• Yunying Feng, Yuelun Zhang, Boyuan Sun, Yumiao He, Lijian Pei, and Yuguang Huang.
• Department of Anesthesiology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, 1 Shuaifuyuan, Dongcheng District, Beijing, 100730, China.
• J Anesth. 2023 Aug 1; 37 (4): 573581573-581.

PurposeThe objective of this study was to provide an updated review on the active warming effects on major adverse cardiac events, 30-day all-cause mortality, and myocardial injury after noncardiac surgery.MethodWe systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane CENTRAL, Web of Science, and Chinese BioMedical Literature Database. We included randomized controlled trials of adult population undergoing noncardiac surgeries that concentrate on the comparison of active warming methods and passive thermal management. Cochrane Collaboration's tool was applied for risk-of-bias assessment. We used trial sequential analysis to evaluate the possibility of false positive or negative results.ResultsA total of 13,316 unique records were identified, of which only 19 with reported perioperative cardiovascular outcomes were included in the systematic review and nine of them were included in final meta-analysis. No statistically significant difference between active warming methods and routine care was found in major adverse cardiac events (RR 0.56, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.14-2.21, I2 = 71%, number of events 59 vs. 70), 30-day all-cause mortality (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.43-1.54, I2 = 0%, number of events 17 vs. 21), and myocardial injury after noncardiac surgery (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.17-2.22, I2 = 79%, number of events 236 vs. 234). Trial sequential analysis suggests that current trials did not reach the minimum information size regarding the major cardiovascular events.ConclusionsCompared to routine perioperative care, we found that active warming methods are not necessary for cardiovascular prevention in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery.© 2023. The Author(s).

9 keywords...

hide…