Dataset Information

Effects of surgery and general anaesthesia on sleep-wake timing: CLOCKS observational study.

ABSTRACT: Surgery and general anaesthesia have the potential to disturb the body's circadian timing system, which may affect postoperative outcomes. Animal studies suggest that anaesthesia could induce diurnal phase shifts, but clinical research is scarce. We hypothesised that surgery and general anaesthesia would result in peri-operative changes in diurnal sleep-wake patterns in patients. In this single-centre prospective cohort study, we recruited patients aged ≥18 years scheduled for elective surgery receiving ≥30 min of general anaesthesia. The Munich Chronotype Questionnaire and Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index were used to determine baseline chronotype, sleep characteristics and sleep quality. Peri-operative sleeping patterns were logged. Ninety-four patients with a mean (SD) age of 52 (17) years were included; 56 (60%) were female. The midpoint of sleep (SD) three nights before surgery was 03.33 (55 min) and showed a phase advance of 40 minutes to 02.53 (67 min) the night after surgery (p < 0.001). This correlated with the midpoint of sleep three nights before surgery and was not associated with age, sex, duration of general anaesthesia or intra-operative dexamethasone use. Peri-operatively, patients had lower subjective sleep quality and worse sleep efficiency. Disruption started from one night before surgery and did not normalise until 6 days after surgery. We conclude that there is a peri-operative phase advance in midpoint of sleep, confirming our hypothesis that surgery and general anaesthesia disturb the circadian timing system. Patients had decreased subjective sleep quality, worse sleep efficiency and increased daytime fatigue.

SUBMITTER: van Zuylen ML

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9291940 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Automated control of mechanical ventilation during general anaesthesia is not common. A novel system for automated control of most of the ventilator settings was designed and is available on an anaesthesia machine.The 'Automated control of mechanical ventilation during general anesthesia study' (AVAS) is an international investigator-initiated bicentric observational study designed to examine safety and efficacy of the system during general anaesthesia. The system controls mechanical breathing frequency, inspiratory pressure, pressure support, inspiratory time and trigger sensitivity with the aim to keep a patient stable in user adoptable target zones. Adult patients, who are classified as American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I, II or III, scheduled for elective surgery of the upper or lower limb or for peripheral vascular surgery in general anaesthesia without any additional regional anaesthesia technique and who gave written consent for study participation are eligible for study inclusion. Primary endpoint of the study is the frequency of specifically defined adverse events. Secondary endpoints are frequency of normoventilation, hypoventilation and hyperventilation, the time period between switch from controlled ventilation to assisted ventilation, achievement of stable assisted ventilation of the patient, proportion of time within the target zone for tidal volume, end-tidal partial pressure of carbon dioxide as individually set up for each patient by the user, frequency of alarms, frequency distribution of tidal volume, inspiratory pressure, inspiration time, expiration time, end-tidal partial pressure of carbon dioxide and the number of re-intubations.AVAS will be the first clinical study investigating a novel automated system for the control of mechanical ventilation on an anaesthesia machine. The study was approved by the ethics committees of both participating study sites. In case that safety and efficacy are acceptable, a randomised controlled trial comparing the novel system with the usual practice may be warranted.DRKS DRKS00011025, registered 12 October 2016; clinicaltrials.gov ID. NCT02644005, registered 30 December 2015.

Project description:BackgroundPatients who have severe narrowing at or near the origin of the internal carotid artery as a result of atherosclerosis have a high risk of ischaemic stroke ipsilateral to the arterial lesion. Previous trials have shown that carotid endarterectomy improves long-term outcomes, particularly when performed soon after a prior transient ischaemic attack or mild ischaemic stroke. However, complications may occur during or soon after surgery, the most serious of which is stroke, which can be fatal. It has been suggested that performing the operation under local anaesthesia, rather than general anaesthesia, may be safer. Therefore, a prospective, randomised trial of local versus general anaesthesia for carotid endarterectomy was proposed to determine whether type of anaesthesia influences peri-operative morbidity and mortality, quality of life and longer term outcome in terms of stroke-free survival.Methods/designA two-arm, parallel group, multicentre randomised controlled trial with a recruitment target of 5000 patients. For entry into the study, in the opinion of the responsible clinician, the patient requiring an endarterectomy must be suitable for either local or general anaesthesia, and have no clear indication for either type. All patients with symptomatic or asymptomatic internal carotid stenosis for whom open surgery is advised are eligible. There is no upper age limit. Exclusion criteria are: no informed consent; definite preference for local or general anaesthetic by the clinician or patient; patient unlikely to be able to co-operate with awake testing during local anaesthesia; patient requiring simultaneous bilateral carotid endarterectomy; carotid endarterectomy combined with another operation such as coronary bypass surgery; and, the patient has been randomised into the trial previously. Patients are randomised to local or general anaesthesia by the central trial office. The primary outcome is the proportion of patients alive, stroke free (including retinal infarction) and without myocardial infarction 30 days post-surgery. Secondary outcomes include the proportion of patients alive and stroke free at one year; health related quality of life at 30 days; surgical adverse events, re-operation and re-admission rates; the relative cost of the two methods of anaesthesia; length of stay and intensive and high dependency bed occupancy.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN00525237.

Project description:ObjectiveTo examine the associations between neuraxial anaesthesia or general anaesthesia and clinical outcomes, length of hospital stay, and readmission in adults undergoing lower limb revascularisation surgery.DesignComparative effectiveness study using linked, validated, population based databases.SettingOntario, Canada, 1 April 2002 to 31 March 2015.Participants20 988 patients Ontario residents aged 18 years or older who underwent their first lower limb revascularisation surgery in hospitals performing 50 or more of these surgeries annually.Main outcome measuresPrimary outcome was 30 day all cause mortality. Secondary outcomes were in-hospital cardiopulmonary and renal complications, length of hospital stay, and 30 day readmissions. Multivariable, mixed effects regression models, adjusting for patient, procedural, and hospital characteristics, were used to estimate associations between anaesthetic technique and outcomes. Robustness of analyses were evaluated by conducting instrumental variable, propensity score matched, and survival sensitivity analyses.ResultsOf 20 988 patients who underwent lower limb revascularisation surgery, 6453 (30.7%) received neuraxial anaesthesia and 14 535 (69.3%) received general anaesthesia. The percentage of neuraxial anaesthesia use ranged from 0.6% to 90.6% across included hospitals. Furthermore, use of neuraxial anaesthesia declined by 17% over the study period. Death within 30 days occurred in 204 (3.2%) patients who received neuraxial anaesthesia and 646 (4.4%) patients who received general anaesthesia. After multivariable, multilevel adjustment, use of neuraxial anaesthesia compared with use of general anaesthesia was associated with decreased 30 day mortality (absolute risk reduction 0.72%, 95% confidence interval 0.65% to 0.79%; odds ratio 0.68, 95% confidence interval 0.57 to 0.83; number needed to treat to prevent one death=139). A similar direction and magnitude of association was found in instrumental variable, propensity score matched, and survival analyses. Use of neuraxial anaesthesia compared with use of general anaesthesia was also associated with decreased in-hospital cardiopulmonary and renal complications (odds ratio 0.73, 0.63 to 0.85) and a reduced length of hospital stay (-0.5 days, -0.3 to-0.6 days).ConclusionsUse of neuraxial anaesthesia compared with general anaesthesia for lower limb revascularisation surgery was associated with decreased 30 day mortality and hospital length of stay. These findings might have been related to reduced cardiopulmonary and renal complications after neuraxial anaesthesia and support the increased use of neuraxial anaesthesia in patients undergoing these surgeries until the results of a large, confirmatory randomised trial become available.

Dataset Information

Effects of surgery and general anaesthesia on sleep-wake timing: CLOCKS observational study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets