The Effect of Mode of Anaesthesia on Outcomes After Elective Endovascular Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm.

OBJECTIVE: Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is the most commonly used method to repair abdominal aortic aneurysms. EVAR can be performed using a variety of anaesthetic techniques, including general anaesthetic (GA), regional anaesthetic (RA), and local anaesthetic (LA), but little is known about the effects that each of these anaesthetic modes have on patient outcome. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of anaesthetic technique on early outcomes after elective EVAR. METHODS: Data from the UK's National Vascular Registry were analysed. All patients undergoing elective standard infrarenal EVAR between 1 January 2014 and 31 December 2016 were included. Patients with a symptomatic aneurysm treated semi-electively were excluded. The primary outcome was in hospital death within 30 days of surgery. Secondary outcomes included post-operative complications and length of hospital stay. Time to event outcomes were compared using Cox proportional hazards regression adjusted for confounders, including British Aneurysm Repair score (a validated aneurysm risk prediction score that is calculated using age, sex, creatinine, cardiac disease, electrocardiogram, previous aortic surgery, white blood cell count, serum sodium, abdominal aortic aneurysm diameter, and American Society of Anaesthesiologists grade) and chronic lung disease. RESULTS: A total of 9783 patients received an elective, standard infrarenal EVAR (GA, n = 7069; RA, n = 2347; and LA, n = 367) across 89 hospitals. RA and/or LA was used in 82 hospitals. There were 64 in hospital deaths within 30 days, 50 (0.9% mortality at 30 days, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.7-1.2) in the GA group, 11 (0.6%, 95% CI 0.3-1.1) in the RA group, and three (1.5%, 95% CI 0.5-4.7) in the LA group. The mortality rate differed between groups (p = .03) and was significantly lower in the RA group compared with the GA group (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] RA/GA 0.37 [95% CI 0.17-0.81]; LA/GA 0.63 [95% CI 0.15-2.69]). The median length of stay was two days for all modes of anaesthesia, but patients were discharged from hospital more quickly in the RA and LA groups than the GA group (aHR RA/GA 1.10 [95% CI 1.03-1.17]; LA/GA 1.15 [95% CI 1.02-1.29]). Overall, 20.7% of patients experienced one or more complications (GA group, 22.1%; RA group, 16.8%; LA group, 17.7%) and pulmonary complications occurred with similar frequency in the three groups (overall 2.4%, adjusted odds ratio RA/GA 0.93 [95% CI 0.66-1.32]; LA/GA 0.82 [95% CI 0.41-1.63]). CONCLUSION: Thirty day mortality was lower with RA than with GA, but mode of anaesthesia was not associated with increased complications for patients undergoing elective standard infrarenal EVAR.

Propofol cardioplegia: A single-center, placebo-controlled, randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: Cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass and cardioplegic arrest is an effective treatment for coronary artery and aortic valve diseases. However, the myocardium sustains reperfusion injury after ischemic cardioplegic arrest. Our objective was to assess the benefits of supplementing cardioplegia solution with the general anesthetic propofol in patients undergoing either coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or aortic valve replacement (AVR). METHODS: A single-center, double-blind randomized controlled trial was carried out to compare cardioplegia solution supplemented with propofol (concentration 6 µg/mL) versus intralipid (placebo). The primary outcome was cardiac troponin T release over the first 48 hours after surgery. RESULTS: We recruited 101 participants (51 in the propofol group, 50 in the intralipid group); 61 underwent CABG and 40 underwent AVR. All participants were followed to 3 months. Cardiac troponin T release was on average 15% lower with propofol supplementation (geometric mean ratio, 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73-1.01; P = .051). There were no differences for CABG participants but propofol-supplemented participants undergoing AVR had poorer postoperative renal function (geometric mean ratio, 1.071; 95% CI, 1.019-1.125; P = .007), with a trend toward longer intensive care stay (median, 89.5 vs 47.0 hours; hazard ratio, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.31-1.09; P = .09) and fewer with perfect health (based on the EQ-5D health utility index) at 3 months (odds ratio, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.06-1.05; P = .058) compared with the intralipid group. Safety profiles were similar. There were no deaths. CONCLUSIONS: Propofol supplementation in cardioplegia appears to be cardioprotective. Its influence on early clinical outcomes may differ between CABG and AVR surgery. A larger, multicenter study is needed to confirm or refute these suggestions.

A randomized trial of tranexamic acid in combination with cell salvage plus a meta-analysis of randomized trials evaluating tranexamic acid in off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to evaluate the effectiveness of tranexamic acid in off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting surgery, either when used in combination with mechanical cell salvage or when used alone. METHODS: One hundred patients were randomized to either 2 g of tranexamic acid as an intravenous bolus before sternotomy or to placebo. Intraoperative and postoperative cell salvage was used in all patients. The primary end point was early postoperative blood loss (within 4 hours). To evaluate the efficacy of tranexamic acid in isolation, we also performed a meta-analysis of 4 randomized trials identified from a systematic literature search. The primary end point of the meta-analysis was red cell transfusion. RESULTS: In our randomized trial patients in the tranexamic acid group had a significant reduction in early postoperative blood loss, (median difference, 50 mL; 95% confidence interval, 15-100 mL; P < .01); however, there was no reduction in the frequency of blood component transfusion. Patients in the placebo group received a significantly larger volume of autotransfused red cells (median difference, 120 mL; 95% confidence interval, 0-220 mL; P = .02). The meta-analysis demonstrated a significant reduction in red cell transfusions in patients receiving tranexamic acid compared with those receiving placebo (risk ratio, 0.48; 95% confidence interval, 0.24-0.97; P = .041). There was also a reduction in the frequency of any allogeneic blood component transfusion, as well as a highly significant reduction in postoperative blood loss, in patients receiving tranexamic acid (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Tranexamic acid reduces blood loss and transfusion requirements in off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting surgery. A reduction in allogeneic blood transfusion was not evident in the presence of perioperative cell salvage. These data support the routine use of tranexamic acid in off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting surgery.