Etomidate and the Risk of Complications After Cardiac Surgery: A Retrospective Cohort Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To compare incidence of atrial arrhythmia, duration of care, and major complications after cardiac surgery between patients who received etomidate and those who received other induction agents. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study utilizing propensity score matching. SETTING: A single academic, tertiary care hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Eight thousand nine hundred seventy-eight patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), valve, or combined valve/CABG surgery requiring cardiopulmonary bypass between January 2005 and December 2010. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were divided into those who received etomidate at anesthetic induction and those who received another induction agent. Patients given etomidate were propensity-score matched to patients given other induction agents in a 2:1 ratio. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of 8,978 patients who underwent CABG, valve, or combined valve/surgery, 6,313 received etomidate and 2,665 received other induction agents. Among these, the authors successfully matched 4,094 etomidate patients with 2,524 non-etomidate patients. The authors did not find a significant association between receiving etomidate and odds of experiencing postoperative atrial arrhythmia (odds ratio [98.3% confidence interval] of 1.07 [0.92, 1.23], p = 0.29). Etomidate was not associated significantly with either intensive care unit or hospital stay. Etomidate was associated significantly with use of packed red blood cells (odds ratio [99.6% confidence interval] of 1.32 [1.02, 1.70], p = 0.002), but not with use of fresh frozen plasma, platelets, or cryoprecipitate. None of the other complications differed significantly between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Etomidate was not associated with increased incidence of postoperative atrial arrhythmia or increased intensive care unit or hospital stay.

Comparison of Positive End-Expiratory Pressure of 8 versus 5 cm H2O on Outcome After Cardiac Operations.

PURPOSE: Postoperative positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) selection in patients who are mechanically ventilated after cardiac operations often seems random. The aim of this investigation was to compare the 2 most common postoperative initial PEEP settings at our institution, 8 and 5 cm H2O, on postoperative initial tracheal intubation time (primary outcome); cardiovascular intensive care unit (CVICU); hospital length of stay (LOS); occurrence of pneumonia; and hospital mortality (secondary outcomes). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The electronic medical records of patients who were mechanically ventilated after isolated coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or combined CABG and valve operations were reviewed. Propensity score matching was used to compare patients with an initial postoperative PEEP setting of 8 cm H2O (n = 4722 [25.9%]) with those who had PEEP of 5 cm H2O (n = 13 535 [74.1%]) on the primary and secondary outcomes listed earlier. RESULTS: There was no difference in initial postoperative intubation time between the PEEP of 8 cm H2O and the PEEP of 5 cm H2O patient groups (mean 11.9 vs 12.0 hours [median 8.2 vs 8.8 hours], P = .89). The groups did not differ on the occurrence of pneumonia (0.43% vs 0.60%, P = .25) nor on hospital mortality (0.47% vs 0.43%, P = .76). Aspiration pneumonia occurrence approached a significant difference (0.06% vs 0.21%, P value = .052), as did CVICU LOS (mean: 47.9 vs 49.8 hours [median: 28.5 vs 28.4 hours], P = .057), but were not statistically different. There was a slight but likely clinically unimportant difference in hospital LOS (7.7 vs 7.4 days, PEEP = 8 vs 5, P < .001). CONCLUSION: Patients being mechanically ventilated after cardiac operations with an initial postoperative PEEP setting of 8 versus 5 cm H2O differed significantly only on hospital LOS but the difference was likely clinically unimportant. Thus, use of 8 cm H2O PEEP in these patients without a clinical indication, although likely not harmful, does not seem beneficial.

Occult rhabdomyolysis after acute type A aortic dissection.

OBJECTIVES: We report a case of a patient presenting with an acute type A aortic dissection who presented with bilateral lower extremity paraplegia and development of rhabdomyolysis of the paraspinal muscles during the postoperative period. This discussion includes presentation, clinical course, diagnosis, and management of this rare complication. DATA SOURCES: Data were collected from the patient's electronic medical record and the hospital radiology database. CONCLUSIONS: Our case describes rhabdomyolysis of the paraspinal muscles occurring after acute type A aortic dissection. Lumbar arteries that supply the paraspinal muscles may become compromised because of either hypoperfusion or occlusion from aortic cross-clamping, or ligation of the vessels within the false lumen of the dissection, or from atheroembolic phenomena. The resultant ischemia causes edema and necrosis of the paraspinal muscles, subsequently increasing the pressure within the paraspinal compartment. Treatment includes fluid administration, urine alkalinization, and monitoring for signs of acute renal failure.