The risk of myocardial ischemia in patients receiving desflurane versus sufentanil anesthesia for coronary artery bypass graft surgery. The S.P.I. Research Group.

Desflurane, a coronary vasodilator, may induce myocardial ischemia in patients with coronary artery disease. To determine whether desflurane is safe to administer to the at-risk patient population (with known coronary artery disease), we compared the incidence and characteristics of perioperative myocardial ischemia in 200 patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery randomly assigned to receive desflurane (thiopental adjuvant) versus sufentanil anesthesia. Under conditions of hemodynamic control, perioperative ischemia was assessed using continuous echocardiography (precordial: during induction; transesophageal: during surgery) and Holter electrocardiography (ECG); hemodynamics (including pulmonary artery pressure) were measured continuously. Hemodynamic results: During induction, no significant changes in hemodynamics occurred in the sufentanil group, while in the desflurane group, heart rate, systemic and pulmonary arterial pressure increased and stroke volume decreased significantly. During the intraoperative period, the incidence of hemodynamic variations was low in both anesthetic groups; however, the prebypass incidence of tachycardia (greater than 120% of preoperative baseline heart rate) was greater in the desflurane group (4 +/- 7% of total time monitored) than in the sufentanil group (1 +/- 6%) (P = 0.0003). Similarly, the incidence of prebypass hypotension (less than 80% of preoperative baseline systolic arterial blood pressure) was greater in the desflurane group (21 +/- 14%) than in the sufentanil group (15 +/- 16%) (P = 0.01). ECG results: Preoperatively, 15% (28/191) of patients developed ECG ischemia, with no difference between patients who received desflurane, 13% (12/96) or sufentanil, 16% (16/95) (P = 0.6). During anesthetic induction, 9% (9/99) of patients who received desflurane developed ECG ischemia, compared with 0% (0/98) who received sufentanil (P = 0.007). During the prebypass period, 5% (10/197) of patients developed ECG ischemia, with no difference between patients who received desflurane, 7% (7/99) or sufentanil, 3% (3/98) (P = 0.3). Postbypass, 12% (24/194) of patients developed ECG ischemic changes, with no difference between patients who received desflurane, 13% (13/97) or sufentanil, 11% (11/96) (P = 0.9). Echocardiographic results: The incidence of precordial echocardiographic ischemia during anesthetic induction was 13% (5/39) in the desflurane group versus 0% (0/29) in the sufentanil group (P = 0.1). Moderate to severe transesophageal echocardiographic (TEE) ischemic episodes occurred in 12% (21/175) of patients during prebypass, with no significant difference between the desflurane group, 16% (15/91) and the sufentanil group, 7% (6/84) (P = 0.09). TEE ischemic episodes occurred in 27% (49/178) of patients during the postbypass period, with no difference between the desflurane, 29% (27/92) and sufentanil, 25% (22/86) groups (P = 0.7).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Adverse cerebral outcomes after coronary bypass surgery. Multicenter Study of Perioperative Ischemia Research Group and the Ischemia Research and Education Foundation Investigators.

BACKGROUND: Acute changes in cerebral function after elective coronary bypass surgery is a difficult clinical problem. We carried out a multicenter study to determine the incidence and predictors of -- and the use of resources associated with -- perioperative adverse neurologic events, including cerebral injury. METHODS: In a prospective study, we evaluated 2108 patients from 24 U.S. institutions for two general categories of neurologic outcome: type I (focal injury, or stupor or coma at discharge) and type II (deterioration in intellectual function, memory deficit, or seizures). RESULTS: Adverse cerebral outcomes occurred in 129 patients (6.1 percent). A total of 3.1 percent had type I neurologic outcomes (8 died of cerebral injury, 55 had nonfatal strokes, 2 had transient ischemic attacks, and 1 had stupor), and 3.0 percent had type II outcomes (55 had deterioration of intellectual function and 8 had seizures). Patients with adverse cerebral outcomes had higher in-hospital mortality (21 percent of patients with type I outcomes died, vs. 10 percent of those with type II and 2 percent of those with no adverse cerebral outcome; P<0.001 for all comparisons), longer hospitalization (25 days with type I outcomes, 21 days with type II, and 10 days with no adverse outcome; P<0.001), and a higher rate of discharge to facilities for intermediate- or long-term care (69 percent, 39 percent, and 10 percent ; P<0.001). Predictors of type I outcomes were proximal aortic atherosclerosis, a history of neurologic disease, and older age; predictors of type II outcomes were older age, systolic hypertension on admission, pulmonary disease, and excessive consumption of alcohol. CONCLUSIONS: Adverse cerebral outcomes after coronary bypass surgery are relatively common and serious; they are associated with substantial increases in mortality, length of hospitalization, and use of intermediate- or long-term care facilities. New diagnostic and therapeutic strategies must be developed to lessen such injury.

Ineffectiveness of burst suppression therapy in mitigating perioperative cerebrovascular dysfunction. Multicenter Study of Perioperative Ischemia (McSPI) Research Group.

BACKGROUND: Cerebral injury is among the most common and disabling complications of open heart surgery. Attempts to provide neuroprotection have yielded conflicting results. We assessed the potential of propofol-induced burst suppression during open heart surgery to provide cerebral protection as determined by postoperative neuropsychologic function. METHODS: Two hundred twenty-five patients undergoing valve surgery were randomized to receive either sufentanil or sufentanil plus propofol titrated to electroencephalographic burst suppression. Blinded investigators performed neurologic and neuropsychologic testing at baseline, postoperative day (POD) 1 (neurologic testing only), PODs 5-7, and PODs 50-70. Neuropsychologic tests were compared with the results of 40 nonsurgical patients matched for age and education. RESULTS: Electroencephalographic burst suppression was successfully achieved in all 109 propofol patients. However, these patients sustained at least as many adverse neurologic outcomes as the 116 controls: POD 1, 40% versus 25%, P = 0.06; PODs 5-7, -18% versus 8%, P = 0.07; PODs 50-70, -6% versus 6%, P = 0.80. No differences in the incidence of neuropsychologic deficits were detected, with 91% of the propofol patients versus 92% of the control patients being impaired at PODs 5-7, decreasing to 52 and 47%, respectively, by PODs 50-70. No significant differences in the severity of neuropsychologic dysfunction, depression, or anxiety were noted. CONCLUSIONS: Electroencephalographic burst suppression surgery with propofol during cardiac valve replacement did not significantly reduce the incidence or severity of neurologic or neuropsychologic dysfunction. The authors' results suggest that neither cerebral metabolic suppression nor reduction in cerebral blood flow reliably provide neuroprotection during open heart surgery. Other therapeutic approaches must be evaluated to address this important medical problem.

Cerebral injury after cardiac surgery: identification of a group at extraordinary risk. Multicenter Study of Perioperative Ischemia Research Group (McSPI) and the Ischemia Research Education Foundation (IREF) Investigators.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Cerebral injury after cardiac surgery is now recognized as a serious and costly healthcare problem mandating immediate attention. To effect solution, those subgroups of patients at greatest risk must be identified, thereby allowing efficient implementation of new clinical strategies. No such subgroup has been identified; however, patients undergoing intracardiac surgery are thought to be at high risk, but comprehensive data regarding specific risk, impact on cost, and discharge disposition are not available. METHODS: We prospectively studied 273 patients enrolled from 24 diverse US medical centers, who were undergoing intracardiac and coronary artery surgery. Patient data were collected using standardized methods and included clinical, historical, specialized testing, neurological outcome and autopsy data, and measures of resource utilization. Adverse outcomes were defined a priori and determined after database closure by a blinded independent panel. Stepwise logistic regression models were developed to estimate the relative risks associated with clinical history and intraoperative and postoperative events. RESULTS: Adverse cerebral outcomes occurred in 16% of patients (43/273), being nearly equally divided between type I outcomes (8.4%; 5 cerebral deaths, 16 nonfatal strokes, and 2 new TIAs) and type II outcomes (7.3%; 17 new intellectual deterioration persisting at hospital discharge and 3 newly diagnosed seizures). Associated resource utilization was significantly increased--prolonging median intensive care unit stay from 3 days (no adverse cerebral outcome) to 8 days (type I; P<0.001) and from 3 to 6 days (type II; P<0.001), and increasing hospitalization by 50% (type II, P=0.04) to 100% (type I, P<0.001). Furthermore, specialized care after hospital discharge was frequently necessary in those with type I outcomes, in that only 31% returned home compared with 85% of patients without cerebral complications (P<0.001). Significant risk factors for type I outcomes related primarily to embolic phenomena, including proximal aortic atherosclerosis, intracardiac thrombus, and intermittent clamping of the aorta during surgery. For type II outcomes, risk factors again included proximal aortic atherosclerosis, as well as a preoperative history of endocarditis, alcohol abuse, perioperative dysrhythmia or poorly controlled hypertension, and the development of a low-output state after cardiopulmonary bypass. CONCLUSIONS: These prospective multicenter findings demonstrate that patients undergoing intracardiac surgery combined with coronary revascularization are at formidable risk, in that 1 in 6 will develop cerebral complications that are frequently costly and devastating. Thus, new strategies for perioperative management--including technical and pharmacological interventions--are now mandated for this subgroup of cardiac surgery patients.