Why the study?
Patients undergoing noncardiac surgery after coronary stent implantation have high thrombotic risk, but the association between anesthetic agents and MACCE has not been studied.
Does propofol-based TIVA reduce MACCE compared to volatile anesthetics in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery after coronary stent implantation?
Does propofol-based TIVA reduce MACCE compared to volatile anesthetics in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery after coronary stent implantation?
The choice between propofol-based TIVA and volatile anesthetics does not significantly affect the 30-day risk of MACCE in patients with prior coronary stents undergoing noncardiac surgery.
No MACCE difference by anesthetic after matching; leaves open whether randomized trials would detect perioperative effects.
Patients undergoing noncardiac surgery after coronary stent implantation are at an increased risk of thrombotic complications. Volatile anesthetics are reported to have organ-protective effects against ischemic injury. Propofol has an anti-inflammatory action that can mitigate ischemia-reperfusion injury. However, the association between anesthetic agents and the risk of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebral event (MACCE) has never been studied before. In the present study, a total of 1630 cases were reviewed. Four different propensity score matchings were performed to minimize selection bias (propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) vs. volatile anesthetics; TIVA vs. sevoflurane; TIVA vs. desflurane; and sevoflurane vs. desflurane). The incidence of MACCE in these four propensity score-matched cohorts was compared. As a sensitivity analysis, a multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify independent predictors for MACCE during the postoperative 30 days both in total and matched cohorts (TIVA vs. volatile agent). MACCE occurred in 6.0% of the patients. Before matching, there was a significant difference in the incidence of MACCE between TIVA and sevoflurane groups (TIVA 5.1% vs. sevoflurane 8.2%, p = 0.006). After matching, there was no significant difference in the incidence of MACCE between the groups of any pairs (TIVA 6.5% vs. sevoflurane 7.7%; p = 0.507). The multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed no significant association of the volatile agent with MACCE (odds ratio 1.48, 95% confidence interval 0.92–2.37, p = 0.104). In conclusion, the choice of anesthetic agent for noncardiac surgery did not significantly affect the development of MACCE in patients with previous coronary stent implantation. However, further randomized trials are needed to confirm our results.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yoon et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: