Rotational Thromboelastometry-Guided Use of Synthetic Blood Products in Cardiac Transplant Patients: A Retrospective Before-After Study.

OBJECTIVES: Viscoelastic hemostatic assays, such as rotational thromboelastometry (ROTEM), are used increasingly in cardiac surgery to guide transfusion decisions. After separation from cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB), achieving hemostasis rapidly is the main goal before chest closure. The authors hypothesized that introducing a ROTEM-guided factor- concentrate transfusion algorithm would reduce the duration from CPB separation to chest closure during cardiac transplantation. DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study of 21 patients before and 28 patients after implementation of the ROTEM-guided transfusion algorithm who underwent cardiac transplantation. SETTING: This single-center study was conducted at Saint Paul's Hospital, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. INTERVENTIONS: Using a ROTEM-guided factor-concentrate transfusion algorithm for cardiac transplant recipients. MEASUREMENT AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome was the duration from CPB separation to chest closure analyzed using Mann-Whitney U tests. The secondary outcomes included the volume of postoperative chest tube drainage, packed red blood cell (pRBC) transfusion requirements within 24 hours of surgery, the incidence of adverse events, and the length of stay before and after introducing a ROTEM-guided factor-concentrate transfusion algorithm. After adjusting for confounders using multivariate linear regression analysis, using a ROTEM-guided factor-concentrate transfusion algorithm resulted in a significant decrease in time from CPB separation to skin closure of 39.4 minutes (-73.1 to 123.5 min, p = 0.016). For the secondary outcomes, the use of ROTEM-guided transfusion showed reductions in pRBC transfusion within 24 hours of surgery (-1.3 units, -2.7 to 0.1 units; p = 0.077) and chest tube bleeding (-0.44 mL, -0.96 to +0.083 mL; p = 0.097); however, neither was statistically significant after adjustment. The median hospital length of stay in the study group was lower by 3 days (13 days v 16) days; p = 0.048). CONCLUSION: The introduction of a ROTEM-guided factor-concentrate transfusion algorithm was associated with a significant reduction in time to chest closure after separation from CPB. Although it reduced the total hospital length of stay, there were no differences in mortality, major complications, or intensive care unit length of stay.

A Single Prophylactic Dose of Ondansetron Given at Cessation of Postoperative Propofol Sedation Decreases Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting in Cardiac Surgery Patients: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a common occurrence after cardiac surgery. However, in contrast to other surgical populations, routine PONV prophylaxis is not a standard of care in cardiac surgery. We hypothesized that routine administration of a single prophylactic dose of ondansetron (4 mg) at the time of stopping postoperative propofol sedation before extubation in the cardiac surgery intensive care unit would decrease the incidence of PONV. METHODS: With institutional human ethics board approval and written informed consent, we conducted a randomized controlled trial in patients ≥19 years of age with no history of PONV undergoing elective or urgent cardiac surgery procedures requiring cardiopulmonary bypass. The primary outcome was the incidence of PONV in the first 24 hours postextubation, compared by the χ test. Secondary outcomes included the incidence and times to first dose of rescue antiemetic treatment administration, the incidence of headaches, and the incidence of ventricular arrhythmias. RESULTS: PONV within the first 24 hours postextubation occurred in 33 of 77 patients (43%) in the ondansetron group versus 50 of 82 patients (61%) in the placebo group (relative risk, 0.70 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.51-0.95]; absolute risk difference, -18% [95% CI, -33 to -2]; number needed to treat, 5.5 [95% CI, 3.0-58.4]; χ test, P = .022). Kaplan-Meier "survival" analysis of the times to first rescue antiemetic treatment administration over 24 hours indicated that patients in the ondansetron group fared better than those in the placebo group (log-rank [Mantel-Cox] test; P = .028). Overall, 32 of 77 patients (42%) in the ondansetron group received rescue antiemetic treatment over the first 24 hours postextubation versus 47 of 82 patients (57%) in the placebo group (relative risk, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.52-1.00]; absolute risk difference, -16% [95% CI, -31 to 1]); P = .047. There were no significant differences between the groups in the incidence of postoperative headache (ondansetron group, 5 of 77 patients [6%] versus placebo group, 4 of 82 patients [5%]; Fisher exact test; P = .740) or ventricular arrhythmias (ondansetron group, 2 of 77 patients [3%] versus placebo group, 4 of 82 patients [5%]; P = .68). CONCLUSIONS: These findings support the routine administration of ondansetron prophylaxis at the time of discontinuation of postoperative propofol sedation before extubation in patients following cardiac surgery. Further research is warranted to optimize PONV prophylaxis in cardiac surgery patients.