Restricted versus liberal intraoperative benzodiazepine use in cardiac anaesthesia for reducing delirium (B-Free Pilot): a pilot, multicentre, randomised, cluster crossover trial.

BACKGROUND: Delirium is common after cardiac surgery and is associated with adverse outcomes. Perioperative benzodiazepine use is associated with delirium and is common during cardiac surgery, which may increase the risk of postoperative delirium. We undertook a pilot study to inform the feasibility of a large randomised cluster crossover trial examining whether an institutional policy of restricted benzodiazepine administration during cardiac surgery (compared with liberal administration) would reduce delirium. METHODS: We conducted a two-centre, pilot, randomised cluster crossover trial with four 4 week crossover periods. Each centre was randomised to a policy of restricted or liberal use, and then alternated between the two policies during the remaining three periods. Our feasibility outcomes were adherence to each policy (goal ≥80%) and outcome assessment (one delirium assessment per day in the ICU in ≥90% of participants). We also evaluated the incidence of intraoperative awareness in one site using serial Brice questionnaires. RESULTS: Of 800 patients undergoing cardiac surgery during the trial period, 127/800 (15.9%) had delirium. Of these, 355/389 (91.3%) received benzodiazepines during the liberal benzodiazepine periods and 363/411 (88.3%) did not receive benzodiazepines during the restricted benzodiazepine periods. Amongst the 800 patients, 740 (92.5%) had ≥1 postoperative delirium assessment per day in the ICU. Of 521 patients screened for intraoperative awareness, one patient (0.2%), managed during the restricted benzodiazepine period (but who received benzodiazepine), experienced intraoperative awareness. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study demonstrates the feasibility of a large, multicentre, randomised, cluster crossover trial examining whether an institutional policy of restricted vs liberal benzodiazepine use during cardiac surgery will reduce postoperative delirium. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03053869.

International Normalized Ratio Targets for Left-Sided Mechanical Valve Replacement.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines recommend higher international normalized ratio (INR) targets for patients with mechanical valves believed to be at higher risk for thromboembolism. Higher INR targets are associated with increased bleeding risk. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis assessing effects of lower and higher INR targets on thromboembolic and bleeding risk in patients with mechanical heart valves. METHODS: We searched Cochrane CENTRAL, MEDLINE and EMBASE for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating lower versus higher INR targets for adults with bileaflet mechanical valves. We performed title and abstract screening, full-text review, risk of bias evaluation and data collection independently and in duplicate. We pooled data using a random effects model and used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework to evaluate overall quality of evidence. RESULTS: We identified six RCTs (n = 5,497). Lower INR targets were associated with significantly less bleeding-22% versus 40% (relative risk [RR]: 0.54, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.31, 0.93, p = 0.03, very low quality). There was no difference in thromboembolism-2% in both groups (RR: 1.28, 95% CI: 0.88, 1.85, p = 0.20, very low quality) or mortality-5.5% with lower INR targets versus 8.5% (RR: 1.00, 95% CI: 0.82, 1.21, p = 0.47, moderate quality). CONCLUSION: In patients with mechanical valves, higher INR targets are not supported by current evidence, which is of very low quality. In fact, our systematic review suggests that lower INR targets offer significantly lower bleeding risks with no significant difference in thromboembolic risk.