Balanced Nonopioid General Anesthesia With Lidocaine Is Associated With Lower Postoperative Complications Compared With Balanced Opioid General Anesthesia With Sufentanil for Cardiac Surgery With Cardiopulmonary Bypass: A Propensity Matched Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: There are no data on the effect of balanced nonopioid general anesthesia with lidocaine in cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass. The main study objective was to evaluate the association between nonopioid general balanced anesthesia and the postoperative complications in relation to opioid side effects. METHODS: Patients undergoing cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass between 2019 and 2021 were identified. After exclusion of patients for heart transplantation, left ventricular assistance device, and off-pump surgery, we classified patients according to an opioid general balanced anesthesia or a nonopioid balanced anesthesia with lidocaine. The primary outcome was a collapsed composite of postoperative complications that comprise respiratory failure and confusion, whereas secondary outcomes were acute renal injury, pneumoniae, death, intensive care unit (ICU), and hospital length of stay. RESULTS: We identified 859 patients exposed to opioid-balanced general anesthesia with lidocaine and 913 patients exposed to nonopioid-balanced general anesthesia. Propensity score matching yielded 772 individuals in each group with balanced baseline covariates. Two hundred thirty-six patients (30.5%) of the nonopioid-balanced general anesthesia versus 186 patients (24.1%) presented postoperative composite complications. The balanced lidocaine nonopioid general anesthesia group was associated with a lower proportion with the postoperative complication composite outcome OR, 0.72 (95% CI, 0.58-0.92; P = .027). The number of patients with acute renal injury, death, and hospital length of stay did not differ between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: A balanced nonopioid general anesthesia protocol with lidocaine was associated with lower odds of postoperative complication composite outcome based on respiratory failure and confusion.

Anaesthesia and ICU sedation with sevoflurane do not reduce myocardial injury in patients undergoing cardiac surgery: A randomized prospective study.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the effect of anaesthesia and ICU sedation with sevoflurane to protect the myocardium against ischemia-reperfusion injury associated to cardiac surgery assessed by troponin release. METHODS: We performed a prospective, open-label, randomized study in cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass. Patients were randomized to an algorithm-based intervention group and a control group. The main outcome was the perioperative kinetic of cardiac troponin I (cTnI). The secondary outcomes included composite endpoint, GDF-15 (macrophage inhibitory cytokine-1) value, arterial lactate levels, and the length of stay (LOS) in the ICU. RESULTS: Of 82 included patients, 81 were analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis (intervention group: n = 42; control group: n = 39). On inclusion, the intervention and control groups did not differ significantly in terms of demographic and surgical data. The postoperative kinetics of cTnI did not differ significantly between groups: the mean difference was 0.44 ±â€Š1.09 µg/ml, P = .69. Incidence of composite endpoint and GDF-15 values were higher in the sevoflurane group than in propofol group. The intervention and control groups did not differ significantly in terms of ICU stay and hospital stay. CONCLUSION: The use of an anaesthesia and ICU sedation with sevoflurane was not associated with a lower incidence of myocardial injury assessed by cTnI. Sevoflurane administration was associated with higher prevalence of acute renal failure and higher GDF-15 values.

Effect of opioid-free anaesthesia on post-operative period in cardiac surgery: a retrospective matched case-control study.

BACKGROUND: No study has been conducted to demonstrate the feasibility of an opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) protocol in cardiac surgery to improve patient care. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effect of OFA on post-operative morphine consumption and the post-operative course. METHODS: After retrospectively registering to clinicaltrial.gov (NCT03816592), we performed a retrospective matched cohort study (1:1) on cardiac surgery patients with cardiopulmonary bypass between 2018 and 2019. Patients were divided into two groups: OFA (lidocaine, dexamethasone and ketamine) or opioid anaesthesia (OA) (sufentanil). The main outcome was the total postoperative morphine consumption in the 48 h after surgery. Secondary outcomes were rescue analgesic use, a major adverse event composite endpoint, and ICU and hospital length of stay (LOS). RESULTS: One hundred ten patients were matched (OFA: n = 55; OA: n = 55). On inclusion, demographic and surgical data for the OFA and OA groups were comparable. The total morphine consumption was higher in the OA group than in the OFA group (15 (6-34) vs 5 mg (2-18), p = 0.001). The pain score during the first 48 post-operative hours did not differ between the two groups. Creatinine values did not differ on the first post-operative day (80 (IQR: 66-115) vs 77 mmol/l (IQR: 69-95), p = 0.284). Incidence of the composite endpoint was lower in the OFA group (25 patients (43%) vs 38 patients (68%), p = 0.021). The time to extubation and the ICU stays were shorter in the OFA group (3 (1-5) vs 5 (3-6) hours, p = 0.001 and 2 (1-3) vs 3 (2-5) days, p = 0.037). CONCLUSION: The use of OFA was associated with lower morphine consumption. OFA might be associated with shorter intubation time and ICU stays. Further randomized studies are needed to confirm these results. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was retrospectively registered to ct2 (identifier: NCT03816592 ) on January 25, 2019.