Key result
Total intravenous anesthesia was associated with a significantly higher 30-day mortality compared to volatile anesthetics in patients with preoperative myocardial injury undergoing non-cardiac surgery (17.0% vs. 9.1%; HR 2.60).
Why the study?
It was unknown whether volatile anesthetics could improve postoperative outcomes after non-cardiac surgery in patients with preoperative myocardial injury defined by cardiac troponin elevation.
Does volatile anesthesia reduce 30-day mortality in adult patients with preoperative myocardial injury undergoing non-cardiac surgery compared to total intravenous anesthesia?
Cohort (n=1,254)
No
Does volatile anesthesia reduce 30-day mortality in adult patients with preoperative myocardial injury undergoing non-cardiac surgery compared to total intravenous anesthesia?
Hazard Ratio: 2.6 (95% CI 1.14–5.93)
Absolute Event Rate: 17% vs 9.1%
p-value: p=0.02
In patients with preoperative myocardial injury undergoing non-cardiac surgery, the use of volatile anesthetics was associated with significantly lower 30-day mortality compared to total intravenous anesthesia.
May warrant preferring volatile anesthetics in this population; leaves open need for randomized confirmation.
We evaluated whether volatile anesthetics can improve the postoperative outcomes of non-cardiac surgery in patients with preoperative myocardial injury defined by the cardiac troponin elevation. From January 2010 to June 2018, 1254 adult patients with preoperative myocardial injury underwent non-cardiac surgery under general anesthesia and were enrolled in this study. Patients were stratified into following two groups according to anesthetic agents; 115 (9.2%) patients whose anesthesia was induced and maintained with continuous infusion of propofol and remifentanil (TIVA group) and 1139 (90.8%) patients whose anesthesia was maintainted with volatile anesthetics (VOLATILE group). The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. To diminish the remifentanil effect, a further analysis was conducted after excluding the patients who received only volatile anesthetics without remifentanil infusion. In a propensity-score matched analysis, 30-day mortality was higher in the TIVA group than the VOLATILE group (17.0% vs. 9.1%; hazard ratio [HR] 2.60; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.14-5.93; p = 0.02). In addition, the TIVA group showed higher 30-day mortality than the VOLATILE group, even after eliminating the effect of remifentanil infusion (15.8% vs. 8.3%; HR 4.62; 95% CI, 1.82-11.74; p = 0.001). In our study, the use of volatile anesthetics showed the significant survival improvement after non-cardiac surgery in patients with preoperative myocardial injury, which appears to be irrelevant to the remifentanil use. Further studies are needed to confirm this beneficial effect of volatile anesthetics. Clinical trial number and registry URL: KCT0004349 (www.cris.nih.go.kr).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Park et al. (2020) conducted a cohort in Preoperative myocardial injury (n=1,254). Total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) vs. Volatile anesthetics was evaluated on 30-day mortality (HR 2.60, 95% CI 1.14-5.93, p=0.02). Total intravenous anesthesia was associated with a significantly higher 30-day mortality compared to volatile anesthetics in patients with preoperative myocardial injury undergoing non-cardiac surgery (17.0% vs. 9.1%; HR 2.60).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: