The Effect of Propofol Versus Volatile Anesthetics on Persistent Pain After Cardiac Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Volatile Versus Total Intravenous Anesthesia on Postoperative Delirium in Adult Patients Undergoing Cardiac Valve Surgery: A Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

The effect of anesthesia regimens on postoperative delirium after on-pump cardiac valve surgery is yet undetermined. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of volatile anesthesia compared with propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) on the occurrence of delirium after on-pump cardiac valve surgery.

METHODS

This randomized clinical trial was conducted at a university academic hospital in China, from February 2019 to January 2021. Patients scheduled for on-pump cardiac valve surgery or combined valve with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgeries were randomly assigned to receive anesthesia maintenance with either a volatile anesthetic (sevoflurane or desflurane) or propofol-based TIVA. The primary outcome was the incidence of delirium during the first 7 days after surgery, assessed using the confusion assessment method for the intensive care unit (ICU). The secondary outcomes included duration of delirium, subtypes of delirium, 30-day mortality, pain score, major morbidity (including cerebral infarction, respiratory failure, and pneumonia), duration of mechanical ventilation, and lengths of ICU and hospital stay. The statistical analysis of the primary outcome variable was by Pearson's χ 2 test.

RESULTS

Among the 684 patients analyzed (mean age, 53.8 years; 381 [55.7%] women), 676 were assessed for the primary outcome. Postoperative delirium occurred in 63 of 337 (18.7%) patients receiving volatile anesthesia versus 76 of 339 (22.4%) patients receiving propofol-based TIVA (relative risk, 0.80; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.55-1.16; P = .231). There were no significant differences between the groups in any of the secondary outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients undergoing on-pump cardiac valve surgery, anesthesia maintenance with a volatile agent did not result in significantly fewer occurrences of postoperative delirium than propofol-based TIVA.

Inhalational or total intravenous anesthetic for cardiac surgery: does the debate even exist?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Perioperative myocardial injury related to cardiac surgery is associated with organ dysfunction and increased mortality. Volatile anesthetics (VA) have been used during cardiac surgery for decades because of their direct and indirect preconditioning and protection against ischemia-reperfusion injury. The current review provides a summary of the latest literature comparing pharmacological preconditioning and the potential benefits of using VA versus total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) for general anesthesia to improve outcomes after cardiac surgery.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent literature reports lower mortality and better outcomes when VA is used alone or in combination with remote ischemic preconditioning compared with groups receiving TIVA. However, inconsistent research findings over the years have led to continued debate regarding the anesthetic technique considered more favorable for cardiac surgery.

SUMMARY

Research findings regarding the use of volatile anesthetic versus TIVA for better outcomes after cardiac surgery are inconsistent. Variability in timing, duration, dosing, and type of VA as well as surgical and patient-related factors may have influenced these results. Therefore, either technique can reasonably be adopted depending on provider and institutional preference and used safely in patients undergoing cardiac surgery.

Year in Review 2020: Noteworthy Literature in Cardiothoracic Anesthesiology

The year 2020 was marred by the emergence of a deadly pandemic that disrupted every aspect of life. Despite the disruption, notable research accomplishments in the practice of cardiothoracic anesthesiology occurred in 2020 with an emphasis on optimizing care, improving outcomes, and expanding what is possible for patients undergoing cardiac surgery. This year's edition of Noteworthy Literature Review will focus on specific themes in cardiac anesthesiology that include preoperative anemia, predictors of acute kidney injury following cardiac surgery, pain management modalities, anticoagulation strategies after transcatheter aortic valve replacement, mechanical circulatory support, and future directions in research.

Does a combined intravenous-volatile anesthesia offer advantages compared to an intravenous or volatile anesthesia alone: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

In anesthesia, additive drug interactions are used for reducing dose and dose-dependent side-effects. The combination of propofol with volatile anesthetics is rather unusual but might have advantages compared to the single use regarding PONV, time to extubation, movement during surgery and postoperative pain perception.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and CENTRAL for relevant studies comparing combined intravenous volatile anesthesia with total intravenous or balanced anesthesia. The studies identified were summarized in a meta-analysis with the standardized mean difference or risk ratio as the effect size.

RESULTS

Ten studies provided data. The risk for PONV in the recovery room was significantly reduced for a combined anesthesia compared to a balanced anesthesia (RR 0.657, CI 0.502-0.860, p-value 0.002). There was no significant difference detected either in the time to extubation or in pain perception. Movement during surgery was significantly reduced for a combined compared to a total intravenous anesthesia (RR 0.241, CI 0.135-0.428, p-value 0.000).

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of propofol and volatiles may have some advantages in the early occurrence of PONV compared to a balanced anesthesia. To sufficiently evaluate potential advantages of a combination of volatiles and propofol further high-quality trials are needed.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42019126627 .