Objective: The aim of this meta-analysis was to investigate the cardioprotective properties of isoflurane versus any comparator in terms of the rate of myocardial infarction and all-cause mortality. Design: Pertinent studies were searched independently in Biomed, Central, PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of clinical trials. The primary endpoint was mortality at the longest follow-up available. Setting: A hospital. Participants: Randomized controlled trials. Intervention: A meta-analysis of 37 trials. Measurements and Main Results: The 37 included trials randomized 3,539 patients in cardiac (16 studies) and in noncardiac surgery (21 studies) with noninhalation comparators in 55% of trials. The overall analysis showed no difference in mortality between the isoflurane and control groups (16/1,602 [1.0%] v 23/1,937 [1.2%], odds ratios (OR) = 0.76 [0.39-1.47], p = 0.4 with 37 studies included) and no difference in the rate of myocardial infarction (3/1,312 [0.2%] v 1/1,532 [0.07%], OR = 2.03 [0.27-15.49], p = 0.5 with 30 studies included). Mortality was reduced in the isoflurane group when only studies with a low risk of bias were included in the analyses (0/540 [0%] v 5/703 [0.7%] in the control arm, OR = 0.13 [0.02-0.76], p = 0.02) with 4 cardiac and 6 noncardiac trials included and 5 noninhalation and 5 inhalation agents as the comparator. A trend was noted when a subanalysis was performed with propofol as a comparator (1/544 [0.2%] v 6/546 [1.1%], p = 0.05, with 16 studies included). Conclusions: Isoflurane reduced mortality in high-quality studies and showed a trend toward a reduction in mortality when it was compared with propofol. No differences in the rates of overall mortality and myocardial infarction were noted.
- intensive care
- myocardial infarction
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
- Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine