Evidence Hub

PRECISION study: impact of personalised cardiac anaesthesia and cerebral autoregulation on neurological outcomes in patients undergoing cardiac surgery - protocol for an international, multicentre, prospective cohort study

Gomes NV, Edgar-Whelan H, Beqiri E, Young J, Schindler C, Gregor M, Erb JM, Siegemund M et al.

BMJ open, 2026

500 participants · 1 citation

Abstract

Introduction: Adverse neurological complications, including postoperative delirium (POD) and stroke, remain one of the major risks after cardiac surgery. A lack of comprehensive knowledge about their causes and neuroprotective strategies has hindered the development of effective interventions to reduce these events. Personalised cerebral autoregulation (CA)-oriented blood pressure monitoring aims to identify blood pressure targets tailored to each individual patient, thereby reducing brain injury. The PRECISION study aims to assess whether perioperative duration and magnitude of mean arterial pressure (MAP) deviation from an individual's CA limits are associated with adverse neurological complications.

Methods and analysis: This international, multicentre, prospective cohort study is conducted at two Swiss and one British hospital. Patients aged 65 years or older undergoing elective primary or re-operative coronary artery bypass graft and/or valvular and/or ascending aorta surgery requiring cardiopulmonary bypass are included. Preoperatively, the patient's baseline of physical, cognitive and mental status is established. Intraoperatively, near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) and transcranial Doppler (TCD) are recorded in real-time to generate NIRS-derived and TCD-derived CA indices. The primary endpoint is POD, assessed daily on postoperative days 0 to 7 or up to discharge, whichever occurs earlier with the 3D-Confusion Assessment Method (3D-CAM) or CAM-Intensive Care Unit.…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a clinical trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 500 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free