A Randomized, Multicenter, Open-Label, Blinded End Point, Phase 2, Feasibility, Efficacy, and Safety Trial of Preoperative Microvascular Protection in Patients Undergoing Major Abdominal Surgery. (October 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Yanase, Fumitaka; Tosif, Shervin H.; Churilov, Leonid; Yee, Ken; Bellomo, Rinaldo; Gunn, Kerry; Kim, Chang; Krizhanovskii, Camilla; Hahn, Robert G.; Riedel, Bernhard; Weinberg, Laurence
• Is Part Of: Anesthesia & analgesia. Volume 133:Number 4(2021)
• Publication Date: 2021-10
• Subjects: Anesthesiology -- Periodicals; Anesthesia; Anesthesiology; Analgesia; Analgesics; Anesthesiology -- Periodicals; 617.9605
• DOI: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000005667
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0003-2999

Abstract

Abstract : BACKGROUND: The endothelial glycocalyx, a carbohydrate-rich layer coating all endothelial surfaces, plays a fundamental role in the function of microcirculation. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of using dexamethasone and albumin to protect the endothelial glycocalyx in patients undergoing abdominal surgery. Secondary and exploratory outcomes included efficacy and safety. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, open-label, blinded end point, phase 2, randomized trial. Patients undergoing colorectal, pancreas, or liver surgery were recruited and randomized to receive either intravenous dexamethasone (16 mg) and 20% albumin (100 mL) at induction of anesthesia, then 200 mL of 20% albumin with each subsequent 1000 mL of crystalloid administered (dexamethasone and albumin [Dex-Alb] group), or crystalloid fluid only with no dexamethasone (control group). Feasibility end points included patient recruitment and retention, consent rate, and successful study drug administration. The primary efficacy end point was the measurement of plasma syndecan-1 level on postoperative day (POD) 1, and secondary end points were heparan sulfate levels and inflammatory markers measured at 4 perioperative timepoints. Safety end points included errors in administration of the intervention, hyperglycemia, occurrence of postoperative complications, and patient retention. RESULTS: Seventy-two patients were randomized. All feasibility end points were achievable. There were no statistically significant differences observed in median (interquartile range) syndecan-1 levels on POD 1 (39 ng·mL −1 [20–97] in the Dex-Alb group versus 41 ng·mL −1 [19–84] in the control group; difference in medians −2.1, 95% confidence interval [CI], −13 to 8.6; P = .69). The Dex-Alb group had lower POD 1 heparan sulfate levels (319 ng·mL −1 [161–717] in the Dex-Alb group versus 1422 [670–2430] ng·mL −1 in the control group; difference in medians −1085, 95% CI, −1779 to −391) and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels on POD 1 (48 [29–77] mg·L −1 in the Dex-Alb group versus 85 mg·L −1 [49–133] in the control group; difference in medians −48, 95% CI, −75 to −21). Fewer patients had one or more postoperative complication in the Dex-Alb group than in the control group (6 [17%] vs 18 patients [50%]; odds ratio = 0.2, 95% CI, 0.06–0.6). CONCLUSIONS: Intravenous dexamethasone and albumin administration was feasible but did not reduce syndecan-1 on POD 1 in patients undergoing abdominal surgery. Given the clinically important CIs observed between the groups for heparan sulfate, CRP, and postoperative complications, a larger trial assessing the associations between dexamethasone and albumin administration and these outcomes is warranted.