Among adults undergoing noncardiac surgery, MINS is common and associated with substantial mortality.
Background Core temperature patterns in patients warmed with forced-air remain poorly characterized. Also unknown is the extent to which transient and mild intraoperative hypothermia contributes to adverse outcomes in broad populations. Methods We evaluated esophageal (core) temperatures in 58,814 adults having surgery lasting >60 min who were warmed with forced air. Independent associations between hypothermic exposure and transfusion requirement and duration of hospitalization was evaluated. Results In every percentile subgroup, core temperature decreased during the first hour and subsequently increased. The mean lowest core temperature during the first hour was 35.7 ± 0.6°C. Sixty-four percent of the patients reached a core temperature threshold of <36°C 45 min after induction; 29% reached a core temperature threshold of <35.5°C. Nearly half the patients had continuous core temperatures <36°C for more than an hour, and 20% of the patients were <35.5°C for more than an hour. Twenty percent of patients had continuous core temperatures <36°C for more than 2 h, and 8% of the patients were below 35.5°C for more than 2 h. Hypothermia was independently associated with both transfusion and duration of hospitalization, although prolongation of hospitalization was small. Conclusions Even in actively warmed patients, hypothermia is routine in the first hour of anesthesia. Thereafter, average core temperatures progressively increase. Nonetheless, intraoperative hypothermia was common, and often prolonged. Hypothermia was associated with increased transfusion requirement which is consistent with numerous randomized trials.
Background-Core temperature patterns in patients warmed with forced-air remain poorly characterized. Also unknown is the extent to which transient and mild intraoperative hypothermia contributes to adverse outcomes in broad populations.
Background Inflammation after cardiopulmonary bypass may contribute to postoperative delirium and cognitive dysfunction. The authors evaluated the effect of high-dose methylprednisolone to suppress inflammation on the incidence of delirium and postoperative quality of recovery after cardiac surgery. Methods Five hundred fifty-five adults from three hospitals enrolled in the randomized, double-blind Steroids in Cardiac Surgery trial were randomly allocated to placebo or 250 mg methylprednisolone at induction and 250 mg methylprednisolone before cardiopulmonary bypass. Each completed the Postoperative Quality of Recovery Scale before surgery and on days 1, 2, and 3 and 1 and 6 months after surgery and the Confusion Assessment Method scale for delirium on days 1, 2, and 3. Recovery was defined as returning to preoperative values or improvement at each time point. Results Four hundred eighty-two participants for recovery and 498 participants for delirium were available for analysis. The quality of recovery improved over time but without differences between groups in the primary endpoint of overall recovery (odds ratio range over individual time points for methylprednisolone, 0.39 to 1.45; 95% CI, 0.08–2.04 to 0.40–5.27; P = 0.943) or individual recovery domains (all P > 0.05). The incidence of delirium was 10% (control) versus 8% (methylprednisolone; P = 0.357), with no differences in delirium subdomains (all P > 0.05). In participants with normal (51%) and low baseline cognition (49%), there were no significant differences favoring methylprednisolone in any domain (all P > 0.05). Recovery was worse in patients with postoperative delirium in the cognitive (P = 0.004) and physiologic (P < 0.001) domains. Conclusions High-dose intraoperative methylprednisolone neither reduces delirium nor improves the quality of recovery in high-risk cardiac surgical patients.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.