Selective brain hypothermia: feasibility and safety study of a novel method in five patients.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Reduction of brain temperature remains the most common method of neuroprotection against ischemic injury employed during cardiac surgery. However, cooling delivered via the cardiopulmonary bypass circuit is brief and cooling the body core along with the brain has been associated with a variety of unwanted effects. This study investigated the feasibility and safety of a novel selective brain cooling approach to induce rapid, brain-targeted hypothermia independent of the cardiopulmonary bypass circuit. METHODS: This first-in-human feasibility study enrolled five adults undergoing aortic valve replacement with cardiopulmonary bypass support. During surgery, the NeuroSave system circulated chilled saline within the pharynx and upper esophagus. Brain and body core temperature were continuously monitored. Adverse effects, cardiopulmonary function, and device function were noted. RESULTS: Patient 1 received cooling fluid for an insignificant period, and Patients 2-5 successfully underwent the cooling procedure using the NeuroSave system for 56-89 minutes. Cooling fluid was 12°C for Patients 1-3, 6°C for Patient 4, and 2°C for Patient 5. There were no NeuroSave-related adverse events and no alterations in cardiopulmonary function during NeuroSave use. Brain temperature decreased by 3°C within 15 minutes and remained at least 3.5°C colder than the body core. During a brief episode of hypotension in one patient, the brain cooled an additional 4°C in 2 minutes, briefly reaching 27.4°C. CONCLUSION: The NeuroSave system can induce rapid brain-targeted hypothermia and simultaneously maintain a favorable body-brain temperature gradient, even during hypotension. Further studies are required to evaluate the function of the system during longer periods of use.

Update on the role of paravertebral blocks for thoracic surgery: are they worth it?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To consider optimal analgesic strategies for thoracic surgical patients. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent studies have consistently suggested analgesic equivalence between paravertebral and thoracic epidural analgesia. Complications appear to be significantly less common with paravertebral analgesia. SUMMARY: There is good evidence that paravertebral block can provide acceptable pain relief compared with thoracic epidural analgesia for thoracotomy. Important side-effects such as hypotension, urinary retention, nausea, and vomiting appear to be less frequent with paravertebral block than with thoracic epidural analgesia. Paravertebral block is associated with better pulmonary function and fewer pulmonary complications than thoracic epidural analgesia. Importantly, contraindications to thoracic epidural analgesia do not preclude paravertebral block, which can also be safely performed in anesthetized patients without an apparent increased risk of neurological injury. The place of paravertebral block in video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery is less clear.