Zhu Fang, Lee Anna, Chee Yee Eot
Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Oct 17;10:CD003587. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003587.pub2.
Fast-track cardiac care is a complex intervention involving several components of care during cardiac anaesthesia and in the postoperative period, all with the ultimate aim of early extubation after surgery, to reduce the length of stay in the intensive care unit and in the hospital. Safe and effective fast-track cardiac care may reduce hospital costs. This is an update of a Cochrane review published in 2003.
To update the evidence on the safety and effectiveness of fast-track cardiac care compared to conventional (not fast-track) care in adult patients undergoing cardiac surgery.
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2012, Issue 3), MEDLINE (January 1966 to April 2012), EMBASE (January 1980 to April 2012), CINAHL (January 1982 to April 2012), and ISI Web of Science (January 2003 to April 2012). We searched reference lists of articles and contacted experts in the field.
All randomized controlled trials of adult cardiac surgical patients (coronary artery bypass grafts, aortic valve replacement, mitral valve replacement) that compared fast-track cardiac care and conventional (not fast-track) care groups were included. We focused on the following fast-track interventions that were designed for early extubation after surgery, administration of low-dose opioid based general anaesthesia during cardiac surgery and the use of a time-directed extubation protocol after surgery. The primary outcome was the risk of mortality. Secondary outcomes included postoperative complications, reintubation within 24 hours of surgery, time to extubation, length of stay in the intensive care unit and in the hospital, quality of life after surgery and hospital costs.
Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted the data. Study authors were contacted for additional information. We used a random-effects model and reported relative risk (RR), mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI).
Twenty-five trials involving 4118 patients were included in the review. There were two studies with a low risk of bias and nine studies with a high risk of bias. There were no differences in the risk of mortality within the first year after surgery between low-dose versus high-dose opioid based general anaesthesia groups (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.28 to 1.18) and between early extubation protocol versus usual care groups (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.75).There were no significant differences between low-dose versus high-dose opioid based anaesthesia groups for postoperative complications: myocardial infarction (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.99), reintubation (RR 1.77, 95% CI 0.38 to 8.27), acute renal failure (RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.33 to 4.33), major bleeding (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.44), and stroke (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.36 to 3.78). Compared to the usual care, there were no significant differences in the risk of postoperative complications associated with early extubation: myocardial infarction (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.60), reintubation (RR 1.91, 95% CI 0.90 to 4.07), acute renal failure (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.19 to 3.10), major bleeding (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.44), stroke (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.31 to 2.46), major sepsis (RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.08 to 19.75) and wound infection (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.25 to 1.83).Although there were high levels of heterogeneity, both low-dose opioid anaesthesia and the use of time-directed extubation protocols were associated with reductions in the time to extubation (3.0 to 10.5 hours) and in the length of stay in the intensive care unit (0.4 to 8.7 hours). However, these fast-track care interventions were not associated with reductions in the total length of stay in hospital. One high quality cost-effectiveness analysis included in a randomized controlled trial showed that early extubation was likely to be cost-effective.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The use of low-dose opioid based general anaesthesia and time-directed protocols for fast-track interventions have similar risks of mortality and major postoperative complications to conventional (not fast-track) care, and therefore appear to be safe in patients considered to be at low to moderate risk. These fast-track interventions reduced the time to extubation and shortened the length of stay in the intensive care unit, but did not reduce the length of stay in the hospital.
快速心脏护理是一种复杂的干预措施,涉及心脏麻醉期间及术后护理的多个环节,其最终目标是术后早期拔管,以缩短重症监护病房和医院的住院时间。安全有效的快速心脏护理可能降低医院成本。这是对2003年发表的一篇Cochrane系统评价的更新。
更新关于快速心脏护理与常规(非快速)护理相比,在接受心脏手术的成年患者中的安全性和有效性的证据。
我们检索了Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL)(2012年第3期)、MEDLINE(1966年1月至2012年4月)、EMBASE(1980年1月至2012年4月)、CINAHL(1982年1月至2012年4月)以及ISI科学网(2003年1月至2012年4月)。我们还检索了文章的参考文献列表并联系了该领域的专家。
纳入所有比较快速心脏护理组和常规(非快速)护理组的成年心脏手术患者(冠状动脉搭桥术、主动脉瓣置换术、二尖瓣置换术)的随机对照试验。我们重点关注以下旨在术后早期拔管、心脏手术期间给予低剂量阿片类药物全身麻醉以及术后使用定时拔管方案的快速干预措施。主要结局是死亡风险。次要结局包括术后并发症、术后24小时内再次插管、拔管时间、重症监护病房和医院的住院时间、术后生活质量以及医院成本。
两位综述作者独立评估试验质量并提取数据。与研究作者联系以获取更多信息。我们使用随机效应模型并报告相对风险(RR)、平均差值(MD)和95%置信区间(95%CI)。
本综述纳入了25项涉及4118例患者的试验。有2项研究偏倚风险较低,9项研究偏倚风险较高。低剂量与高剂量阿片类药物全身麻醉组之间以及早期拔管方案与常规护理组之间在术后第一年的死亡风险无差异(RR 0.58,95%CI 0.28至1.18)和(RR 0.84,95%CI 0.40至1.75)。低剂量与高剂量阿片类药物麻醉组在术后并发症方面无显著差异:心肌梗死(RR 0.98,95%CI 0.48至1.99)、再次插管(RR 1.77,9�%CI 0.38至8.27)、急性肾衰竭(RR 1.19,95%CI 0.33至4.33)、大出血(RR 0.48,95%CI 0.16至1.44)和中风(RR 1.17,95%CI 0.36至3.78)。与常规护理相比,早期拔管相关的术后并发症风险无显著差异:心肌梗死(RR 0.94,95%CI 0.55至1.60)、再次插管(RR 1.91,95%CI 0.90至4.07)、急性肾衰竭(RR 0.77,95%CI 0.19至3.10)、大出血(RR 0.80,95%CI 0.45至1.44)、中风(RR 0.87,95%CI 0.31至2.46)、严重脓毒症(RR 1.25,95%CI 0.08至19.75)和伤口感染(RR 0.67,95%CI 0.25至1.83)。尽管存在高度异质性,但低剂量阿片类药物麻醉和使用定时拔管方案均与拔管时间缩短(3.0至10.5小时)和重症监护病房住院时间缩短(0.4至8.7小时)相关。然而,这些快速护理干预措施与住院总时间缩短无关。一项纳入随机对照试验的高质量成本效益分析表明,早期拔管可能具有成本效益。
使用低剂量阿片类药物全身麻醉和定时方案进行快速干预与常规(非快速)护理相比,具有相似的死亡风险和主要术后并发症风险,因此在低至中度风险的患者中似乎是安全的。这些快速干预措施缩短了拔管时间,缩短了重症监护病房的住院时间,但未缩短住院总时间。