BACKGROUND: To date, only limited data exist about the use of xenon as an anaesthetic agent in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. The favourable cardio- and neuroprotective properties of xenon might attenuate postoperative complications, improve outcome, and reduce the incidence of delirium. Thus, the aims of this study were to investigate the feasibility and safety of balanced xenon anaesthesia in patients undergoing cardiac surgery and to gather pilot data for a future randomized multicentre study. METHODS:Thirty patients undergoing elective coronary artery bypass grafting were enrolled in this randomized, single-blind controlled trial. They were randomized to receive balanced general anaesthesia with either xenon (45-50 vol%) or sevoflurane (1-1.4 vol%). The primary outcome was the occurrence of adverse events (AEs). Secondary outcome parameters were feasibility criteria (bispectral index, perioperative haemodynamic, and respiratory profile) and safety parameters (dosage of study treatments, renal function, intraoperative blood loss, need for inotropic support, regional cerebral tissue oxygenation). Furthermore, at predefined time points, systemic and pulmonary haemodynamics were assessed by the use of a pulmonary artery catheter. RESULTS: There were no patient characteristic differences between the groups. Patients undergoing xenon anaesthesia did not differ with respect to the incidence of AE (6 vs 8, P=0.464) compared with the sevoflurane group. No differences were detected regarding secondary feasibility and safety criteria. The haemodynamic and respiratory profile was comparable between the treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS:Balanced xenon anaesthesia is feasible and safe compared with sevoflurane anaesthesia in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery. Acronym CARDIAX: A pre- and post-coronary artery bypass graft implantation disposed application of xenon. Clinical trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01285271; EudraCT-number: 2010-023942-63. Approved by the ethics committee 'Ethik-Kommission an der Medizinischen Fakultät der Rheinisch-Westfälischen Technischen Hochschule Aachen (RWTH Aachen)': EK-218/10.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: To date, only limited data exist about the use of xenon as an anaesthetic agent in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. The favourable cardio- and neuroprotective properties of xenon might attenuate postoperative complications, improve outcome, and reduce the incidence of delirium. Thus, the aims of this study were to investigate the feasibility and safety of balanced xenon anaesthesia in patients undergoing cardiac surgery and to gather pilot data for a future randomized multicentre study. METHODS: Thirty patients undergoing elective coronary artery bypass grafting were enrolled in this randomized, single-blind controlled trial. They were randomized to receive balanced general anaesthesia with either xenon (45-50 vol%) or sevoflurane (1-1.4 vol%). The primary outcome was the occurrence of adverse events (AEs). Secondary outcome parameters were feasibility criteria (bispectral index, perioperative haemodynamic, and respiratory profile) and safety parameters (dosage of study treatments, renal function, intraoperative blood loss, need for inotropic support, regional cerebral tissue oxygenation). Furthermore, at predefined time points, systemic and pulmonary haemodynamics were assessed by the use of a pulmonary artery catheter. RESULTS: There were no patient characteristic differences between the groups. Patients undergoing xenon anaesthesia did not differ with respect to the incidence of AE (6 vs 8, P=0.464) compared with the sevoflurane group. No differences were detected regarding secondary feasibility and safety criteria. The haemodynamic and respiratory profile was comparable between the treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Balanced xenon anaesthesia is feasible and safe compared with sevoflurane anaesthesia in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery. Acronym CARDIAX: A pre- and post-coronary artery bypass graft implantation disposed application of xenon. Clinical trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01285271; EudraCT-number: 2010-023942-63. Approved by the ethics committee 'Ethik-Kommission an der Medizinischen Fakultät der Rheinisch-Westfälischen Technischen Hochschule Aachen (RWTH Aachen)': EK-218/10.
Authors: Christopher G Hughes; Christina S Boncyk; Deborah J Culley; Lee A Fleisher; Jacqueline M Leung; David L McDonagh; Tong J Gan; Matthew D McEvoy; Timothy E Miller Journal: Anesth Analg Date: 2020-06 Impact factor: 5.108
Authors: Christian Stoppe; Julia Ney; Martin Brenke; Andreas Goetzenich; Christoph Emontzpohl; Gereon Schälte; Oliver Grottke; Manfred Moeller; Rolf Rossaint; Mark Coburn Journal: Sports Med Date: 2016-11 Impact factor: 11.136
Authors: Sarah Devroe; Jurgen Lemiere; Marc Van de Velde; Marc Gewillig; Derize Boshoff; Steffen Rex Journal: Trials Date: 2015-03-04 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Thomas Breuer; Christoph Emontzpohl; Mark Coburn; Carina Benstoem; Rolf Rossaint; Gernot Marx; Gereon Schälte; Juergen Bernhagen; Christian S Bruells; Andreas Goetzenich; Christian Stoppe Journal: Crit Care Date: 2015-10-15 Impact factor: 9.097
Authors: Christian Stoppe; Achim Rimek; Rolf Rossaint; Steffen Rex; Ana Stevanovic; Gereon Schälte; Astrid Fahlenkamp; Michael Czaplik; Christian S Bruells; Christian Daviet; Mark Coburn Journal: Med Gas Res Date: 2013-06-11
Authors: Michael Veldeman; Mark Coburn; Rolf Rossaint; Hans Clusmann; Kay Nolte; Benedikt Kremer; Anke Höllig Journal: Front Neurol Date: 2017-09-27 Impact factor: 4.003