British journal of anaesthesia · 2024
Effect of volatile versus propofol anaesthesia on major complications and mortality after cardiac surgery: a multicentre randomised trial.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеРандомизированное исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Deng Xiao-Qian, Yu Hong, Wang Wei-Jian, Wu Qiao-Lin, Wei Hua, Deng Jing-Song, Li Zhi-Jian, Wu Jin-Zheng, Yang Jian-Jun, Zheng Xiang-Ming, Wei Jin-Ju, Fan Shuai-Shuai, Zou Xiao-Hua, Shi Jing, Zhang Fang-Xiang, Wu Da-Qing, Kou Dang-Pei, Wang Tao, Wang E, Ye Zhi, Zheng Xing, Chen Gang, Huang Wen-Qi, Chen Yu, Wei Xin, Chai Xiao-Qing, Huang Wei-Qin, Wang Ling, Li Kai, Li Liang, Zhang Ye, Li Rui, Jiao Jia-Li, Yu Hai, Liu Jin
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The comparative effectiveness of volatile anaesthesia and total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) in terms of patient outcomes after cardiac surgery remains a topic of debate.
METHODS: Multicentre randomised trial in 16 tertiary hospitals in China. Adult patients undergoing elective cardiac surgery were randomised in a 1:1 ratio to receive volatile anaesthesia (sevoflurane or desflurane) or propofol-based TIVA. The primary outcome was a composite of predefined major complications during hospitalisation and mortality 30 days after surgery.
RESULTS: Of the 3123 randomised patients, 3083 (98.7%; mean age 55 yr; 1419 [46.0%] women) were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. The composite primary outcome was met by a similar number of patients in both groups (volatile group: 517 of 1531 (33.8%) patients vs TIVA group: 515 of 1552 (33.2%) patients; relative risk 1.02 [0.92-1.12]; P=0.76; adjusted odds ratio 1.05 [0.90-1.22]; P=0.57). Secondary outcomes including 6-month and 1-yr mortality, duration of mechanical ventilation, length of ICU and hospital stay, and healthcare costs, were also similar for the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Among adults undergoing cardiac surgery, we found no difference in the clinical effectiveness of volatile anaesthesia and propofol-based TIVA.
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR-IOR-17013578).
METHODS: Multicentre randomised trial in 16 tertiary hospitals in China. Adult patients undergoing elective cardiac surgery were randomised in a 1:1 ratio to receive volatile anaesthesia (sevoflurane or desflurane) or propofol-based TIVA. The primary outcome was a composite of predefined major complications during hospitalisation and mortality 30 days after surgery.
RESULTS: Of the 3123 randomised patients, 3083 (98.7%; mean age 55 yr; 1419 [46.0%] women) were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. The composite primary outcome was met by a similar number of patients in both groups (volatile group: 517 of 1531 (33.8%) patients vs TIVA group: 515 of 1552 (33.2%) patients; relative risk 1.02 [0.92-1.12]; P=0.76; adjusted odds ratio 1.05 [0.90-1.22]; P=0.57). Secondary outcomes including 6-month and 1-yr mortality, duration of mechanical ventilation, length of ICU and hospital stay, and healthcare costs, were also similar for the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Among adults undergoing cardiac surgery, we found no difference in the clinical effectiveness of volatile anaesthesia and propofol-based TIVA.
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR-IOR-17013578).