Propofol and survival: an updated meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Fospropofol disodium versus propofol for long-term sedation during invasive mechanical ventilation: A pilot randomized clinical trial

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Fospropofol disodium is a propofol prodrug that is water-soluble and has a reduced risk of bacterial contamination and hypertriglyceridemia compared with propofol. Prior to implementing a large randomized trial, we investigated the feasibility, initial efficacy, and safety of fospropofol disodium compared with propofol in long-term mild-to-moderate sedation in intensive care units (ICUs).

DESIGN

Single-centered, prospective, unblind, randomized, parallel-group clinical trial.

SETTING

The general ICU of university-affiliated teaching hospital.

PATIENTS

Adult patients (n = 60) expected to have mechanical ventilation for >24 h were enrolled and randomly assigned to the fospropofol or propofol group.

INTERVENTIONS

The fospropofol group received continuous fospropofol disodium infusions and the propofol group received continuous propofol infusions. The sedation goal was a score of -3 to 0 on the Richmond Agitation and Sedation Scale (RASS).

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcome was the percentage of time spent in the target sedation range without rescue sedation. Safety outcomes were based on adverse events. Blood samples were collected to measure formate concentration in plasma.

MAIN RESULTS

The median dose was 4.33 (IQR, 3.08-4.94) mg/kg/h in the fospropofol group and 1.96 (IQR, 1.44-2.94) mg/kg/h in the propofol group. The median percentage of time spent in the target RASS range without rescue sedation was identical in both groups, with 83.33% (IQR, 74.43%-100.00%) in the fospropofol group and 83.33% (IQR, 77.45%-100.00%) in the propofol group (p = 0.887). At least one adverse event was identifed in 23 (76.7%) fospropofol patients and 27 (90.0%) propofol patients. The most common adverse events were tachycardia and hypotension. No paresthesia, catheter-related bloodstream infection or propofol infusion syndrome in both groups was reported. Three patients in the fospropofol group had mild hypertriglyceridemia, and nine patients in propofol group had hypertriglyceridemia (mild in eight patients and moderate in one patient) (10% versus 30%, p = 0.104). The formate concentration in plasma was very low, and no significant difference was identified at any time point between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Fospropofol disodium appears to be a feasible, effective and safe sedative for patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation with long-term sedation.

Mortality and morbidity after total intravenous anaesthesia versus inhalational anaesthesia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

General anaesthesia is provided to more than 300 million surgical patients worldwide, every year. It is administered either through total intravenous anaesthesia, using only intravenous agents, or through inhalational anaesthesia, using volatile anaesthetic agents. The debate on how this affects postoperative patient outcome is ongoing, despite an abundance of published trials. The relevance of this topic has grown by the increasing concern about the contribution of anaesthetic gases to the environmental impact of surgery. We aimed to summarise all available evidence on relevant patient outcomes with total intravenous anaesthesia versus inhalational anaesthesia.

Methods

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched PubMed/Medline, Embase and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled trials for works published from January 1, 1985 to August 1, 2023 for randomised controlled trials comparing total intravenous anaesthesia using propofol versus inhalational anaesthesia using the volatile anaesthetics sevoflurane, desflurane or isoflurane. Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts and full text articles, and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane Collaboration tool. Outcomes were derived from a recent series of publications on consensus definitions for Standardised Endpoints for Perioperative trials (StEP). Primary outcomes covered mortality and organ-related morbidity. Secondary outcomes were related to anaesthetic and surgical morbidity. This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023430492).

Findings

We included 317 randomised controlled trials, comprising 51,107 patients. No difference between total intravenous and inhalational anaesthesia was seen in the primary outcomes of in-hospital mortality (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.67-1.66, 27 trials, 3846 patients), 30-day mortality (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.70-1.36, 23 trials, 9667 patients) and one-year mortality (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.88-1.48, 13 trials, 9317 patients). Organ-related morbidity was similar between groups except for the subgroup of elderly patients, in which total intravenous anaesthesia was associated with a lower incidence of postoperative cognitive dysfunction (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.40-0.97, 11 trials, 3834 patients) and a better score on postoperative cognitive dysfunction tests (standardised mean difference 1.68, 95% CI 0.47-2.88, 9 trials, 4917 patients). In the secondary outcomes, total intravenous anaesthesia resulted in a lower incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.56-0.67, 145 trials, 23,172 patients), less emergence delirium (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.29-0.56, 32 trials, 4203 patients) and a higher quality of recovery score (QoR-40 mean difference 6.45, 95% CI 3.64-9.25, 17 trials, 1835 patients).

Interpretation

The results indicate that postoperative mortality and organ-related morbidity was similar for intravenous and inhalational anaesthesia. Total intravenous anaesthesia offered advantages in postoperative recovery.

Funding

Dutch Society for Anaesthesiology (NVA).

Comparison between propofol and total inhalational anaesthesia on cardiovascular outcomes following on-pump cardiac surgery in higher-risk patients: a randomised controlled pilot and feasibility study

OBJECTIVES

Myocardial revascularisation and cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) can cause ischaemia-reperfusion injury, leading to myocardial and other end-organ damage. Volatile anaesthetics protect the myocardium in experimental studies. However, there is uncertainty about whether this translates into clinical benefits because of the coadministration of propofol and its detrimental effects, restricting myocardial protective processes.

METHODS

In this single-blinded, parallel-group randomised controlled feasibility trial, higher-risk patients undergoing elective coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery with an additive European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation ≥5 were randomised to receive either propofol or total inhalational anaesthesia as single agents for maintenance of anaesthesia. The primary outcome was the feasibility of recruiting and randomising 50 patients across two cardiac surgical centres, and secondary outcomes included the feasibility of collecting the planned perioperative data, clinically relevant outcomes and assessments of effective patient identification, screening and recruitment.

RESULTS

All 50 patients were recruited within 11 months in two centres, allowing for a 13-month hiatus in recruitment due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Overall, 50/108 (46%) of eligible patients were recruited. One patient withdrew before surgery and one patient did not undergo surgery. All but one completed in-hospital and 30-day follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

It is feasible to recruit and randomise higher-risk patients undergoing CABG surgery to a study comparing total inhalational and propofol anaesthesia in a timely manner and with high acceptance and completion rates.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04039854.

Neuropsychological follow-up of isoflurane sedated intensive care patients: a substudy of a randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Inhaled sedation of intensive care unit (ICU) patients ventilated >24 hours may have long term effects. We hypothesized that isoflurane has a better neuropsychological outcome in a one-year follow-up compared to propofol sedation.

METHODS

All 66 patients included by the coordinating center of the ISOCONDA study (EudraCT#: 2016-004551-67) took part in this substudy (DRKS00020240). A delirium test (CAM-ICU) was performed 24 hours after end of sedation. Sedation-, ventilator-, ICU- and delirium-free days within 30 days were calculated. Patients were sent five questionnaires one, three and twelve months after ICU discharge: ICU-Memory-tool (ICU-MT), Short-Form-36-Health-survey (SF-36), Posttraumatic-Stress-Scale-14 (PTSS-14), WHO-Five-Well-Being-Index (WHO-5) and Hospital-Anxiety-Depression-Scale (HADS).

RESULTS

CAM-ICU was positive in 17% of patients, however 68% showed signs of delirium during the ICU stay (no group differences). Mortality was lower after isoflurane (30-days: 1/33 versus 7/33, P=0.024; One-year: 9/33 versus 14/33, P=0.156). Isoflurane led to significantly more sedation- (median [IQR]: 28[25-29] versus 24[21-29], P=0.016), ventilator- (28[24-29] versus 22[4-28], P=0.011), ICU- (23[13-26] versus 11[0-25], P=0.044) and delirium-free days (25[21-29] versus 20[12-28], P=0.031). Return rate of questionnaires was high (87/128). In the ICU-MT, isoflurane patients recalled significantly more factual memories after one year. Generally, the psychological tests suggested a poor quality of life (SF-36), high rates of post-traumatic-stress-disorder (PTSS-14: 38%) and depression (WHO-5: 54%, HADS: 43%), without significant group differences.

CONCLUSIONS

Isoflurane sedation leads to more delirium free days during the ICU treatment and more factual memories of the ICU stay one year after the ICU stay. However long-term outcome of ventilated ICU patients is poor, and there were no differences between isoflurane and propofol sedation.

Reducing the carbon footprint of general anaesthesia: a comparison of total intravenous anaesthesia vs. a mixed anaesthetic strategy in 47,157 adult patients

Global warming is a major public health concern. Volatile anaesthetics are greenhouse gases that increase the carbon footprint of healthcare. Modelling studies indicate that total intravenous anaesthesia is less carbon intensive than volatile anaesthesia, with equivalent quality of care. In this observational study, we aimed to apply the findings of previous modelling studies to compare the carbon footprint per general anaesthetic of an exclusive TIVA strategy vs. a mixed TIVA-volatile strategy. This comparative retrospective study was conducted over 2 years in two French hospitals, one using total intravenous anaesthesia only and one using a mixed strategy including both intravenous and inhalation anaesthetic techniques. Based on pharmacy procurement records, the quantity of anaesthetic sedative drugs was converted to carbon dioxide equivalents. The primary outcome was the difference in carbon footprint of hypnotic drugs per intervention between the two strategies. From 1 January 2021 to 31 December 2022, 25,137 patients received general anaesthesia in the hospital using the total intravenous anaesthesia strategy and 22,020 in the hospital using the mixed strategy. The carbon dioxide equivalent footprint of hypnotic drugs per intervention in the hospital using the total intravenous anaesthesia strategy was 20 times lower than in the hospital using the mixed strategy (emissions of 2.42 kg vs. 48.85 kg carbon dioxide equivalent per intervention, respectively). The total intravenous anaesthesia strategy significantly reduces the carbon footprint of hypnotic drugs in general anaesthesia in adult patients compared with a mixed strategy. Further research is warranted to assess the risk-benefit ratio of the widespread adoption of total intravenous anaesthesia.

Efficacy of Sevoflurane and Propofol Anesthesia on Perioperative Adverse Cardiovascular Events and Hemodynamics in Elderly Patients With Diabetes

PURPOSE

This study was undertaken to compare the effects of sevoflurane and propofol anesthesia on perioperative hemodynamics and perioperative adverse cardiovascular events (PACE) in elderly patients with diabetes undergoing general anesthesia for noncardiac surgery.

METHODS

According to the random number table (n = 40), 80 patients with diabetes undergoing noncardiac general anesthesia were divided into a control group and an observation group. In the control group, the patients were given propofol 4 to 6 mg/(kg·h), continuously pumped to maintain anesthesia. In the observation group, the patients were given maintained concentration of sevoflurane for 1 to 1.5 minimum alveolar concentration (MAC) for continuous inhalation, while remifentanil with volume fraction of 0.05 to 1 µg/(kg·min) was given for continuous pumping in both groups. The heart rate (HR) and mean arterial pressure (MAP) of the patients were recorded, and the serum creatine kinase-MB (CK-MB) and cardiac troponin I (cTnI) contents before anesthesia (T0), immediately after surgery (T3), and 24 hours later (T4) as well as the blood glucose levels at T0 and T3 were compared between the two groups. The occurrence of PACE in the two groups was compared during the perioperative period.

FINDINGS

The HR and MAP 5 minutes after intubation (T1), 1 hour after skin incision (T2), and at T3 in the two groups were significantly lower than those of T0 (P < 0.05), whereas the MAP and HR of T1, T2, and T3 in the observation group were significantly higher than those of the control group (P < 0.05). The T3 blood glucose levels were significantly higher in the two groups than that in T0 (P < 0.05), and the T3 blood glucose levels in the observation group were significantly lower than that in the control group (P < 0.05). CK-MB and cTnI in the two groups were significantly higher at T3 and T4 than T0 (P < 0.05), whereas CK-MB and cTnI in the observation group were significantly lower than in the control group at T3 and T4 (P < 0.05). The incidence of hypotension and PACE was significantly lower in the observation group than in the control group (P < 0.05).

IMPLICATIONS

Compared with propofol IV general anesthesia, sevoflurane inhalation anesthesia can improve perioperative hemodynamics stability and reduce the incidence of PACE in elderly patients with diabetes undergoing noncardiac surgery.

Association between first-week propofol administration and long-term outcomes of critically ill mechanically ventilated patients: A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND & AIM

Propofol is commonly used in ICUs, but its long-term effects have not been thoroughly studied. In vitro studies suggest it may harm mitochondrial function, potentially affecting clinical outcomes. This study aimed to investigate the association between substantial propofol sedation and clinical outcomes in critically ill patients.

METHODS

We conducted a single-centre cohort study of critically ill, mechanically ventilated (≥7 days) adults to compare patients who received a substantial dose of propofol (cumulative >500 mg) during the first week of ICU admission with those who did not. The primary outcome was the association between substantial propofol administration and 6-month mortality, adjusted for relevant covariates. Subanalyses were performed for administration in the early (day 1-3) and late (day 4-7) acute phases of critical illness due to the metabolic changes in this period. Secondary outcomes included tracheostomy need and duration, length of ICU and hospital stay (LOS), discharge destinations, ICU, hospital, and 3-month mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 839 patients were enrolled, with 73.7 % receiving substantial propofol administration (substantial propofol dose group). Six-month all-cause mortality was 32.4 %. After adjusting for relevant variables, we found no statistically significant difference in 6-month mortality between both groups. There were also no significant differences in secondary outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Our study suggests that substantial propofol administration during the first week of ICU stay in the least sick critically ill, mechanically ventilated adult patients is safe, with no significant associations found with 6-month mortality, ICU or hospital LOS, differences in discharge destinations or need for tracheostomy.

Myocardial Protection in Cardiac Surgery: Exploring the Influence of Anesthetic Agents

This review assesses the efficacy of inhalation anesthetics and propofol in cardiac surgery, primarily focusing on their impact on myocardial protection and subsequent clinical outcomes. The review provides a concise summary of the current scientific information regarding the protective efects of inhalation anesthetics and propofol, particularly in the context of ischemia-reperfusion injury during cardiac surgery. The review delves into the mechanisms of action and discusses clinical studies comparing the 2 anesthetic strategies regarding mortality, complication rates, and length of hospital stay. Inhalation anesthetics exhibit cardioprotective properties through many mechanisms, such as preconditioning, scavenging of free radicals, and stabilizing mitochondria. Propofol demonstrates certain protective benefits but does not possess the preconditioning capability of inhalation medications. Clinical investigations yield contradictory findings, as several studies indicate enhanced outcomes with inhalation anesthetics, while others observe no substantial disparity between the 2 approaches. The cardioprotective efcacy of propofol against ischemia-reperfusion injury remains limited. While its inherent antioxidant properties ofer direct myocardial protection, propofol demonstrably lacks the preconditioning-mediated signaling pathways triggered by inhalation anesthetics. As a result, propofol's protective efect may be slightly inferior to preconditioning strategies, and its potential to inhibit organ-protective impact of other interventions needs further investigation. The question of which anesthetic approach ofers superior myocardial protection remains debatable. Current evidence is inconclusive, potentially due to patient heterogeneity, surgical complexity, and methodological limitations of existing studies. Future research, including pharmacogenetic studies and large, welldesigned, randomized controlled trials, are necessary to provide definitive guidance on anesthetic selection for optimal myocardial protection in cardiac surgery.

Sedation for Patients with Sepsis: Towards a Personalised Approach

This article looks at the challenges of sedoanalgesia for sepsis patients, and argues for a personalised approach. Sedation is a necessary part of treatment for patients in intensive care to reduce stress and anxiety and improve long-term prognoses. Sepsis patients present particular difficulties as they are at increased risk of a wide range of complications, such as multiple organ failure, neurological dysfunction, septic shock, ARDS, abdominal compartment syndrome, vasoplegic syndrome, and myocardial dysfunction. The development of any one of these complications can cause the patient's rapid deterioration, and each has distinct implications in terms of appropriate and safe forms of sedation. In this way, the present article reviews the sedative and analgesic drugs commonly used in the ICU and, placing special emphasis on their strategic administration in sepsis patients, develops a set of proposals for sedoanalgesia aimed at improving outcomes for this group of patients. These proposals represent a move away from simplistic approaches like avoiding benzodiazepines to more "objective-guided sedation" that accounts for a patient's principal pathology, as well as any comorbidities, and takes full advantage of the therapeutic arsenal currently available to achieve personalised, patient-centred treatment goals.

Remimazolam and serious adverse events: A scoping review

Remimazolam is anticipated to be an interesting anaesthetic and sedative. It combines the pharmacodynamic properties of midazolam with pharmacokinetic properties similar to remifentanil. However, worrisome case reports of anaphylaxis, delayed emergence and re-sedation have emerged recently and necessitate further investigation.PubMed (including MEDLINE) and EMBASE were searched for all studies reporting serious adverse events where remimazolam was administered for sedation or anaesthesia.Thirty-six case reports and 73 trials were identified, involving a total of 6740 patients who received remimazolam. Hypotension was reported in 911 cases, delayed emergence in 68 cases, anaphylaxis in 10 cases and re-sedation in 8 cases. The incidence of hypotension seems to be lower compared with other anaesthetics, even in high-risk patients.Delayed emergence might be related to the metabolism of remimazolam through carboxylesterase 1 (CES1), a tissue esterase predominant in the liver. There is significant interindividual variation, and it is inhibited by flavonoids, fatty acids and alcohol. Individual benzodiazepine sensitivity has also been reported. A higher BMI, older age and low plasma albumin concentration are risk factors for delayed emergence. Anaphylaxis might be related to a non-IgE-mediated effect of the excipient dextran-40 or a partially IgE-mediated reaction to remimazolam itself. Resedation has been reported after flumazenil reversal and is explained by the specific pharmacokinetic properties of flumazenil and remimazolam. Reversal by flumazenil should be reserved for and used carefully in patients with delayed emergence.

VISUAL ABSTRACT

http://links.lww.com/EJA/A864 .

Mechanisms of Action of the Detrimental Effects of Propofol on Survival

Due to its favorable pharmacologic features, propofol is the most commonly used hypnotic agent in perioperative and intensive care settings. However, it also has adverse effects like propofol infusion syndrome and an increased risk of infection. Growing evidence suggests that propofol may worsen clinical outcomes by inhibiting the organ-protective properties of other interventions, such as volatile anesthetics or remote ischemic preconditioning. This editorial describes possible mechanisms underlying the detrimental effects of propofol, and provides an overview of the results of clinical trials evaluating the effects of propofol in various settings.