MyMedR

Displaying all 4 publications

Abstract:

Sort:

A randomized controlled trial of levosimendan to reduce mortality in high-risk cardiac surgery patients (CHEETAH): Rationale and design

Zangrillo A, Alvaro G, Pisano A, Guarracino F, Lobreglio R, Bradic N, et al.

Am Heart J, 2016 Jul;177:66-73.
PMID: 27297851 DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2016.03.021

OBJECTIVE: Patients undergoing cardiac surgery are at risk of perioperative low cardiac output syndrome due to postoperative myocardial dysfunction. Myocardial dysfunction in patients undergoing cardiac surgery is a potential indication for the use of levosimendan, a calcium sensitizer with 3 beneficial cardiovascular effects (inotropic, vasodilatory, and anti-inflammatory), which appears effective in improving clinically relevant outcomes.
DESIGN: Double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter randomized trial.
SETTING: Tertiary care hospitals.
INTERVENTIONS: Cardiac surgery patients (n = 1,000) with postoperative myocardial dysfunction (defined as patients with intraaortic balloon pump and/or high-dose standard inotropic support) will be randomized to receive a continuous infusion of either levosimendan (0.05-0.2 μg/[kg min]) or placebo for 24-48 hours.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary end point will be 30-day mortality. Secondary end points will be mortality at 1 year, time on mechanical ventilation, acute kidney injury, decision to stop the study drug due to adverse events or to start open-label levosimendan, and length of intensive care unit and hospital stay. We will test the hypothesis that levosimendan reduces 30-day mortality in cardiac surgery patients with postoperative myocardial dysfunction.
CONCLUSIONS: This trial is planned to determine whether levosimendan could improve survival in patients with postoperative low cardiac output syndrome. The results of this double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trial may provide important insights into the management of low cardiac output in cardiac surgery.
A Systematic Review and International Web-Based Survey of Randomized Controlled Trials in the Perioperative and Critical Care Setting: Interventions Reducing Mortality

Sartini C, Lomivorotov V, Pieri M, Lopez-Delgado JC, Baiardo Redaelli M, Hajjar L, et al.

J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth, 2019 05;33(5):1430-1439.
PMID: 30600204 DOI: 10.1053/j.jvca.2018.11.026

The authors aimed to identify interventions documented by randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that reduce mortality in adult critically ill and perioperative patients, followed by a survey of clinicians' opinions and routine practices to understand the clinicians' response to such evidence. The authors performed a comprehensive literature review to identify all topics reported to reduce mortality in perioperative and critical care settings according to at least 2 RCTs or to a multicenter RCT or to a single-center RCT plus guidelines. The authors generated position statements that were voted on online by physicians worldwide for agreement, use, and willingness to include in international guidelines. From 262 RCT manuscripts reporting mortality differences in the perioperative and critically ill settings, the authors selected 27 drugs, techniques, and strategies (66 RCTs, most frequently published by the New England Journal of Medicine [13 papers], Lancet [7], and Journal of the American Medical Association [5]) with an agreement ≥67% from over 250 physicians (46 countries). Noninvasive ventilation was the intervention supported by the largest number of RCTs (n = 13). The concordance between agreement and use (a positive answer both to "do you agree" and "do you use") showed differences between Western and other countries and between anesthesiologists and intensive care unit physicians. The authors identified 27 clinical interventions with randomized evidence of survival benefit and strong clinician support in support of their potential life-saving properties in perioperative and critically ill patients with noninvasive ventilation having the highest level of support. However, clinician views appear affected by specialty and geographical location.
A Systematic Review and International Web-Based Survey of Randomized Controlled Trials in the Perioperative and Critical Care Setting: Interventions Increasing Mortality

Sartini C, Lomivorotov V, Pisano A, Riha H, Baiardo Redaelli M, Lopez-Delgado JC, et al.

J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth, 2019 Oct;33(10):2685-2694.
PMID: 31064730 DOI: 10.1053/j.jvca.2019.03.022

OBJECTIVE: Reducing mortality is a key target in critical care and perioperative medicine. The authors aimed to identify all nonsurgical interventions (drugs, techniques, strategies) shown by randomized trials to increase mortality in these clinical settings.
DESIGN: A systematic review of the literature followed by a consensus-based voting process.
SETTING: A web-based international consensus conference.
PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred fifty-one physicians from 46 countries.
INTERVENTIONS: The authors performed a systematic literature search and identified all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) showing a significant increase in unadjusted landmark mortality among surgical or critically ill patients. The authors reviewed such studies during a meeting by a core group of experts. Studies selected after such review advanced to web-based voting by clinicians in relation to agreement, clinical practice, and willingness to include each intervention in international guidelines.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The authors selected 12 RCTs dealing with 12 interventions increasing mortality: diaspirin-crosslinked hemoglobin (92% of agreement among web voters), overfeeding, nitric oxide synthase inhibitor in septic shock, human growth hormone, thyroxin in acute kidney injury, intravenous salbutamol in acute respiratory distress syndrome, plasma-derived protein C concentrate, aprotinin in high-risk cardiac surgery, cysteine prodrug, hypothermia in meningitis, methylprednisolone in traumatic brain injury, and albumin in traumatic brain injury (72% of agreement). Overall, a high consistency (ranging from 80% to 90%) between agreement and clinical practice was observed.
CONCLUSION: The authors identified 12 clinical interventions showing increased mortality supported by randomized controlled trials with nonconflicting evidence, and wide agreement upon clinicians on a global scale.
MortalitY in caRdIAc surgery (MYRIAD): A randomizeD controlled trial of volatile anesthetics. Rationale and design

Landoni G, Lomivorotov V, Pisano A, Nigro Neto C, Benedetto U, Biondi Zoccai G, et al.

Contemp Clin Trials, 2017 08;59:38-43.
PMID: 28533194 DOI: 10.1016/j.cct.2017.05.011

OBJECTIVE: There is initial evidence that the use of volatile anesthetics can reduce the postoperative release of cardiac troponin I, the need for inotropic support, and the number of patients requiring prolonged hospitalization following coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery. Nevertheless, small randomized controlled trials have failed to demonstrate a survival advantage. Thus, whether volatile anesthetics improve the postoperative outcome of cardiac surgical patients remains uncertain. An adequately powered randomized controlled trial appears desirable.
DESIGN: Single blinded, international, multicenter randomized controlled trial with 1:1 allocation ratio.
SETTING: Tertiary and University hospitals.
INTERVENTIONS: Patients (n=10,600) undergoing coronary artery bypass graft will be randomized to receive either volatile anesthetic as part of the anesthetic plan, or total intravenous anesthesia.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary end point of the study will be one-year mortality (any cause). Secondary endpoints will be 30-day mortality; 30-day death or non-fatal myocardial infarction (composite endpoint); cardiac mortality at 30day and at one year; incidence of hospital re-admission during the one year follow-up period and duration of intensive care unit, and hospital stay. The sample size is based on the hypothesis that volatile anesthetics will reduce 1-year unadjusted mortality from 3% to 2%, using a two-sided alpha error of 0.05, and a power of 0.9.
CONCLUSIONS: The trial will determine whether the simple intervention of adding a volatile anesthetic, an intervention that can be implemented by all anesthesiologists, can improve one-year survival in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery.