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.
BackgroundMinimal invasive heart surgery (MIHS) presents several benefits, but provides intense and prolonged post-operative pain. Our objective was to compare efficacy of serratus anterior plane block (SAPB) with continuous wound infiltration (CWI) for management of post-operative pain following MIHS.MethodsIt’s retrospective, monocentric study between November 2016 to April 2017. The study was performed at the University hospital of Dijon, Burgundy, France. All patients scheduled for MIHS was included. Data was collected retrospectively. During this period, 20 patients had SAPB and 26 had CWI. SAPB was performed before extubation with a single injection of 0.5 mg/kg of ropivacaïne (5 mg/ml). In the CWI group, catheter was inserted in the subcutaneous space by the surgeon at the end of the procedure. A 10 ml bolus of ropivacaïne (7.5 mg/mL) was followed by a continuous infusion (2 mg/ml) between 7 and 12 ml/h for 48 h. Morphine consumption and visual analog score (VAS) were recorded for 48 h. Length of stay in intensive care unit and hospital was also collected.ResultsMorphine consumption and VAS score were significantly lower in SAPB group (p < 0.01). Length of stay in intensive care and hospital was significantly was decreased in SAPB group.ConclusionSAPB appears effective in reducing postoperative MIHS pain.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12871-018-0614-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Despite the abundant literature on vasopressor therapy, few studies have focused on vasopressor-sparing strategies in patients with shock. We performed a scoping-review of the published studies evaluating vasopressor-sparing strategies by analyzing the results from randomized controlled trials conducted in patients with shock, with a focus on vasopressor doses and/or duration reduction. We analyzed 143 studies, mainly performed in septic shock. Our analysis demonstrated that several pharmacological and non-pharmacological strategies are associated with a decrease in the duration of vasopressor therapy. These strategies are as follows: implementing a weaning strategy, vasopressin use, systemic glucocorticoid administration, beta-blockers, and normothermia. On the contrary, early goal directed therapies, including fluid therapy, oral vasopressors, vitamin C, and renal replacement therapy, are not associated with an increase in vasopressor-free days. Based on these results, we proposed an evidence-based vasopressor management strategy.
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 ± 1.09 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.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.