Congress Review | Editors Choice | AHA 2024
 

Evaluating the Role of GLP-1 Agonists in Protecting Vital Organs During Open-Heart Surgery: Results from the GLORIOUS Trial


Time to read: 03:50
Time to listen: 07:51

Published on MedED:  25 November 2024
Originally Published: 16 November 2024
Sourced: AHA Scientific Sessions 2024
Type of article: In Brief
MedED Catalogue Reference:
 MCABC002
Category: Cardiovascular Disease
Cross Reference: Surgery

Keywords: cardiovascular diseases, GLP-1, CABG, Bypass

 
Key Takeaway
The GLORIOUS trial demonstrated that a single, short-duration infusion of exenatide did not significantly reduce mortality or prevent complications such as ischemic injury, renal failure, or heart failure in patients undergoing cardiopulmonary bypass.

| Access More AHA 2024 Abstracts

Top     

Presented at AHA Scientific Sessions 2024 as a Research Abstract.This summary does not represent the original research, nor is it intended to replace the original research. Content Disclaimer

 

 
 

Patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) often experience ischemia-induced injury to vital organs during open-heart surgeries such as coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or off-pump CABG (OPCAB). 
 

These procedures carry varying risks, with 30-day mortality rates ranging from 1-2% for elective CABG to as high as 20% in elderly patients with comorbidities and reduced renal function. Common causes of death following surgery include severe heart failure, renal failure, stroke, and inflammation.
 

While pharmacological strategies to protect the brain during cardiac surgery have been explored, none have become standard practice. 
 

Exendin-4 (exenatide), a glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) agonist, has shown promise in reducing infarct size and improving myocardial salvage index in patients undergoing acute revascularisation. 


Given its potential protective benefits against ischemic damage, the GLORIOUS trial aimed to evaluate whether exenatide could reduce mortality and morbidity in patients undergoing cardiopulmonary bypass-assisted cardiac surgery.


These findings were presented as an Abstract at the American Heart Association (AHA) conference in 2024. They should be considered preliminary until the research is published in a peer-reviewed publication.
 

 

Study Hypothesis
 
The trial explored two main hypotheses:

The first is that preoperative administration of a GLP-1 agonist would reduce mortality and morbidity caused by ischemic injury to the heart, brain, and kidneys.

The second hypothesis was that restrictive oxygenation during cardiopulmonary bypass (FiO2 = 50%) would lower mortality, ischemic organ damage, and surgical site infections compared to liberal oxygenation (FiO2 = 100) .


Participants
 

The study included 1,389 adults scheduled for elective or subacute cardiopulmonary bypass-assisted CABG and, or a surgical aortic valve replacement.
 

The average age was 68 years & 17% were female.
 

30% had pre-existing heart disease, 16% with heart failure, 20% had a history of myocardial infarction, and 9% had had a prior stroke.



Study Design
 

The GLORIOUS trial was a multicenter, randomised, double-masked, placebo-controlled study conducted at a single heart centre in Denmark between February 2016 and December 2021. 

The participants were randomised to receive either a six-hour, 15-minute infusion of exenatide (17.4 µg) or a placebo initiated at the time of anaesthesia before surgery. 

 
The trial's primary outcomes included death from any cause or adverse event, including :
  • Renal failure requiring replacement therapy

  • Stroke (neurological dysfunction >24 hours)

  • New or worsening heart failure requiring mechanical circulatory support, prolonged inotropic support, or reoperation
     

Secondary outcomes included the incidence of complications including:

Surgical site infections requiring prolonged antibiotics or surgical debridement

Significant reductions in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF)

Post-surgical myocardial infarction (type 5)

Cardiovascular-related hospital readmissions.

 

 

Results
 

Over an average follow-up period of 5.9 years, no significant differences were observed between the exenatide and placebo groups across key outcomes:


The following were recorded:


Mortality: there was a 14% mortality rate in the exenatide group vs. 13% in the placebo group


Stroke: 5.8%  of the participants in the exenatide group vs. 4.8% in the placebo group experienced a stroke


Heart Failure: 9.8% of the exenatide group experienced new or worsening heart failure vs. 10% in the placebo group


Acute Kidney Injury: 4.8% in the exenatide group vs. 5.3% in the placebo group were diagnosed with AKI


In the separate arm of the study, a restrictive oxygenation strategy during cardiopulmonary bypass-assisted coronary bypass grafting and/or SAVR and weaning of cardiopulmonary bypass in adult patients did not reduce mortality or morbidity from renal failure, stroke or heart failure.
 

Participants were followed for a median of 5.9 years until a total of 323 events had occurred 

No significant difference between the two treatment groups was recorded.

 


Study Implications


The GLORIOUS trial demonstrated that a single, short-duration infusion of exenatide did not significantly reduce mortality or prevent complications such as ischemic injury, renal failure, or heart failure in patients undergoing cardiopulmonary bypass. These findings underscore the limitations of GLP-1 agonists in this setting and the necessity for further research into alternative treatment strategies.


The study also highlights the need for trials evaluating different GLP-1 analogues, extended treatment durations, or higher dosing regimens to determine their potential protective effects during open-heart surgery.


In an interview conducted by AHA Newsroom, investigator Sebastian Wiberg, M.D., PhD, an anaesthesiologist at The Heart Centre, Copenhagen University Hospital Rigshospitalet in Copenhagen, Denmark, commented:
 

"We had hoped exenatide might protect patients from developing heart failure or other common complications after heart bypass surgery. However, the results suggest that this GLP-1 analog does not offer significant benefits. Of note, these findings provide important insights into what does and doesn't work in the complex setting of cardiac surgery. There is still a big gap in knowledge about how to best support patients on bypass during surgery, and there is an urgent need for more clinical trials to find ways to optimise patient health during and after bypass surgery."

 

 

 

 


Conclusion

 

The GLORIOUS trial indicates that exenatide does not offer significant perioperative benefits in reducing complications or mortality during cardiopulmonary bypass-assisted surgeries. This research underscores the urgent need for innovative strategies and robust clinical trials to optimise patient outcomes in cardiac surgery.

 


Limitations

 

The trial's findings are limited by its focus on a single treatment with exenatide over a short administration period at one heart centre in Denmark, making the results less generalisable to broader populations or other GLP-1 medications. Further research is needed to explore the potential benefits of different GLP-1 analogues, prolonged administration periods, or higher doses for patients undergoing cardiopulmonary bypass-assisted cardiac surgery.



Clinical Trial Registration Information


ClinicalTrials.gov. (n.d.). GLP-1 and hyperoxia for organ protection in heart surgery (GLORIOUS). ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02673931. Accessed November 26, 2024. Available at: https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT02673931

Back to top


Disclaimer
This article is reproduced under the terms of CC-BY-Licence. It is in no way presented as an original work.  Every effort has been made to attribute quotes and content correctly. Where possible, all information has been independently verified. The Medical Education Network bears no responsibility for any inaccuracies which may occur from the use of third-party sources. If you have any queries regarding this article contact us 

Fact-checking Policy
The Medical Education Network makes every effort to review and fact-check the articles used as source material in our summaries and original material. We have strict guidelines in relation to the publications we use as our source data, favouring peer-reviewed research wherever possible. Every effort is made to ensure that the information contained here is an accurate reflection of the original material. Should you find inaccuracies, out of date content or have any additional issues with our articles, please
 contact us 

Back to top

Rapid SSL

The Medical Education Network
Powered by eLecture, a VisualLive Solution