Mehmet Kirişci1, Aydemir Koçarslan1, Duygun Altintaş Aykan2, Filiz Alkan Baylan3, Adem Doğaner4, Yavuz Orak5. 1. Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam University, Kahramanmaraş, Turkey 2. Department of Pharmacology, Faculty of Medicine, Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam University, Kahramanmaraş, Turkey 3. Department of Biochemistry, Faculty of Medicine, Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam University, Kahramanmaraş, Turkey 4. Department of Biostatistics, Faculty of Medicine, Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam University, Kahramanmaraş, Turkey 5. Department of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, Faculty of Medicine, Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam University, Kahramanmaraş, Turkey
Abstract
Background/aim: Our aim in this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of crystalloid del Nido solution and cold blood cardioplegia solution on clinical and laboratory parameters. Materials and methods: Sixty patients who underwent elective coronary bypass operation between July 2019 and January 2020 were included in our study. Patients were divided into 2 groups of 30 patients using del Nido solution (DNS) and cold blood cardioplegia solution (CBCS), which were given for cardiac arrest. Demographic data, preoperative, postoperative 0th h, 6th h and 4th day creatine kinase myocardial band (CK-MB) and troponin I values were compared with a specific cardiac enzyme heart-type fatty acid-binding protein (H-FABP). Results: We found that aortic cross clamp duration and cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) time were shorter in patients using del Nido solution than cold blood cardioplegia solution (57.30 ± 23.57 min, 76.07 ± 27.18 min, P = 0.006) (95.07 ± 23.06 min, 114.13 ± 33.93, P = 0.014). Total cardioplegia solution volume was higher in the cold blood cardioplegia solution group (1426.67 ± 416.00 vs. 1200 ± 310.73 P = 0.02). Preoperative and postoperative levels of cardiac enzymes including CK-MB, troponin I and H-FABP were comparable in del Nido solution and cold blood cardioplegia solution groups. Conclusion: According to these results, when we compare both demographic data and CK-MB, troponin I and H-FABP levels, both cardioplegia solutions were comparable regarding safety and efficacy in terms of myocardial protection. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Background/aim: Our aim in this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of crystalloid del Nido solution and cold blood cardioplegia solution on clinical and laboratory parameters. Materials and methods: Sixty patients who underwent elective coronary bypass operation between July 2019 and January 2020 were included in our study. Patients were divided into 2 groups of 30 patients using del Nido solution (DNS) and cold blood cardioplegia solution (CBCS), which were given for cardiac arrest. Demographic data, preoperative, postoperative 0th h, 6th h and 4th day creatine kinase myocardial band (CK-MB) and troponin I values were compared with a specific cardiac enzyme heart-type fatty acid-binding protein (H-FABP). Results: We found that aortic cross clamp duration and cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) time were shorter in patients using del Nido solution than cold blood cardioplegia solution (57.30 ± 23.57 min, 76.07 ± 27.18 min, P = 0.006) (95.07 ± 23.06 min, 114.13 ± 33.93, P = 0.014). Total cardioplegia solution volume was higher in the cold blood cardioplegia solution group (1426.67 ± 416.00 vs. 1200 ± 310.73 P = 0.02). Preoperative and postoperative levels of cardiac enzymes including CK-MB, troponin I and H-FABP were comparable in del Nido solution and cold blood cardioplegia solution groups. Conclusion: According to these results, when we compare both demographic data and CK-MB, troponin I and H-FABP levels, both cardioplegia solutions were comparable regarding safety and efficacy in terms of myocardial protection. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors: J A Kragten; F A van Nieuwenhoven; M P van Dieijen-Visser; P H Theunissen; W T Hermens; J F Glatz Journal: Clin Chem Date: 1996-02 Impact factor: 8.327
Authors: Christoph Liebetrau; Holger M Nef; Oliver Dörr; Luise Gaede; Jedrzej Hoffmann; Astrid Hahnel; Andreas Rolf; Christian Troidl; Karl J Lackner; Till Keller; Christian W Hamm; Helge Möllmann Journal: Heart Date: 2014-01-31 Impact factor: 5.994
Authors: K Suzuki; Y Sawa; K Kadoba; T Takahashi; H Ichikawa; K Kagisaki; T Ohata; H Matsuda Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 1998-01 Impact factor: 4.330