Ultra Fast-Track vs Fast-Track Protocols in Off-Pump and Minimally Invasive Valve Cardiac Surgery

Plain-language summary

Fast-track cardiac anesthesia (FTCA) has gained significant popularity over the past decades due to its potential to reduce healthcare costs and optimize the use of medical resources. This approach has led anesthesiologists to reconsider the traditional model of cardiac anesthesia, known as Conventional Cardiac Anesthesia (CCA), which historically relied on the administration of high-dose opioids to ensure adequate hemodynamic stability and prolonged postoperative analgesia, thereby reducing the incidence of myocardial ischemia. One of the primary goals of fast-track cardiac anesthesia is early tracheal extubation. Increasing evidence demonstrates that early extubation is associated with a reduction in the length of stay in the intensive care unit (ICU) and overall hospital length of stay, resulting in significant cost savings without negatively affecting patients' clinical outcomes. In contrast, prolonged mechanical ventilation has been shown to have a substantial economic impact and, more importantly, is associated with higher in-hospital mortality and reduced long-term survival, including decreased five-year survival rates. The Ultra Fast Track protocol, which involves extubation directly in the operating room, is currently less commonly used. However, it may further reduce postoperative mechanical ventilation time and the incidence of pulmonary complications, potentially leading to an additional reduction in hospital length of stay. The aim of this study is to compare the Fast Track and Ultra Fast Track protocols in order to evaluate differences in the incidence of respiratory, cardiac, renal, septic, and neurological complications. Postoperative pain will also be assessed using the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), as well as the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV).

Who can participate

What they're measuring

Trial details