Richard L. Wolman

Adverse Cerebral Outcomes after Coronary Bypass Surgery

Background Acute changes in cerebral function after elective coronary bypass surgery are a difficult clinical problem. We carried out a multicenter study to determine the incidence and predictors of — and the use of resources associated with — perioperative adverse neurologic events, including cerebral injury. Methods In a prospective study, we evaluated 2108 patients from 24 U.S. institutions for two general categories of neurologic outcome: type I (focal injury, or stupor or coma at discharge) and type II (deterioration in intellectual function, memory deficit, or seizures). Results Adverse cerebral outcomes occurred in 129 patients (6.1 percent). A total of 3.1 percent had type I neurologic outcomes (8 died of cerebral injury, 55 had nonfatal strokes, 2 had transient ischemic attacks, and 1 had stupor), and 3.0 percent had type II outcomes (55 had deterioration of intellectual function and 8 had seizures). Patients with adverse cerebral outcomes had higher in-hospital mortality (21 percent of patients ...

Cerebral Injury After Cardiac Surgery Identification of a Group at Extraordinary Risk

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Cerebral injury after cardiac surgery is now recognized as a serious and costly healthcare problem mandating immediate attention. To effect solution, those subgroups of patients at greatest risk must be identified, thereby allowing efficient implementation of new clinical strategies. No such subgroup has been identified; however, patients undergoing intracardiac surgery are thought to be at high risk, but comprehensive data regarding specific risk, impact on cost, and discharge disposition are not available. METHODS We prospectively studied 273 patients enrolled from 24 diverse US medical centers, who were undergoing intracardiac and coronary artery surgery. Patient data were collected using standardized methods and included clinical, historical, specialized testing, neurological outcome and autopsy data, and measures of resource utilization. Adverse outcomes were defined a priori and determined after database closure by a blinded independent panel. Stepwise logistic regression models were developed to estimate the relative risks associated with clinical history and intraoperative and postoperative events. RESULTS Adverse cerebral outcomes occurred in 16% of patients (43/273), being nearly equally divided between type I outcomes (8.4%; 5 cerebral deaths, 16 nonfatal strokes, and 2 new TIAs) and type II outcomes (7.3%; 17 new intellectual deterioration persisting at hospital discharge and 3 newly diagnosed seizures). Associated resource utilization was significantly increased--prolonging median intensive care unit stay from 3 days (no adverse cerebral outcome) to 8 days (type I; P<0.001) and from 3 to 6 days (type II; P<0.001), and increasing hospitalization by 50% (type II, P=0.04) to 100% (type I, P<0.001). Furthermore, specialized care after hospital discharge was frequently necessary in those with type I outcomes, in that only 31% returned home compared with 85% of patients without cerebral complications (P<0.001). Significant risk factors for type I outcomes related primarily to embolic phenomena, including proximal aortic atherosclerosis, intracardiac thrombus, and intermittent clamping of the aorta during surgery. For type II outcomes, risk factors again included proximal aortic atherosclerosis, as well as a preoperative history of endocarditis, alcohol abuse, perioperative dysrhythmia or poorly controlled hypertension, and the development of a low-output state after cardiopulmonary bypass. CONCLUSIONS These prospective multicenter findings demonstrate that patients undergoing intracardiac surgery combined with coronary revascularization are at formidable risk, in that 1 in 6 will develop cerebral complications that are frequently costly and devastating. Thus, new strategies for perioperative management--including technical and pharmacological interventions--are now mandated for this subgroup of cardiac surgery patients.

Adverse gastrointestinal complications after cardiopulmonary bypass: can outcome be predicted from preoperative risk factors?

Adverse gastrointestinal (GI) outcome after cardiac surgery is an infrequent event but is a clinically important health care problem because of associated increased morbidity and mortality. The ability to identify patients at greatest risk before surgery may be helpful in planning appropriate perioperative management strategies. We examined the pre- and intraoperative characteristics of 2417 patients from 24 diverse United States medical centers enrolled in the Multicenter Study of Perioperative Ischemia Study who were undergoing cardiac surgery using cardiopulmonary bypass as predictors for adverse GI outcome. Resource utilization was evaluated for patients with and without adverse GI outcomes. Adverse GI outcomes occurred in 5.5% of patients (133 of 2417), increased in-hospital mortality 6.5-fold, prolonged the mean intensive care unit length of stay by 1 wk, and more than doubled the mean postoperative hospital stay (P < 0.0001). Predictors of adverse GI outcome included decreased left ventricular function, hyperbilirubinemia, thrombocytopenia, prolonged partial thromboplastin time, prior cardiovascular surgery, combined coronary artery bypass graft surgery and intracardiac or proximal aortic surgery, pharmacological cardiovascular support, and intraoperative transfusion. The literature suggests that adverse GI outcome after cardiac surgery is secondary to poor splanchnic perfusion, which many of these risk factors may predict. Therefore, patients deemed to be at risk before surgery may benefit from tightly controlled hemodynamic management and other strategies that optimize perioperative organ perfusion.

Multicenter Study of Target-Controlled Infusion of Propofol-Sufentanil or Sufentanil-Midazolam for Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery

Background The use of target-controlled infusions of anesthetics for coronary artery bypass graft surgery has not been studied in detail. The effects of target-controlled infusions of propofol or sufentanil, supplemented by infusions of sufentanil or midazolam, respectively, were evaluated and compared. Methods At 14 clinical sites, 329 patients were given a target-controlled infusion of propofol (n = 165) to produce effect-site concentration (Ce) of greater or equal to 3-micro gram/ml or a target-controlled infusion of sufentanil (n = 164). Sufentanil or midazolam, respectively, also were infused. Systolic hypertension, hypotension, tachycardia, and bradycardia were assessed by measuring heart rate and blood pressure every minute during operation. Myocardial ischemia was assessed perioperatively by monitoring ST segment deviation via continuous three-lead Holter electrocardiography, and it was evaluated during operation by monitoring left ventricular wall motion abnormality via transesophageal echocardiography. Results The measured cardiovascular parameters were satisfactory and usually similar for the patients receiving propofol-sufentanil or sufentanil-midazolam. The primary endpoint of the percentage of patients with intraoperative ST segment deviation (23 plus/minus 6% vs. 24 plus/minus 6%, P = 0.86) did not differ significantly between the two groups. The incidence of left ventricular wall motion abnormality shown on transesophageal echocardiography before (19 plus/minus 4% vs. 26 plus/minus 4%, P = 0.25) and after (23 plus/minus 4% vs. 31 plus/minus 5%, P = 0.32) cardiopulmonary bypass also did not differ significantly for the two groups. Changes in intraoperative target concentration were more frequent with propofol-sufentanil anesthetic than with sufentanil-midazolam (11.7 plus/minus 7.1 vs. 7.3 plus/minus 3.6, P <0.001). The incidence of intraoperative hypotension (77% vs. 55%, P <0.001), the use of inotropic/vasopressor medications (93% vs. 84%, P = 0.01), and the administration of crystalloids (2.8 plus/minus 1.4 L vs. 2.4 plus/minus 1.2 L, P < 0.001) were significantly greater in the propofol-sufentanil group. Conversely, the incidence of intraoperative hypertension (43% vs. 54%, P = 0.05) and the use of antihypertensive/vasodilator medications (70% vs. 90%, P < 0.001) were significantly less in the propofol-sufentanil group. Conclusions Target-controlled infusions of propofol or sufentanil, supplemented by infusions of sufentanil or midazolam, respectively, were suitable to provide anesthesia for coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Continuous monitoring revealed a high prevalence of hemodynamic abnormalities. Despite greater hypotension in the propofol-sufentanil group and greater hypertension in the sufentanil-midazolam group, episodes of myocardial ischemia were similar for both groups and were not temporally related to episodes of hemodynamic abnormalities.

Predictive value of the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale and the Mini-Mental State Examination for neurologic outcome after coronary artery bypass graft surgery

OBJECTIVE We intended to define the role of the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale and the Mini-Mental State Examination in identifying adverse neurologic outcomes in a large international sample of patients undergoing cardiac surgery. METHODS We evaluated 4707 patients undergoing cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass at 72 centers in 17 countries between November 1996 and June 2000. Prespecified overt neurologic outcomes were categorized as type I (clinically diagnosed stroke, transient ischemic attack, encephalopathy, or coma) or type II (deterioration of intellectual function). The National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale and Mini-Mental State Examination were administered preoperatively and on postoperative day 3, 4, or 5. Receiver operating characteristic curves were plotted to determine the predictive value of worsening in National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale and Mini-Mental State Examination scores with respect to type I and II outcomes. RESULTS The receiver operating characteristic area under the curve for changes in National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score (n = 4620) was 0.89 for type I outcomes and 0.66 for type II outcomes. A 1-point worsening in National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score provided excellent discrimination (86% specificity; 84% sensitivity) of type I outcomes. The receiver operating characteristic area under the curve for changes in Mini-Mental State Examination score (n = 4707) was 0.75 for type I outcomes and 0.71 for type II outcomes. A 2-point worsening in Mini-Mental State Examination score provided only fair discrimination (73% specificity; 62% sensitivity) of type II outcomes. CONCLUSION We used baseline controls and postoperative worsening in National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale and Mini-Mental State Examination scores to predict both serious adverse neurologic outcome and deterioration of intellectual function. Our findings provide the only reference for evaluating these tests that are used in cardiac surgical clinical trials.