Literature DB >> 16305899

Miniaturized cardiopulmonary bypass in coronary artery bypass surgery: marginal impact on inflammation and coagulation but loss of safety margins.

Georg Nollert1, Ina Schwabenland, Deniz Maktav, Felix Kur, Frank Christ, Peter Fraunberger, Bruno Reichart, Calin Vicol.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Inflammation and coagulation disturbances are common consequences of cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). Recently, miniaturized closed CPB circuits without cardiotomy suction and venous reservoir have been proposed to reduce complication rates. We compared outcomes with conventional (CCPB) and miniaturized cardiopulmonary bypass (MCPB) after coronary artery bypass operations (CABG) with respect to inflammation and coagulation. DESCRIPTION: Thirty patients (23% female; aged 67.9 +/- 9.0 years) were prospectively randomly assigned to undergo isolated CABG with CCPB or MCPB. Conventional CPB had a pump prime of 1, 600 mL. Miniaturized CPB consisted of a centrifugal pump, arterial filter, heparinized tubing, and oxygenator with a priming volume of 800 mL. Shed blood was removed by a cell-saving device and reinfused. Measurements included interleukin (IL)-2 receptor, IL-6, IL-10, tumor necrosis factor receptor 55 and 75, C reactive protein, leukocyte differentiation, d-dimers, fibrinogen, and thrombocytes at six time points. EVALUATION: In both groups no major complication occurred. However, two dangerous air leaks occurred in the closed MCPB circuit, demonstrating the narrow safety margins. Operative handling was also more difficult owing to limitations in venting and fluid management. International normalized ratio (p = 0.03) and antithrombin III (p = 0.04) levels were elevated during CPB in the CCPB group, most likely owing to differences of the intraoperative anticoagulation management. Repeated measures analysis revealed that not a single parameter of inflammation or clinical outcome showed significant differences among groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Use of a MCPB affected inflammation and coagulation variables only marginally and did not lead to clinical relevant changes as assessed by blood loss, need for blood products, and intensive care unit and clinical stays. However, safety margins for volume loss, air emboli, and weaning from CPB decrease, because of the closed MCPB circuit.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16305899     DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2005.05.080

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg        ISSN: 0003-4975            Impact factor:   4.330


  11 in total

1.  A case-controlled evaluation of the Medtronic Resting Heart System compared with conventional cardiopulmonary bypass in patients undergoing isolated coronary artery bypass surgery.

Authors:  Shahab Nozohoor; Per Johnsson; Sara Scicluna; Per Wallentin; Elisabeth Andell; Johan Nilsson
Journal:  Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg       Date:  2012-01-27

Review 2.  Use of minimal invasive extracorporeal circulation in cardiac surgery: principles, definitions and potential benefits. A position paper from the Minimal invasive Extra-Corporeal Technologies international Society (MiECTiS).

Authors:  Kyriakos Anastasiadis; John Murkin; Polychronis Antonitsis; Adrian Bauer; Marco Ranucci; Erich Gygax; Jan Schaarschmidt; Yves Fromes; Alois Philipp; Balthasar Eberle; Prakash Punjabi; Helena Argiriadou; Alexander Kadner; Hansjoerg Jenni; Guenter Albrecht; Wim van Boven; Andreas Liebold; Fillip de Somer; Harald Hausmann; Apostolos Deliopoulos; Aschraf El-Essawi; Valerio Mazzei; Fausto Biancari; Adam Fernandez; Patrick Weerwind; Thomas Puehler; Cyril Serrick; Frans Waanders; Serdar Gunaydin; Sunil Ohri; Jan Gummert; Gianni Angelini; Volkmar Falk; Thierry Carrel
Journal:  Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg       Date:  2016-01-26

3.  Classic pages of the Journal of Extracorporeal Technology.

Authors:  Jeff Riley
Journal:  J Extra Corpor Technol       Date:  2006-06

4.  Getting it right: optimizing the patient and technique for the procedure.

Authors:  Alfred H Stammers
Journal:  J Extra Corpor Technol       Date:  2009-12

5.  Impact of minimally invasive extracorporeal circulation on coagulation-a randomized trial.

Authors:  Ivy Susanne Modrau; Debbie Richards Halle; Per Hostrup Nielsen; Hans Henrik Kimose; Jacob Raben Greisen; Michael Kremke; Anne-Mette Hvas
Journal:  Eur J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2020-06-01       Impact factor: 4.191

6.  Haemostasis alterations in coronary artery bypass grafting: comparison between the off-pump technique and a closed coated cardiopulmonary bypass system.

Authors:  Giuseppe Scrascia; Crescenzia Rotunno; Piero Guida; Manuela Conte; Lillà Amorese; Vito Margari; Luigi de Luca Tupputi Schinosa; Domenico Paparella
Journal:  Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg       Date:  2013-01-18

7.  Minimally invasive cardiopulmonary bypass: does it really change the outcome?

Authors:  Marco Ranucci; Giuseppe Isgrò
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 9.097

Review 8.  Mini cardiopulmonary bypass: Anesthetic considerations.

Authors:  Raed A Alsatli
Journal:  Anesth Essays Res       Date:  2012 Jan-Jun

Review 9.  Strategies to prevent intraoperative lung injury during cardiopulmonary bypass.

Authors:  Efstratios E Apostolakis; Efstratios N Koletsis; Nikolaos G Baikoussis; Stavros N Siminelakis; Georgios S Papadopoulos
Journal:  J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2010-01-11       Impact factor: 1.637

10.  Miniaturized cardiopulmonary bypass: the Hammersmith technique.

Authors:  Aziz Momin; Mansour Sharabiani; John Mulholland; Gemma Yarham; Barnaby Reeves; Jon Anderson; Gianni Angelini
Journal:  J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2013-06-03       Impact factor: 1.637

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.