Peri-operative SARS-CoV-2 infection increases postoperative mortality. The aim of this study was to determine the optimal duration of planned delay before surgery in patients who have had SARS-CoV-2 infection. This international, multicentre, prospective cohort study included patients undergoing elective or emergency surgery during October 2020. Surgical patients with pre-operative SARS-CoV-2 infection were compared with those without previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. The primary outcome measure was 30-day postoperative mortality. Logistic regression models were used to calculate adjusted 30-day mortality rates stratified by time from diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection to surgery. Among 140,231 patients (116 countries), 3127 patients (2.2%) had a pre-operative SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis. Adjusted 30-day mortality in patients without SARS-CoV-2 infection was 1.5% (95%CI 1.4-1.5). In patients with a pre-operative SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis, mortality was increased in patients having surgery within 0-2 weeks, 3-4 weeks and 5-6 weeks of the diagnosis (odds ratio (95%CI) 4.1 (3.3-4.8), 3.9 (2.6-5.1) and 3.6 (2.0-5.2), respectively). Surgery performed ≥ 7 weeks after SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis was associated with a similar mortality risk to baseline (odds ratio (95%CI) 1.5 (0.9-2.1)). After a ≥ 7 week delay in undertaking surgery following SARS-CoV-2 infection, patients with ongoing symptoms had a higher mortality than patients whose symptoms had resolved or who had been asymptomatic (6.0% (95%CI 3.2-8.7) vs. 2.4% (95%CI 1.4-3.4) vs. 1.3% (95%CI 0.6-2.0), respectively). Where possible, surgery should be delayed for at least 7 weeks following SARS-CoV-2 infection. Patients with ongoing symptoms ≥ 7 weeks from diagnosis may benefit from further delay.

In patients who required perioperative hemodynamic support after cardiac surgery, low-dose levosimendan in addition to standard care did not result in lower 30-day mortality than placebo. (Funded by the Italian Ministry of Health; CHEETAH ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00994825 .).

BACKGROUND: Prospective, single-center trials have shown that the implementation of the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) recommendations in high-risk patients significantly reduced the development of acute kidney injury (AKI) after surgery. We sought to evaluate the feasibility of implementing a bundle of supportive measures based on the KDIGO guideline in high-risk patients undergoing cardiac surgery in a multicenter setting in preparation for a large definitive trial. METHODS: In this multicenter, multinational, randomized controlled trial, we examined the adherence to the KDIGO bundle consisting of optimization of volume status and hemodynamics, functional hemodynamic monitoring, avoidance of nephrotoxic drugs, and prevention of hyperglycemia in high-risk patients identified by the urinary biomarkers tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinases-2 [TIMP-2] and insulin growth factor-binding protein 7 [IGFBP7] after cardiac surgery. The primary end point was the adherence to the bundle protocol and was evaluated by the percentage of compliant patients with a 95% confidence interval (CI) according to Clopper-Pearson. Secondary end points included the development and severity of AKI. RESULTS: In total, 278 patients were included in the final analysis. In the intervention group, 65.4% of patients received the complete bundle as compared to 4.2% in the control group (absolute risk reduction [ARR] 61.2 [95% CI, 52.6-69.9]; P < .001). AKI rates were statistically not different in both groups (46.3% intervention versus 41.5% control group; ARR −4.8% [95% CI, −16.4 to 6.9]; P = .423). However, the occurrence of moderate and severe AKI was significantly lower in the intervention group as compared to the control group (14.0% vs 23.9%; ARR 10.0% [95% CI, 0.9-19.1]; P = .034). There were no significant effects on other specified secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a KDIGO-derived treatment bundle is feasible in a multinational setting. Furthermore, moderate to severe AKI was significantly reduced in the intervention group. (Anesth Analg XXX;XXX:00-00) KEY POINTS• Question: Is it feasible to implement a bundle of supportive measures in high-risk patients undergoing cardiac surgery in a multinational setting? • Findings: In this multicenter randomized clinical trial, we found that the implementation of the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) bundle is feasible in a multinational setting and that these supportive measures significantly reduced the occurrence of moderate and severe acute kidney injury (AKI). • Meaning: The findings underpin the need for a definitive trial to evaluate whether the KDIGO bundle reduces the occurrence of AKI in high-risk patients after cardiac surgery.

BACKGROUNDVolatile (inhaled) anesthetic agents have cardioprotective effects, which might improve clinical outcomes in patients undergoing coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG). METHODSWe conducted a pragmatic, multicenter, single-blind, controlled trial at 36 centers in 13 countries. Patients scheduled to undergo elective CABG were randomly assigned to an intraoperative anesthetic regimen that included a volatile anesthetic (desflurane, isoflurane, or sevoflurane) or to total intravenous anesthesia. The primary outcome was death from any cause at 1 year. RESULTSA total of 5400 patients were randomly assigned: 2709 to the volatile anesthetics group and 2691 to the total intravenous anesthesia group. On-pump CABG was performed in 64% of patients, with a mean duration of cardiopulmonary bypass of 79 minutes. The two groups were similar with respect to demographic and clinical characteristics at baseline, the duration of cardiopulmonary bypass, and the number of grafts. At the time of the second interim analysis, the data and safety monitoring board advised that the trial should be stopped for futility. No significant difference between the groups with respect to deaths from any cause was seen at 1 year (2.8% in the volatile anesthetics group and 3.0% in the total intravenous anesthesia group; relative risk, 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69 to 1.29; P = 0.71), with data available for 5353 patients (99.1%), or at 30 days (1.4% and 1.3%, respectively; relative risk, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.70 to 1.76), with data available for 5398 patients (99.9%). There were no significant differences between the groups in any of the secondary outcomes or in the incidence of prespecified adverse events, including myocardial infarction. CONCLUSIONSAmong patients undergoing elective CABG, anesthesia with a volatile agent did not result in significantly fewer deaths at 1 year than total intravenous anesthesia.