Effects of Volatile Sedation Versus Propofol on Time to Extubation in the Intensive Care Unit After Cardiac Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Maria Luisa Garo, Pasquale Rinaldi, Andrea Galderisi, Marta Di Folco, Alessandro Ruggiero, Alessia Mattei, Lorenzo Schiavoni, Giuseppe Nasso, Giuseppe Pascarella, Massimo Chello, Mario Lusini, Rita Cataldo, Massimiliano Carassiti, Felice Eugenio Agrò, Alessandro Strumia
{"title":"Effects of Volatile Sedation Versus Propofol on Time to Extubation in the Intensive Care Unit After Cardiac Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.","authors":"Maria Luisa Garo, Pasquale Rinaldi, Andrea Galderisi, Marta Di Folco, Alessandro Ruggiero, Alessia Mattei, Lorenzo Schiavoni, Giuseppe Nasso, Giuseppe Pascarella, Massimo Chello, Mario Lusini, Rita Cataldo, Massimiliano Carassiti, Felice Eugenio Agrò, Alessandro Strumia","doi":"10.1053/j.jvca.2025.08.025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Optimal sedation management is critical in the postoperative care of cardiac surgery patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU), where sedative choice may influence respiratory, hemodynamic, and recovery outcomes. Propofol is the most widely used sedative, but volatile anesthetics are gaining interest due to their pharmacologic advantages. This systematic review and meta-analysis was designed to compare volatile anesthetics with propofol for ICU sedation after cardiac surgery, focusing on time to extubation as the primary outcome, and ICU and hospital length of stay, hemodynamic support, and postoperative complications as secondary outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched from July to October 2024 without language or date restrictions. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials comparing volatile anesthetics with propofol for postoperative ICU sedation in adult cardiac surgery patients. Studies without extractable data were excluded. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias 2.0 tool. Meta-analyses were performed using random-effects models.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five randomized controlled trials involving 384 patients were included. Sedation with volatile anesthetics significantly reduced time to extubation compared with propofol (weighted mean difference [WMD] = -55 minutes, 95% CI -93 to -17, p < 0.001), although heterogeneity was high (I² = 95.9%, τ² = 1,731.95, p < 0.001). No significant differences were observed for ICU (WMD = -4.26 hours, 95% CI: -17.07 to 8.55, I<sup>2</sup> = 89.9%, t<sup>2</sup> = 143.76, z = -0.65, p = 0.51) or hospital (WMD = -1.94 days, 95% CI: -4.17 to 0.30, I<sup>2</sup> = 65.1%, t<sup>2</sup> = 2.53) length of stay. Secondary outcomes (use of vasopressors and/or positive inotropes, postoperative atrial fibrillation, and nausea and/or vomiting) were inconsistently reported and showed no clear pattern.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Volatile anesthetics reduce extubation time compared with propofol in adult cardiac surgery patients sedated in the ICU. However, evidence on secondary outcomes remains inconclusive due to limited and heterogeneous data.</p>","PeriodicalId":15176,"journal":{"name":"Journal of cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesia","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1053/j.jvca.2025.08.025","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Optimal sedation management is critical in the postoperative care of cardiac surgery patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU), where sedative choice may influence respiratory, hemodynamic, and recovery outcomes. Propofol is the most widely used sedative, but volatile anesthetics are gaining interest due to their pharmacologic advantages. This systematic review and meta-analysis was designed to compare volatile anesthetics with propofol for ICU sedation after cardiac surgery, focusing on time to extubation as the primary outcome, and ICU and hospital length of stay, hemodynamic support, and postoperative complications as secondary outcomes.

Methods: PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched from July to October 2024 without language or date restrictions. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials comparing volatile anesthetics with propofol for postoperative ICU sedation in adult cardiac surgery patients. Studies without extractable data were excluded. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias 2.0 tool. Meta-analyses were performed using random-effects models.

Results: Five randomized controlled trials involving 384 patients were included. Sedation with volatile anesthetics significantly reduced time to extubation compared with propofol (weighted mean difference [WMD] = -55 minutes, 95% CI -93 to -17, p < 0.001), although heterogeneity was high (I² = 95.9%, τ² = 1,731.95, p < 0.001). No significant differences were observed for ICU (WMD = -4.26 hours, 95% CI: -17.07 to 8.55, I2 = 89.9%, t2 = 143.76, z = -0.65, p = 0.51) or hospital (WMD = -1.94 days, 95% CI: -4.17 to 0.30, I2 = 65.1%, t2 = 2.53) length of stay. Secondary outcomes (use of vasopressors and/or positive inotropes, postoperative atrial fibrillation, and nausea and/or vomiting) were inconsistently reported and showed no clear pattern.

Discussion: Volatile anesthetics reduce extubation time compared with propofol in adult cardiac surgery patients sedated in the ICU. However, evidence on secondary outcomes remains inconclusive due to limited and heterogeneous data.

挥发性镇静与异丙酚对心脏手术后重症监护病房拔管时间的影响:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
背景:最佳镇静管理对于入住重症监护病房(ICU)的心脏手术患者的术后护理至关重要,在ICU中,镇静的选择可能会影响呼吸、血流动力学和恢复结果。异丙酚是应用最广泛的镇静剂,但挥发性麻醉剂由于其药理优势而引起人们的兴趣。本系统综述和荟萃分析旨在比较挥发性麻醉药与异丙酚在心脏手术后ICU镇静中的作用,重点关注拔管时间作为主要结局,ICU和住院时间、血流动力学支持和术后并发症作为次要结局。方法:检索2024年7月至10月PubMed、Web of Science和Scopus,无语言和日期限制。符合条件的研究是比较挥发性麻醉剂和异丙酚用于成人心脏手术患者术后ICU镇静的随机对照试验。没有可提取数据的研究被排除在外。使用Cochrane风险-偏倚2.0工具评估偏倚风险。采用随机效应模型进行meta分析。结果:纳入5项随机对照试验,共384例患者。与异丙酚相比,使用挥发性麻醉药镇静可显著减少拔管时间(加权平均差[WMD] = -55分钟,95% CI = -93至-17,p < 0.001),尽管异质性较高(I²= 95.9%,τ²= 1,731.95,p < 0.001)。ICU (WMD = -4.26小时,95% CI: -17.07 ~ 8.55, I2 = 89.9%, t2 = 143.76, z = -0.65, p = 0.51)和医院(WMD = -1.94天,95% CI: -4.17 ~ 0.30, I2 = 65.1%, t2 = 2.53)住院时间差异无统计学意义。次要结局(血管加压药和/或正性肌力药物的使用,术后心房颤动,恶心和/或呕吐)的报道不一致,没有明确的模式。讨论:与异丙酚相比,在ICU镇静的成人心脏手术患者中,挥发性麻醉剂减少拔管时间。然而,由于数据有限和异质性,关于次要结局的证据仍然不确定。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
17.90%
发文量
606
审稿时长
37 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia is primarily aimed at anesthesiologists who deal with patients undergoing cardiac, thoracic or vascular surgical procedures. JCVA features a multidisciplinary approach, with contributions from cardiac, vascular and thoracic surgeons, cardiologists, and other related specialists. Emphasis is placed on rapid publication of clinically relevant material.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信