Influence of the type of anaesthesia on acute kidney injury after nephrectomy: a randomised controlled trial

IF 7.5 1区 医学 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY Anaesthesia Pub Date : 2024-11-27 DOI:10.1111/anae.16490
Soo‐Hyuk Yoon, Yoon Jung Kim, Jeong‐Hwa Seo, Hanbyeol Lim, Ho‐Jin Lee, Cheol Kwak, Won Ho Kim, Hyun‐Kyu Yoon
{"title":"Influence of the type of anaesthesia on acute kidney injury after nephrectomy: a randomised controlled trial","authors":"Soo‐Hyuk Yoon, Yoon Jung Kim, Jeong‐Hwa Seo, Hanbyeol Lim, Ho‐Jin Lee, Cheol Kwak, Won Ho Kim, Hyun‐Kyu Yoon","doi":"10.1111/anae.16490","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"SummaryIntroductionAcute kidney injury develops frequently after nephrectomy, causing increased hospital duration of stay and mortality. Both propofol and volatile anaesthetic agents are thought to have renoprotective effects. We investigated whether the type of maintenance anaesthetic (propofol or desflurane) affected the incidence of acute kidney injury after nephrectomy.MethodsThis single‐centre, randomised controlled trial enrolled adult patients with renal cell carcinoma undergoing nephrectomy. In patients allocated to the propofol group, anaesthesia was induced and maintained using a target‐controlled infusion of propofol. In patients allocated to the desflurane group, anaesthesia was induced with a bolus of thiopental and maintained with desflurane. Both groups received a target‐controlled infusion of remifentanil during surgery. The primary outcome was the incidence of acute kidney injury within 7 postoperative days based on the serum creatinine component of the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes criteria.ResultsWe analysed 317 patients (median (IQR [range]) age 62 (52–70 [26–85] y); 221 (70%) men). Postoperative AKI developed in 79 (25%) patients: 43 (27%) in the propofol group and 36 (23%) in the desflurane group (absolute risk difference (95%CI) 4.6 (‐4.9–14.0%), p = 0.347). The severity of kidney injury was stage 1 in 76 patients, stage 2 in two patients and stage 3 in one patient.DiscussionThe type of anaesthetic maintenance drug (propofol vs. desflurane) did not affect the incidence of acute kidney injury after nephrectomy. Future research might be better directed towards investigating other potentially modifiable risk factors for postoperative acute kidney injury in this patient population.","PeriodicalId":7742,"journal":{"name":"Anaesthesia","volume":"16 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anaesthesia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/anae.16490","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

SummaryIntroductionAcute kidney injury develops frequently after nephrectomy, causing increased hospital duration of stay and mortality. Both propofol and volatile anaesthetic agents are thought to have renoprotective effects. We investigated whether the type of maintenance anaesthetic (propofol or desflurane) affected the incidence of acute kidney injury after nephrectomy.MethodsThis single‐centre, randomised controlled trial enrolled adult patients with renal cell carcinoma undergoing nephrectomy. In patients allocated to the propofol group, anaesthesia was induced and maintained using a target‐controlled infusion of propofol. In patients allocated to the desflurane group, anaesthesia was induced with a bolus of thiopental and maintained with desflurane. Both groups received a target‐controlled infusion of remifentanil during surgery. The primary outcome was the incidence of acute kidney injury within 7 postoperative days based on the serum creatinine component of the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes criteria.ResultsWe analysed 317 patients (median (IQR [range]) age 62 (52–70 [26–85] y); 221 (70%) men). Postoperative AKI developed in 79 (25%) patients: 43 (27%) in the propofol group and 36 (23%) in the desflurane group (absolute risk difference (95%CI) 4.6 (‐4.9–14.0%), p = 0.347). The severity of kidney injury was stage 1 in 76 patients, stage 2 in two patients and stage 3 in one patient.DiscussionThe type of anaesthetic maintenance drug (propofol vs. desflurane) did not affect the incidence of acute kidney injury after nephrectomy. Future research might be better directed towards investigating other potentially modifiable risk factors for postoperative acute kidney injury in this patient population.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
麻醉类型对肾切除术后急性肾损伤的影响:随机对照试验
摘要导言肾切除术后经常会出现急性肾损伤,导致住院时间延长和死亡率升高。异丙酚和挥发性麻醉剂都被认为具有肾保护作用。我们研究了维持麻醉剂的类型(异丙酚或去氟烷)是否会影响肾切除术后急性肾损伤的发生率。方法这项单中心随机对照试验招募了接受肾切除术的成年肾细胞癌患者。分配到异丙酚组的患者使用靶控输注异丙酚诱导和维持麻醉。在去氟烷组患者中,使用硫喷妥诱导麻醉,并使用去氟烷维持麻醉。两组患者在手术期间都接受了目标控制的瑞芬太尼输注。主要结果是术后 7 天内急性肾损伤的发生率:结果我们分析了 317 名患者(中位数(IQR [范围])年龄为 62(52-70 [26-85] 岁);221 名(70%)男性)。术后发生 AKI 的患者有 79 人(25%):异丙酚组 43 例(27%),地氟醚组 36 例(23%)(绝对风险差异 (95%CI) 4.6 (-4.9-14.0%), p = 0.347)。讨论麻醉维持药物的类型(丙泊酚与去氟烷)并不影响肾切除术后急性肾损伤的发生率。未来的研究可能更倾向于调查这类患者术后急性肾损伤的其他潜在可调节风险因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Anaesthesia
Anaesthesia 医学-麻醉学
CiteScore
21.20
自引率
9.30%
发文量
300
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: The official journal of the Association of Anaesthetists is Anaesthesia. It is a comprehensive international publication that covers a wide range of topics. The journal focuses on general and regional anaesthesia, as well as intensive care and pain therapy. It includes original articles that have undergone peer review, covering all aspects of these fields, including research on equipment.
期刊最新文献
The impact of out-of-hours elective surgery: is it worth the risk? Erector spinae plane block vs. rectus sheath block. Gastric ultrasound performance time and difficulty: a prospective observational study. Mandatory training for rare anaesthetic events or mandatory safety preparedness - the beatings will continue until morale improves, or is it time for a carrot and not a stick? Similarities and differences between maternal and major traumatic haemorrhage – what can we learn?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1