在高风险患者进行泵上心脏手术后,比较异丙酚和全吸入麻醉对心血管效果的影响:随机对照试验和可行性研究。

IF 2.8 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS Open Heart Pub Date : 2024-05-09 DOI:10.1136/openhrt-2024-002630
Benjamin Milne, Martin John, Richard Evans, Steven Robertson, Pádraig Ó Scanaill, Gavin J Murphy, Giovanni Landoni, Michael Marber, Tim Clayton, Gudrun Kunst
{"title":"在高风险患者进行泵上心脏手术后,比较异丙酚和全吸入麻醉对心血管效果的影响:随机对照试验和可行性研究。","authors":"Benjamin Milne, Martin John, Richard Evans, Steven Robertson, Pádraig Ó Scanaill, Gavin J Murphy, Giovanni Landoni, Michael Marber, Tim Clayton, Gudrun Kunst","doi":"10.1136/openhrt-2024-002630","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Trial registration number: </strong>NCT04039854.</p>","PeriodicalId":19505,"journal":{"name":"Open Heart","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11086547/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"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.\",\"authors\":\"Benjamin Milne, Martin John, Richard Evans, Steven Robertson, Pádraig Ó Scanaill, Gavin J Murphy, Giovanni Landoni, Michael Marber, Tim Clayton, Gudrun Kunst\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/openhrt-2024-002630\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Trial registration number: </strong>NCT04039854.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19505,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Open Heart\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11086547/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Open Heart\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/openhrt-2024-002630\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open Heart","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/openhrt-2024-002630","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:心肌血管重建术和心肺旁路术(CPB)会造成缺血再灌注损伤,导致心肌和其他内脏器官损伤。在实验研究中,挥发性麻醉剂可保护心肌。然而,由于同时使用异丙酚及其不利影响,限制了心肌保护过程,因此这是否能转化为临床益处尚不确定:在这项单盲平行组随机对照可行性试验中,接受择期冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)手术且欧洲心脏手术风险评估系统加权值≥5的高风险患者被随机分配接受异丙酚或全吸入麻醉作为维持麻醉的单一药物。主要结果是在两个心脏外科中心招募和随机分配 50 名患者的可行性,次要结果包括收集计划围术期数据的可行性、临床相关结果以及有效识别、筛选和招募患者的评估:两个中心在 11 个月内招募了全部 50 名患者,由于 COVID-19 大流行,招募工作中断了 13 个月。总体而言,50/108(46%)名符合条件的患者被招募。一名患者在手术前退出,一名患者未接受手术。除一名患者外,其他患者均完成了院内和30天的随访:试验注册号:NCT04039854:NCT04039854.
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
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.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Open Heart
Open Heart CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
3.70%
发文量
145
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊介绍: Open Heart is an online-only, open access cardiology journal that aims to be “open” in many ways: open access (free access for all readers), open peer review (unblinded peer review) and open data (data sharing is encouraged). The goal is to ensure maximum transparency and maximum impact on research progress and patient care. The journal is dedicated to publishing high quality, peer reviewed medical research in all disciplines and therapeutic areas of cardiovascular medicine. Research is published across all study phases and designs, from study protocols to phase I trials to meta-analyses, including small or specialist studies. Opinionated discussions on controversial topics are welcomed. Open Heart aims to operate a fast submission and review process with continuous publication online, to ensure timely, up-to-date research is available worldwide. The journal adheres to a rigorous and transparent peer review process, and all articles go through a statistical assessment to ensure robustness of the analyses. Open Heart is an official journal of the British Cardiovascular Society.
期刊最新文献
Long-term effects of left atrial appendage isolation in surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation based on lesion set: a multi-centre propensity-score weighted study. Long-term outcomes of ischaemia with no obstructive coronary artery disease (INOCA): a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obstructive sleep apnoea and atrial fibrillation: are we on time?! Use of artificial intelligence-powered ECG to differentiate between cardiac and pulmonary pathologies in patients with acute dyspnoea in the emergency department. Dobutamine stress echocardiography after positive CCTA: diagnostic performance using fractional flow reserve and instantaneous wave-free ratio as reference standards.
×
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