Cardiothoracic & vascular anesthesia
Is Faster Always Better? Ultra-Fast-Track Versus Fast-Track Extubation in Adult Cardiac Surgery: A Comprehensive Meta-analysis With Meta-regression
Pooled result · 30-day mortalityResult — go to the resultOdds ratio 0.54Authors' conclusion
UFTE appears safe in selected patients and is associated with improved efficiency and recovery, particularly reduced ICU and hospital LOS.
Study context
- Population
- Adults undergoing cardiac surgery
- Participants
- nearly 800,000 adults · 20 studies
- Comparison
- Ultra-fast-track extubation (UFTE) vs fast-track extubation (FTE)
- Outcome
- 30-day mortality
- Follow-up
- 30 days
Methodological detailsmeta-regression, Studies from MEDLINE, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library
- Meta-regression
- Studies from MEDLINE, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library
Pooled result
As reported in the abstract
Odds ratio
0.54
Further pooled results
| Outcome | Estimate |
|---|---|
| ICU LOS | MD −12.27 hours |
| Hospital LOS | MD −1.19 days |
| Stroke | OR 0.85 |
| Readmission | OR 0.64 |
| Reintubation (minimally invasive cardiac surgery subgroup) | OR 0.26 |
CABG subgroup
- Only hospital length of stay (LOS) reduced
Propensity-matched cohorts
- Mortality and reintubation comparable; ICU and hospital stays shorter with UFTE
- Propensity-matched cohorts
Meta-regression of mortality effect
- Male sex and baseline left ventricular ejection fraction significant moderators
Safety
Reintubation, reoperation for bleeding, AKI, pneumonia, AF
- Similar rates
Parts of this Brief are withheld: the automatic checks could not confirm them against the abstract.
Original publication
Is Faster Always Better? Ultra-Fast-Track Versus Fast-Track Extubation in Adult Cardiac Surgery: A Comprehensive Meta-analysis With Meta-regression. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. Published 11 June 2026. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →