Randomized trial finds similar composite clinical outcomes between restrictive and liberal oxygenation in cardiac surgery, indicating neither strategy improves long-term prognosis.
BACKGROUND: Maintaining adequate oxygen delivery during cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB)-assisted cardiac surgery is crucial, but hyperoxia has been suggested to cause organ injury. We compared the effects of restrictive vs liberal oxygenation during CPB and weaning from CPB on clinical outcomes in cardiac surgery. METHODS: =100%) oxygen therapy during and for the first hour after weaning from CPB. The primary composite outcome was the time to death, stroke, renal failure requiring dialysis, or new-onset or worsening heart failure during follow-up. RESULTS: 100%. During a median follow-up period of 5.9 yr (interquartile range, 2.5-8.3), 167/695 (24%) participants in the restrictive oxygenation group and 168/694 (24%) participants in the liberal oxygenation group met the primary endpoint (hazard ratio, 1.01 [95% confidence interval, 0.8-1.3]; P=0.92). There was no difference in adverse event rates between restrictive and liberal oxygen therapy. CONCLUSIONS: 100%) during CPB and the subsequent weaning period. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02673931.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wiberg et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: