OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the possible cardioprotective effect of sevoflurane versus propofol anesthesia in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. METHODS: Ten thousand five hundred thirty-five consecutive single cardiac surgical procedures from 3 cardiac centers were reported to a common registry from 1999 to 2005. The registry was established by the National Board of Health, and reporting was obligatory for all public heart centers in Denmark. The patients were stratified according to preoperative risk factors (EuroSCORE parameters). The outcome parameters were 30-day mortality, the incidence of postoperative myocardial infarction, and the incidence of postoperative arrhythmias. RESULTS: Overall, the 30-day mortality was lower after sevoflurane (2.84%) versus propofol (3.30%), although not significantly so (p = 0.18). No difference was found in the incidence of postoperative myocardial infarction (sevoflurane, 7.76%/propofol, 7.47%). Patients with preoperative unstable angina and/or recent myocardial infarction, and thus already "preconditioned," did not show any difference in mortality between anesthetic groups, whereas patients without these predictors showed a lower postoperative mortality after sevoflurane (2.28% v 3.14%, p = 0.015), which can at least partly be explained by a preconditioning-like effect. The data suggest that patients suffering relatively severe preoperative ischemic stress benefited from propofol anesthesia, which can be related to the antioxidant effects of propofol. Patients in the sevoflurane group had a higher incidence of postoperative atrial fibrillation (28.75% v 24.87%, p < 0.001), whereas patients in the propofol group showed a higher incidence of all other arrhythmias. CONCLUSION: Sevoflurane and propofol both possess some, although different, cardioprotective properties. Sevoflurane appears to be superior to propofol in patients with little or no ischemic heart disease, such as noncoronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery and CABG surgery without severe preoperative ischemia, whereas propofol seems superior in patients with severe ischemia, cardiovascular instability, or in acute/urgent surgery.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the possible cardioprotective effect of sevoflurane versus propofol anesthesia in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. METHODS: Ten thousand five hundred thirty-five consecutive single cardiac surgical procedures from 3 cardiac centers were reported to a common registry from 1999 to 2005. The registry was established by the National Board of Health, and reporting was obligatory for all public heart centers in Denmark. The patients were stratified according to preoperative risk factors (EuroSCORE parameters). The outcome parameters were 30-day mortality, the incidence of postoperative myocardial infarction, and the incidence of postoperative arrhythmias. RESULTS: Overall, the 30-day mortality was lower after sevoflurane (2.84%) versus propofol (3.30%), although not significantly so (p = 0.18). No difference was found in the incidence of postoperative myocardial infarction (sevoflurane, 7.76%/propofol, 7.47%). Patients with preoperative unstable angina and/or recent myocardial infarction, and thus already "preconditioned," did not show any difference in mortality between anesthetic groups, whereas patients without these predictors showed a lower postoperative mortality after sevoflurane (2.28% v 3.14%, p = 0.015), which can at least partly be explained by a preconditioning-like effect. The data suggest that patients suffering relatively severe preoperative ischemic stress benefited from propofol anesthesia, which can be related to the antioxidant effects of propofol. Patients in the sevoflurane group had a higher incidence of postoperative atrial fibrillation (28.75% v 24.87%, p < 0.001), whereas patients in the propofol group showed a higher incidence of all other arrhythmias. CONCLUSION:Sevoflurane and propofol both possess some, although different, cardioprotective properties. Sevoflurane appears to be superior to propofol in patients with little or no ischemic heart disease, such as noncoronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery and CABG surgery without severe preoperative ischemia, whereas propofol seems superior in patients with severe ischemia, cardiovascular instability, or in acute/urgent surgery.
Authors: Alexandre Mebazaa; Antonis A Pitsis; Alain Rudiger; Wolfgang Toller; Dan Longrois; Sven-Erik Ricksten; Ilona Bobek; Stefan De Hert; Georg Wieselthaler; Uwe Schirmer; Ludwig K von Segesser; Michael Sander; Don Poldermans; Marco Ranucci; Peter C J Karpati; Patrick Wouters; Manfred Seeberger; Edith R Schmid; Walter Weder; Ferenc Follath Journal: Crit Care Date: 2010-04-28 Impact factor: 9.097
Authors: Marco Moscarelli; Prakash P Punjabi; Gamov I Miroslav; Paolo Del Sarto; Francesca Fiorentino; Gianni D Angelini Journal: J Cardiothorac Surg Date: 2015-01-20 Impact factor: 1.637