cardiomyocytes from I/R-induced death. Furthermore, we extended these results to human cardiomyocytes (derived from induced pluripotent stem - IPS - cells). Importantly, we demonstrated that this protective signaling pathway induced by SEV could be stimulated using the antidiabetic agent metformin (MET), suggesting the preconditioning properties of MET. Altogether, our study identified a signaling pathway allowing APc of cardiac injuries as well as a rational for the use of MET as a pharmacological preconditioning agent to prevent I/R injuries.

Role of Anaesthetic Choice in Improving Outcome after Cardiac Surgery

Clinical background

Volatile anaesthetics (VAs) have been shown to protect cardiomyocytes against ischaemia and reperfusion injury in cardiac surgery.

Clinical problems

VAs have been shown in multiple trials and meta-analyses to be associated with better outcomes when compared to intravenous anaesthesia in cardiac surgery. However, recent data from a large randomised controlled trial do not confirm the superiority of VA as compared to total intravenous anaesthesia in this population.

Review objectives

This mini review presents the VA cardioprotective effects, their clinical use in cardiac surgery and the most recent evidence that compares VA to intravenous anaesthesia for reducing perioperative morbidity. At present, there is no clear superiority of VA over intravenous anaesthesia in improving the outcome after cardiac surgery.

Disease Mechanisms of Perioperative Organ Injury

Despite substantial advances in anesthesia safety within the past decades, perioperative mortality remains a prevalent problem and can be considered among the top causes of death worldwide. Acute organ failure is a major risk factor of morbidity and mortality in surgical patients and develops primarily as a consequence of a dysregulated inflammatory response and insufficient tissue perfusion. Neurological dysfunction, myocardial ischemia, acute kidney injury, respiratory failure, intestinal dysfunction, and hepatic impairment are among the most serious complications impacting patient outcome and recovery. Pre-, intra-, and postoperative arrangements, such as enhanced recovery after surgery programs, can contribute to lowering the occurrence of organ dysfunction, and mortality rates have improved with the advent of specialized intensive care units and advances in procedures relating to extracorporeal organ support. However, no specific pharmacological therapies have proven effective in the prevention or reversal of perioperative organ injury. Therefore, understanding the underlying mechanisms of organ dysfunction is essential to identify novel treatment strategies to improve perioperative care and outcomes for surgical patients. This review focuses on recent knowledge of pathophysiological and molecular pathways leading to perioperative organ injury. Additionally, we highlight potential therapeutic targets relevant to the network of events that occur in clinical settings with organ failure.

Cardioprotective Effect of Anesthetics: Translating Science to Practice

Cardiovascular diseases are the number one cause of mortality in the world, particularly among the aging population. Major adverse cardiac events are also a major contributor to perioperative complications, affecting 2.6% of noncardiac surgeries and up to 18% of cardiac surgeries. Cardioprotective effects of volatile anesthetics and certain intravenous anesthetics have been well-documented in preclinical studies; however, their clinical application has yielded conflicting results in terms of their efficacy. Therefore, better understanding of the underlying mechanisms and developing effective ways to translate these insights into clinical practice remain significant challenges and unmet needs in the area. Several recent reviews have focused on mechanistic dissection of anesthetic-mediated cardioprotection. The present review focuses on recent clinical trials investigating the cardioprotective effects of anesthetics in the past five years. In addition to highlighting the main outcomes of these trials, the authors provide their perspectives about the current gap in the field and potential directions for future investigations.

Volatile versus total intravenous anesthesia for 30-day mortality following non-cardiac surgery in patients with preoperative myocardial injury

We evaluated whether volatile anesthetics can improve the postoperative outcomes of non-cardiac surgery in patients with preoperative myocardial injury defined by the cardiac troponin elevation. From January 2010 to June 2018, 1254 adult patients with preoperative myocardial injury underwent non-cardiac surgery under general anesthesia and were enrolled in this study. Patients were stratified into following two groups according to anesthetic agents; 115 (9.2%) patients whose anesthesia was induced and maintained with continuous infusion of propofol and remifentanil (TIVA group) and 1139 (90.8%) patients whose anesthesia was maintainted with volatile anesthetics (VOLATILE group). The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. To diminish the remifentanil effect, a further analysis was conducted after excluding the patients who received only volatile anesthetics without remifentanil infusion. In a propensity-score matched analysis, 30-day mortality was higher in the TIVA group than the VOLATILE group (17.0% vs. 9.1%; hazard ratio [HR] 2.60; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.14-5.93; p = 0.02). In addition, the TIVA group showed higher 30-day mortality than the VOLATILE group, even after eliminating the effect of remifentanil infusion (15.8% vs. 8.3%; HR 4.62; 95% CI, 1.82-11.74; p = 0.001). In our study, the use of volatile anesthetics showed the significant survival improvement after non-cardiac surgery in patients with preoperative myocardial injury, which appears to be irrelevant to the remifentanil use. Further studies are needed to confirm this beneficial effect of volatile anesthetics. Clinical trial number and registry URL: KCT0004349 (www.cris.nih.go.kr).

Total Intravenous Anesthesia was Associated With Better Survival Outcomes After Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: A Retrospective Cohort Study With 3-Year Follow-Up in South Korea

OBJECTIVE

The authors aimed to investigate if the anesthetic technique was associated with 3-year all-cause mortality after isolated coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG).

DESIGN

Population-based cohort study.

SETTING

Cohort data obtained from the National Health Insurance Service database in South Korea.

PARTICIPANTS

All adult patients diagnosed with ischemic heart disease who underwent isolated CABG between January 2012 and December 2015.

EXPOSURES

The authors divided the cohort into the following 2 groups: the total intravenous anesthesia group using propofol (TIVA group) and the volatile anesthesia group.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The primary study endpoint was 3-year all-cause mortality. The authors enrolled 10,440 patients from 91 hospitals; among them, 3,967 patients were in the TIVA group and 6,473 were in the volatile anesthesia group. After propensity score matching, the authors included 5,656 patients (2,828 patients per group) in the final analysis. The 3-year all-cause mortality rates in the TIVA and volatile anesthesia groups were 15.3% (434/2,828) and 18.3% (518/2,828), respectively. The risk of 3-year all-cause mortality was 16% lower in the TIVA group than in the volatile anesthesia group (hazard ratio: 0.84, 95% confidence interval: 0.75-0.94; p = 0.002). Similar results were observed for 30-day, 90-day, and 1-year all-cause mortality after CABG.

CONCLUSION

Compared with volatile anesthesia, propofol-based TIVA was associated with decreased 3-year all-cause mortality in patients undergoing CABG. This was the first study to suggest that TIVA might be associated with an increase in survival at 3-year follow-up after CABG, and further studies are needed to confirm the optimal anesthetic choice for CABG.

Sevoflurane preconditioning inhibits cardiomyocyte injury induced by oxygen‑glucose deprivation by modulating TXNIP

The thioredoxin interaction protein (TXNIP) has been reported to be closely related to cell oxidative stress, apoptosis and inflammation. TXNIP is involved in the regulation of oxidative stress in lung and renal injury. However, it is unclear as to whether it participates in the protective effects of sevoflurane preconditioning in cardiomyocyte injury caused by oxidative stress in ischemia. In the present study, H9c2 cardiomyocytes were cultured with 0, 1.5, 2, 3.5, 5 or 6% sevoflurane for 3 h, followed by exposure to oxygen and glucose deprivation. The results demonstrated that oxygen and glucose deprivation induced an increase in TXNIP expression, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) release, caspase‑3 activity, reactive oxygen species and malondialdehyde production. Preconditioning of the H9c2 cells with 3.5% sevoflurane suppressed TXNIP expression, LDH leakage, caspase‑3 activity, reactive oxygen species and malondialdehyde production, and it promoted cell viability. TXNIP overexpression reversed the effects of 3.5% sevoflurane preconditioning on caspase‑3 activity, reactive oxygen production and cell viability. Furthermore, TXNIP modulated p27 expression via PKB (protein kinase B/AKT) phosphorylation following preconditioning with 3.5% sevoflurane, and oxygen and glucose deprivation. On the whole these findings indicated that sevoflurane preconditioning protected the H9c2 cells against injury induced by oxygen and glucose deprivation by modulating TXNIP, AKT activation and p27 signaling.

Noteworthy Literature in Cardiac Anesthesia for 2019

This article represents a selective review of literature published in 2019. Initial results from PubMed searching for a combination of terms, including cardiac anesthesiology and anesthesiology outcomes, yielded more than 1400 publications. From there, we manually screened the results and identified 5 major themes for the year of 2019, including transcatheter techniques, delirium and anesthesiology, coagulation management following cardiopulmonary bypass, perfusion management with del Nido cardioplegia, and applied clinical research. The following research accomplishments have expanded what is possible and set ambitious goals for the future.

The Impact of Anesthetic Regimen on Outcomes in Adult Cardiac Surgery: A Narrative Review

Despite improvements in surgical techniques and perioperative care, cardiac surgery still is burdened by relatively high mortality and frequent major postoperative complications, including myocardial dysfunction, pulmonary complications, neurologic injury, and acute kidney injury. Although the surgeon's skills and volume and patient- and procedure-related risk factors play a major role in the success of cardiac surgery, there is growing evidence that also optimizing perioperative care may improve outcomes significantly. The present review focuses on the aspects of perioperative care that are strictly related to the anesthesia regimen, with special reference to volatile anesthetics and neuraxial anesthesia, whose effect on outcome in adult cardiac surgery has been investigated extensively.

Effects of Volatile versus Total Intravenous Anesthesia on Occurrence of Myocardial Injury after Non-Cardiac Surgery

The cardioprotective effects of volatile anesthetics versus total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) are controversial, especially in patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery. Using current generation high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn), we aimed to evaluate the effect of anesthetics on the occurrence of myocardial injury after non-cardiac surgery (MINS). From February 2010 to December 2016, 3555 patients without preoperative hs-cTn elevation underwent non-cardiac surgery under general anesthesia. Patients were grouped according to anesthetic agent; 659 patients were classified into a propofol-remifentanil total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) group, and 2896 patients were classified into a volatile group. To balance the use of remifentanil between groups, a balanced group (n = 1622) was generated with patients who received remifentanil infusion in the volatile group, and two separate comparisons were performed (TIVA vs. volatile and TIVA vs. balanced). The primary outcome was occurrence of MINS, defined as rise of hs-cTn I ≥ 0.04 ng/mL within postoperative 48 hours. The secondary outcomes were 30-day mortality, postoperative acute kidney injury (AKI), and adverse events during hospital stay (mortality, type I myocardial infarction (MI), and new-onset arrhythmia). In propensity-matched analyses, the occurrence of MINS was lower in the TIVA group compared to the volatile group (OR 0.642; 95% CI 0.450–0.914; p = 0.014). However, after balancing the use of remifentanil, there was no difference between groups in the risk of MINS (OR 0.832; 95% CI 0.554–1.251; p-value = 0.377). There were no significant associations between the two groups in type 1 MI, new-onset atrial fibrillation, in-hospital and 30-day mortality before and after balancing the use of remifentanil. However, the incidence of postoperative AKI was lower in the TIVA group (OR 0.362; 95% CI 0.194–0.675; p-value = 0.001). After balancing the use of remifentanil, volatile anesthesia and TIVA showed comparable effects on MINS in patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery without preoperative myocardial injury. Further studies are needed on the benefit of remifentanil infusion.

Volatile anesthetics versus total intravenous anesthesia in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting: An updated meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

The benefits of volatile anesthetics in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) patients remain controversial. We aimed to conduct an updated meta-analysis to assess whether the use of volatile anesthetics during CABG could reduce mortality and other outcomes.

Methods

We searched eight databases from inception to June 2019 and included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effects of volatile anesthetics versus total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) in CABG patients. The primary outcomes were operative mortality and one-year mortality. The secondary outcomes included the length of stay in the intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital and postoperative safety outcomes (myocardial infarction, heart failure, arrhythmia, stroke, delirium, postoperative cognitive impairment, acute kidney injury, and the use of intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) or other mechanical circulatory support). Trial sequential analysis (TSA) was performed to control for random errors.

Results

A total of 89 RCTs comprising 14,387 patients were included. There were no significant differences between the volatile anesthetics and TIVA groups in operative mortality (relative risk (RR) = 0.92, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.68–1.24, p = 0.59, I² = 0%), one-year mortality (RR = 0.64, 95% CI: 0.32–1.26, p = 0.19, I² = 51%), or any of the postoperative safety outcomes. The lengths of stay in the ICU and hospital were shorter in the volatile anesthetics group than in the TIVA group. TSA revealed that the results for operative mortality, one-year mortality, length of stay in the ICU, heart failure, stroke, and the use of IABP were inconclusive.

Conclusions

Conventional meta-analysis suggests that the use of volatile anesthetics during CABG is not associated with reduced risk of mortality or other postoperative safety outcomes when compared with TIVA. TSA shows that the current evidence is insufficient and inconclusive. Thus, future large RCTs are required to clarify this issue.

Volatile Anesthetics versus Total Intravenous Anesthesia for Cardiac Surgery

BACKGROUND

Volatile (inhaled) anesthetic agents have cardioprotective effects, which might improve clinical outcomes in patients undergoing coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG).

METHODS

We conducted a pragmatic, multicenter, single-blind, controlled trial at 36 centers in 13 countries. Patients scheduled to undergo elective CABG were randomly assigned to an intraoperative anesthetic regimen that included a volatile anesthetic (desflurane, isoflurane, or sevoflurane) or to total intravenous anesthesia. The primary outcome was death from any cause at 1 year.

RESULTS

A total of 5400 patients were randomly assigned: 2709 to the volatile anesthetics group and 2691 to the total intravenous anesthesia group. On-pump CABG was performed in 64% of patients, with a mean duration of cardiopulmonary bypass of 79 minutes. The two groups were similar with respect to demographic and clinical characteristics at baseline, the duration of cardiopulmonary bypass, and the number of grafts. At the time of the second interim analysis, the data and safety monitoring board advised that the trial should be stopped for futility. No significant difference between the groups with respect to deaths from any cause was seen at 1 year (2.8% in the volatile anesthetics group and 3.0% in the total intravenous anesthesia group; relative risk, 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69 to 1.29; P = 0.71), with data available for 5353 patients (99.1%), or at 30 days (1.4% and 1.3%, respectively; relative risk, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.70 to 1.76), with data available for 5398 patients (99.9%). There were no significant differences between the groups in any of the secondary outcomes or in the incidence of prespecified adverse events, including myocardial infarction.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients undergoing elective CABG, anesthesia with a volatile agent did not result in significantly fewer deaths at 1 year than total intravenous anesthesia. (Funded by the Italian Ministry of Health; MYRIAD ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02105610.).