Design and Organization of the Dexamethasone, Light Anesthesia and Tight Glucose Control (DeLiT) Trial: a factorial trial evaluating the effects of corticosteroids, glucose control, and depth-of-anesthesia on perioperative inflammation and morbidity from major non-cardiac surgery

Combined Application of Dexamethasone and Tranexamic Acid to Reduce the Postoperative Inflammatory Response and Improve Functional Outcomes in Total Hip Arthroplasty

Objective

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of combined use of tranexamic acid (TXA) and dexamethasone (DEX) for anti‐inflammatory and clinical outcomes after total hip arthroplasty (THA).

Methods

A total of 100 patients were included in this randomized, controlled study. Patients in the TXA + DEX group were administered TXA at a dose of 15 mg/kg, which was repeated 3 h after THA, and received 20 mg DEX. In contrast, patients in the TXA group were administered TXA at a dose of 15 mg/kg, which was repeated at 3 h postoperatively. C‐reactive protein (CRP), interleukin‐6 (IL‐6) and pain levels, incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), total blood loss and transfusion rates, postoperative fatigue, range of motion (ROM), length of hospital stay (LOS), analgesic rescue and antiemetic rescue consumption, and complications were compared in both groups.

Results

The CRP and IL‐6 levels were lower in the TXA + DEX group than in the TXA group (all P < 0.001) at 24 h, 48 h, and 72 h postoperatively. Patients in the TXA + DEX group had lower pain scores at rest and walking at 24 h postoperatively (all P < 0.001). In the TXA + DEX group, the incidence of PONV was lower (P = 0.005), postoperative fatigue (P < 0.001) was reduced, and analgesia and antiemetic rescue consumption were also reduced. The total blood loss, transfusion rate, LOS and hip ROM were similar in the two groups. There was no thrombosis, infection, or gastrointestinal bleeding in either group.

Conclusion

Compared to TXA alone, the combination of TXA + DEX can reduce postoperative inflammatory response, relieve pain, and reduce PONV and fatigue, without increasing the risk of complications. Therefore, the present study suggested that the combination of TXA + DEX is an effective and safe accelerated rehabilitation strategy for patients receiving primary unilateral THA.

The effects of dexamethasone, light anesthesia, and tight glucose control on postoperative fatigue and quality of life after major noncardiac surgery: A randomized trial

STUDY OBJECTIVES

The postoperative period is associated with an inflammatory response that may contribute to a number of complications including postoperative fatigue (POF) that impair patients' quality of life (QoL). We studied the impact of three potentially anti-inflammatory interventions (steroid administration, tight intraoperative glucose control, and light anesthesia) on POF and QoL in patients having major noncardiac surgery.

DESIGN

A randomized Trial.

SETTING

Operating room and postoperative recovery area/ICU/hospital floors.

PATIENTS

Patients undergoing major noncardiac surgery.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomized to perioperative IV dexamethasone (a total of 14 mg tapered over 3 days) versus placebo, intensive versus conventional glucose control (target 80-110 vs. 180-200 mg·dL^-1), and light versus deep anesthesia (Bispectral Index target of 55 vs. 35) in a 3-way factorial design.

MEASUREMENTS

In this planned sub-analysis, QoL was measured using SF-12 preoperatively and on postoperative day (POD) 30. POF was measured using Christensen VAS, pre-operatively, POD 1, and POD 3. We assessed the effect of each intervention on POF and on the physical and mental components of SF-12 summary scores with repeated-measures linear regression models.

MAIN RESULTS

326 patients with complete data were included in the SF-12 analysis and 306 were included in the QoL analysis. No difference was found between any of the intervention groups on fatigue or mean 30-day physical and mental components of SF-12 scores, after adjusting for preoperative score and imbalanced baseline variables (all P-value >0.07 for POF and >0.40 for QoL).

CONCLUSIONS

Steroid administration, tight intraoperative glucose control, and light anesthesia do not improve quality of life or postoperative fatigue after major surgery.

Effects of Single Low Dose of Dexamethasone before Noncardiac and Nonneurologic Surgery and General Anesthesia on Postoperative Cognitive Dysfunction-A Phase III Double Blind, Randomized Clinical Trial

Postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD) is a multifactorial adverse event most frequently in elderly patients. This study evaluated the effect of dexamethasone on POCD incidence after noncardiac and nonneurologic surgery. METHODS: One hundred and forty patients (ASA I-II; age 60–87 years) took part in a prospective phase III, double blind, randomized study involving the administration or not of 8 mg of IV dexamethasone before general anesthesia under bispectral index (BIS) between 35–45 or 46–55. Neuropsychological tests were applied preoperatively and on the 3rd, 7th, 21st, 90th and 180th days after surgery and compared with normative data. S100β was evaluated before and 12 hours after induction of anesthesia. The generalized estimating equations (GEE) method was applied, followed by the posthoc Bonferroni test considering P<0.05 as significant. RESULTS: On the 3rd postoperative day, POCD was diagnosed in 25.2% and 15.3% of patients receiving dexamethasone, BIS 35–45, and BIS 46–55 groups, respectively. Meanwhile, POCD was present in 68.2% and 27.2% of patients without dexamethasone, BIS 35–45 and BIS 46–55 groups (p<0.0001). Neuropsychological tests showed that dexamethasone associated to BIS 46–55 decreased the incidence of POCD, especially memory and executive function. The administration of dexamethasone might have prevented the postoperative increase in S100β serum levels. CONCLUSION: Dexamethasone can reduce the incidence of POCD in elderly patients undergoing surgery, especially when associated with BIS 46–55. The effect of dexamethasone on S100β might be related with some degree of neuroprotection.

Trial Registration:www.clinicaltrials.govNCT01332812

The intraoperative glycemic response to intravenous insulin during noncardiac surgery: a subanalysis of the DeLiT randomized trial

Patient characteristics may affect patients' response to insulin. We examined the impact of body weight and presence of diabetes on the response to insulin during noncardiac surgery. We studied 202 patients who were enrolled in the DeLiT Trial and received intraoperative intravenous insulin. Univariable and multivariable analyses (Bonferroni corrected) assessed the relationship between patient's response to the initial intraoperative I.V. bolus of regular insulin and the factors of interest. Blood glucose concentrations decreased 8.3 ± 10mg/dL (0.46 ± 0.56mmol/L) per unit of I.V. insulin in 30minutes. The response to insulin was similar in patients with or without diabetes (adjusted mean difference [97.5% confidence interval], 0.2 [-3.9, 4.2] mg/dL, 0.01 [-0.22, 0.24] mmol/L; P = .93). No relationship was found between insulin response and body weight (P=0.38). Our results suggest that adjustment for body weight and the presence of diabetes may not improve intraoperative insulin treatment algorithms.

WITHDRAWN: Targeting intensive glycaemic control versus targeting conventional glycaemic control for type 2 diabetes mellitus

The Cochrane Metabolic and Endocrine Disorders Group withdrew this review as of Issue 7, 2015 because the involvement of two authors (C Hemmingsen and SS Lund) being employed in pharmaceutical companies. The authors of the review and the Cochrane Metabolic and Endocrine Disorders Group did not find that this was a breach of the rules of the Cochrane Collaboration at the time when it was published. However, after the publication of the review, the Cochrane Collaboration requested withdrawal of the review due to the employment of the two authors. A new protocol for a review to cover this topic will be published. This will have a new title and a markedly improved protocol fulfilling new and important developments and standards within the Cochrane Collaboration as well as an improved inclusion and search strategy making it necessary to embark on a completely new review project.

The editorial group responsible for this previously published document have withdrawn it from publication.

Study protocol of a randomised controlled trial comparing perioperative intravenous insulin, GIK or GLP-1 treatment in diabetes-PILGRIM trial

Background

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is associated with poor outcome after surgery. The prevalence of DM in hospitalised patients is up to 40%, meaning that the anaesthesiologist will encounter a patient with DM in the operating room on a daily basis. Despite an abundance of published glucose lowering protocols and the known negative outcomes associated with perioperative hyperglycaemia in DM, there is no evidence regarding the optimal intraoperative glucose lowering treatment. In addition, protocol adherence is usually low and protocol targets are not simply met.

Recently, incretins have been introduced to lower blood glucose. The main hormone of the incretin system is glucagon-like peptide–1 (GLP-1). GLP-1 increases insulin and decreases glucagon secretion in a glucose-dependent manner, resulting in glucose lowering action with a low incidence of hypoglycaemia.

We set out to determine the optimal intraoperative treatment algorithm to lower glucose in patients with DM type 2 undergoing non-cardiac surgery, comparing intraoperative glucose-insulin-potassium infusion (GIK), insulin bolus regimen (BR) and GPL-1 (liragludite, LG) treatment.

Methods/Design

This is a multicentre randomised open label trial in patients with DM type 2 undergoing non-cardiac surgery. Patients are randomly assigned to one of three study arms; intraoperative glucose-insulin-potassium infusion (GIK), intraoperative sliding-scale insulin boluses (BR) or GPL-1 pre-treatment with liraglutide (LG). Capillary glucose will be measured every hour. If necessary, in all study arms glucose will be adjusted with an intravenous bolus of insulin. Researchers, care givers and patients will not be blinded for the assigned treatment. The main outcome measure is the difference in median glucose between the three study arms at 1 hour postoperatively. We will include 315 patients, which gives us a 90% power to detect a 1 mmol l⁻¹ difference in glucose between the study arms.

Discussion

The PILGRIM trial started in January 2014 and will provide relevant information on the perioperative use of GLP-1 agonists and the optimal intraoperative treatment algorithm in patients with diabetes mellitus type 2.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02036372

Targeting intensive glycaemic control versus targeting conventional glycaemic control for type 2 diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) have an increased risk of cardiovascular disease and mortality compared to the background population. Observational studies report an association between reduced blood glucose and reduced risk of both micro- and macrovascular complications in patients with T2D. Our previous systematic review of intensive glycaemic control versus conventional glycaemic control was based on 20 randomised clinical trials that randomised 29 ,986 participants with T2D. We now report our updated review.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of targeted intensive glycaemic control compared with conventional glycaemic control in patients with T2D.

SEARCH METHODS

Trials were obtained from searches of The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded, LILACS, and CINAHL (all until December 2012).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised clinical trials that prespecified targets of intensive glycaemic control versus conventional glycaemic control targets in adults with T2D.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed the risk of bias and extracted data. Dichotomous outcomes were assessed by risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Health-related quality of life and costs of intervention were assessed with standardized mean differences (SMD) and 95% Cl.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-eight trials with 34,912 T2D participants randomised 18,717 participants to intensive glycaemic control versus 16,195 participants to conventional glycaemic control. Only two trials had low risk of bias on all risk of bias domains assessed. The duration of the intervention ranged from three days to 12.5 years. The number of participants in the included trials ranged from 20 to 11,140. There were no statistically significant differences between targeting intensive versus conventional glycaemic control for all-cause mortality (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.08; 34,325 participants, 24 trials) or cardiovascular mortality (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.21; 34,177 participants, 22 trials). Trial sequential analysis showed that a 10% relative risk reduction could be refuted for all-cause mortality. Targeting intensive glycaemic control did not show a statistically significant effect on the risks of macrovascular complications as a composite outcome in the random-effects model, but decreased the risks in the fixed-effect model (random RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.02; and fixed RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.87 to 0.99; P = 0.02; 32,846 participants, 14 trials). Targeting intensive versus conventional glycaemic control seemed to reduce the risks of non-fatal myocardial infarction (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.98; P = 0.02; 30,417 participants, 14 trials), amputation of a lower extremity (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.94; P = 0.02; 11,200 participants, 11 trials), as well as the risk of developing a composite outcome of microvascular diseases (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.82 to 0.95; P = 0.0008; 25,927 participants, 6 trials), nephropathy (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.95; P = 0.02; 28,096 participants, 11 trials), retinopathy (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.92; P = 0.002; 10,300 participants, 9 trials), and the risk of retinal photocoagulation (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.97; P = 0.03; 11,212 participants, 8 trials). No statistically significant effect of targeting intensive glucose control could be shown on non-fatal stroke, cardiac revascularization, or peripheral revascularization. Trial sequential analyses did not confirm a reduction of the risk of non-fatal myocardial infarction but confirmed a 10% relative risk reduction in favour of intensive glycaemic control on the composite outcome of microvascular diseases. For the remaining microvascular outcomes, trial sequential analyses could not establish firm evidence for a 10% relative risk reduction. Targeting intensive glycaemic control significantly increased the risk of mild hypoglycaemia, but substantial heterogeneity was present; severe hypoglycaemia (RR 2.18, 95% CI 1.53 to 3.11; 28,794 participants, 12 trials); and serious adverse events (RR 1.06, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.10; P = 0.007; 24,280 participants, 11 trials). Trial sequential analysis for a 10% relative risk increase showed firm evidence for mild hypoglycaemia and serious adverse events and a 30% relative risk increase for severe hypoglycaemia when targeting intensive versus conventional glycaemic control. Overall health-related quality of life, as well as the mental and the physical components of health-related quality of life did not show any statistical significant differences.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Although we have been able to expand the number of participants by 16% in this update, we still find paucity of data on outcomes and the bias risk of the trials was mostly considered high. Targeting intensive glycaemic control compared with conventional glycaemic control did not show significant differences for all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality. Targeting intensive glycaemic control seemed to reduce the risk of microvascular complications, if we disregard the risks of bias, but increases the risk of hypoglycaemia and serious adverse events.

Revisiting tight glycemic control in perioperative and critically ill patients: when one size may not fit all

Glycemic control has received intense scrutiny in the last decade as an important aspect of patient care. Earlier studies suggested that tight glycemic control (target level of 80 - 110 mg/dL) improved outcomes in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. Subsequent trials did not confirm the same benefit. Moreover, increased mortality was found in association with such tight control compared with a less strict target. As a result, tight glucose control has become less popular. The interaction between diabetic status and outcomes in relation to glucose control strategies and/or chronic glycemic state in perioperative and critically ill patients was examined. Tight glucose control appears to be more beneficial in patients without diabetes than in those with known diabetes. It also may be more beneficial in improving outcomes in surgical rather than nonsurgical ICU patients, and in decreasing sepsis rather than mortality. Tight glycemic control was associated with a high incidence of hypoglycemia, which may offset some of its potential benefits. Tight glycemic control in the perioperative and intensive care settings should not be totally abandoned either as a clinical practice or as a subject of future research. Beneficial effects of tight glycemic control may be demonstrated when the appropriate glycemic targets are matched to the appropriate population.

Systemic inflammation in the elderly

Inflammation is an adaptive response to surgery. When the pro-inflammatory responses are unregulated and become over reactive, systemic inflammatory response syndrome may occur. Postoperative systemic inflammation is more common than is generally acknowledged and is observed in about 10-15% of elderly patients undergoing major surgery. Although the vast majority of systemic inflammation is related to infections, other important predisposing risk factors, such as extent of trauma and haemorrhage, should not be overlooked. Increased awareness, modification of risk factors and early recognition are the key elements in the management of systemic inflammation. Prompt resuscitation aiming to correct hypotension, hypovolaemia and tissue hypoxia may improve outcome. Future large prospective observational studies are needed to define the incidence, risk factors and impact of systemic inflammatory syndrome in the elderly surgical patients. A better understanding of the molecular events during the systemic inflammatory response syndrome is required for future development of specific immunotherapy.

Review articles: the effects of perioperative and intensive care unit sedation on brain organ dysfunction

Analgesia and sedation are routinely administered to patients in procedural suites, operating rooms, and intensive care units to permit invasive procedures, prevent pain and anxiety, reduce stress and oxygen consumption, allow mechanical ventilation, and for numerous other patient comfort and safety reasons. Increasing research and evidence, however, has implicated commonly prescribed sedative medications as risk factors for untoward events and worse patient outcomes, including brain organ dysfunction manifested as delirium and coma. The effect of sedatives on outcomes is also influenced by the depth of sedation, making it imperative to reduce total exposure to this class of medications. Juxtaposing the widespread necessity and use of sedation with the cost of acute and long-term cognitive dysfunction to patients and society, physicians must now strive to balance patients' demands and requisite for comfort with their own oath to do no harm. Fortunately, our methods of sedation and choice of medications can likely mitigate this cognitive risk. In this review, we detail the effects of perioperative and intensive care unit sedation on the development of delirium and cognitive impairment and provide an evidence-based approach towards analgesia and sedation paradigms to improve patient outcomes.

Impact of bispectral index monitoring on postoperative delirium in patients undergoing aortic surgery

BACKGROUND

Bispectral index monitoring can facilitate anesthesia care. We evaluated the association of Bispectral index with postoperative neurological outcome and delirium in patients undergoing aortic surgery.

METHODS

From 2006 to 2009, 292 consecutive patients undergoing aortic surgery were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were classified into 5 groups according to Bispectral index reduction: Group I (≤15%), Group II (15-20%), Group III (20-25%), Group IV (25-30%), and Group V (>30%).

RESULTS

The number of patients in each group was : 52 (17.8%), Group I; 125 (42.8%), Group II;68 (23.3%), Group III; 33 (11.3%), Group IV; 14 (4.8%), Group V. The incidence of delirium and neurological events was higher in Group IV and Group V(90.9% and 18.2% in Group IV, and 71% and 79% in Group V; both p<0.001). Only Group V showed a longer intensive care unit stay compared to Group I (13.5±10.3 vs 5.4±6.6 days; p=0.002), Group II (7.3±8.6 days, p=0.005) and Group III (6.7±6.5 days, p=0.015). Group V also showed a longer intubation time compared to Group I (228±211 vs 73±112 hours; p=0.008) and Group II (105±177 hours, p=0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest a higher incidence of neurological deficits in patients with a Bispectral index reduction of >25% from baseline. Explanations for these findings are speculative with regard to the underlying mechanisms, and larger studies are warranted to clarify these issues.