Efficacy of the Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Agonist Exenatide in Patients Undergoing CABG or Aortic Valve Replacement: A Randomized Double-Blind Clinical Trial

Kjaergaard, J; Møller, CH; Wiberg, S; Mikkelsen, AD; Møller-Sørensen, H; Ravn, HB; Ravn, J; Olsen, PS; Høfsten, DE; Boesgaard, S; Køber, L; Nilsson, JC; Hassager, C

doi:10.1161/circinterventions.124.014961

Efficacy of the Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Agonist Exenatide in Patients Undergoing CABG or Aortic Valve Replacement: A Randomized Double-Blind Clinical Trial

Circ Cardiovasc IntervPublished 23 Apr 2025Randomized, double-blinded, 2-by-2 factorial design, single-center clinical trial

Primary result · Time to composite of death, stroke, renal failure requiring dialysis, or new/worsening heart failureResultHazard ratio 1.0 95% CI 0.83–1.3

Read the original article ↗PubMed

Cite

Authors' conclusion

Exenatide during cardiopulmonary bypass and weaning thereof did not significantly reduce the incidence of death, stroke, renal failure, or new/worsening heart failure in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting and aortic valve replacement.

Study context

Population: Adult patients undergoing elective cardiopulmonary bypass-assisted coronary artery bypass grafting or aortic valve replacement; predominantly low riskpatients included in the analyses
Participants: 1,389 patients

Comparison: FiO 2 50% vs FiO 2 100%
Primary endpoint: Time to composite of:
Death
Stroke
Renal failure requiring dialysis
New/worsening heart failure
Follow-up: Median 5.9 years (min-max; 2.5-8.3 years)

Methodological detailsalso including liberal (FiO 2 of 100%) or restrictive (FiO 2 of 50%) oxygenation during and after bypass, the present article presents the results of the exenatide intervention

Also including liberal (FiO 2 of 100%) or restrictive (FiO 2 of 50%) oxygenation during and after bypass
The present article presents the results of the exenatide intervention

Primary result

As reported in the abstract

Hazard ratio

1.0

95% CI 0.83–1.3

P = 0.80

Events by treatment group

Exenatide24%170 events

Placebo24%165 events

FiO 2 50% vs FiO 2 100%

hazard ratio 1.0 (95% CI 0.83–1.3); P = 0.80

Safety

Prespecified adverse events

No significant difference in rates of adverse events between the 2 groups

Reference

Authors: Kjaergaard J, Møller CH, Wiberg S, Mikkelsen AD, Møller-Sørensen H, Ravn HB, et al.
All 13 authors
Kjaergaard J, Møller CH, Wiberg S, Mikkelsen AD, Møller-Sørensen H, Ravn HB, Ravn J, Olsen PS, Høfsten DE, Boesgaard S, Køber L, Nilsson JC, Hassager C
Journal: Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions
Published: 23 Apr 2025
DOI: 10.1161/circinterventions.124.014961
PubMed: 40265262
Registration: NCT02673931

Country: Denmark
Topic: Valvular & structural heart disease
Also indexed: Coronary disease & ACS

Intervention details

exenatide: infusion of 17.4 µg of exenatide during cardiopulmonary bypass and the first hour after weaning thereof
placebo: placebo infusion during cardiopulmonary bypass and the first hour after weaning thereof
FiO 2 50%: restrictive oxygenation during and after bypass
FiO 2 100%: liberal oxygenation during and after bypass

Key notes

No difference in time to the first event
Time to first event; the abstract prints this ratio for the FiO 2 groups, not for exenatide vs placebo

More notes

The second group's events are printed without a group name

Original publication

Efficacy of the Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Agonist Exenatide in Patients Undergoing CABG or Aortic Valve Replacement: A Randomized Double-Blind Clinical Trial. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. Published 23 April 2025. doi:10.1161/circinterventions.124.014961

Read the original article ↗

Summarised from the published abstract; every number is checked against it