Search

Objective: To measure surrogate markers of coagulation activation as well as of the systemic inflammatory response in patients undergoing primary elective coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) using either the so-called Smart suction device or a continuous autotransfusion system (C.A.T.S.®)., Methods: Fifty-eight patients being operated with a miniaturized circuit (minimal extracorporeal circuit, MECC) were prospectively randomized to using a so-called Smart suction device or a routine continuous autotransfusion system (C.A.T.S.®) for collection of mediastinal shed blood. The coagulation response was measured by thrombin-antithrombin complex (TAT) and D-dimer. The inflammatory response was measured by Interleukin 6 (IL-6) and complement factor 3a (C3a) at three different time points, before surgery, 2h after surgery, as well as 18 h after surgery., Results: No serious adverse cardiovascular event was observed. Serum levels of TAT significantly differed between both groups 2h after surgery (Smart suction 16.12 ± 13.51 μg l⁻¹ vs C.A.T.S® 9.83 ± 7.81 μg l⁻¹, p = 0.040) and returned to baseline values after 18 h in both groups. Serum levels of D-dimer showed a corresponding pattern with a peak 2h after surgery (Smart suction 1115 ± 1231 ng ml⁻¹ vs C.A.T.S.® 507 ± 604 ng ml⁻¹, p = 0.025). IL-6 levels also significantly differed between both groups 2h after surgery (Smart suction 186 ± 306 pg ml⁻¹ vs C.A.T.S.® 82 ± 71 pg ml⁻¹, p = 0.072). No significant changes in serum levels of C3a over time could be observed., Conclusions: Despite no differences in the clinical course of patients with either Smart suction or C.A.T.S.® being observed, surrogate markers of coagulation and inflammation seem to be less pronounced in patients where cardiotomy blood is not being directly reinfused. As such, C.A.T.S.® should be preferred in routine CABG, as long as no extensive volume substitution is anticipated., (Copyright © 2011 European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Minimal extracorporeal circulation (MECC) is a promising perfusion technology, taking the advantage of an ECC while having a significantly reduced priming volume. We analyzed the actual possible benefits of using MECC in patients undergoing CABG procedures and compared the results with conventional extracorporeal circulation (CECC)., Methods: One thousand fifty-three consecutive patients underwent CABG surgery using the MECC perfusion technique. Subgroup analyses focused on perioperative myocardial markers (cardiac troponin I [cTnI]), incidence of atrial fibrillation (AF), and perioperative evaluation of inflammatory markers and data were compared with those of patients who underwent CABG using CECC. A propensity score analysis was performed., Results: Patient characteristics and distribution of EuroSCORE risk were similar in both groups. Severity of coronary artery disease and extent of revascularization were also comparable in both groups (number of distal anastomoses: 3.2 +/- 1.1 in CECC vs 3.2 +/- 0.9 in MECC; p = not significant [ns]). The cTnI was significantly lower in the MECC group (11.0 +/- 10.8 microg/L in MECC vs 24.7 +/- 25.3 microg/L in CECC; p < 0.05). Incidence of AF was 11.1% in MECC and 39.0% in CECC (p < 0.05). Inflammatory markers (interleukin-6, SC5b-9) were lower in MECC patients (p < 0.05). Propensity score analysis confirmed faster recovery in MECC patients and lower incidence of AF., Conclusions: Minimal extracorporeal circulation is a safe perfusion technique for CABG and may therefore concurrence OPCAB and traditional CABG under CECC.

Objective: The standard heart-lung machine is a major trigger of systemic inflammatory response and the morbidity attributed to conventional extracorporeal circulation (CECC) is still significant. Reduction of blood-artificial surface contact and reduction of priming volume are principal aims in minimized extracorporeal circulation (MECC) cardiopulmonary bypass systems. The aim of this paper is to give an overview of the literature and to present our experience with the MECC-smart suction system., Methods and Results: At our institution, 1799 patients underwent isolated coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery, 1372 with a MECC-smart suction system and 427 with CECC. All in-hospital data were assessed and the results were compared between the 2 groups. Patient characteristics and the distribution of EuroSCORE risk profile in our collective were similar between both groups. Average age in the MECC collective was 67.5 +/- 11.4 years and average EuroSCORE was 5.0 +/- 1.5. Average number of distal anastomoses was similar to the average number encountered in patients undergoing CABG surgery with CECC (3.3 +/- 1.0 for MECC versus 3.2 +/- 1.1 for CECC; P = ns). Myocardial protection is superior in MECC patients with lower postoperative maximal cTnI values (11.0 +/- 10.8 micromol/L for MECC versus 24.7 +/- 25.3 micromol/L for CECC; P < .05). Postoperative recovery was faster in patients operated on with the MECC-smart suction system and discharge from the hospital was earlier than for CECC patients (7.4 +/- 1.9 days for MECC versus 8.8 +/- 3.8 days for CECC; P < .05)., Conclusions: The MECC-smart suction system is a safe perfusion technique for CABG surgery. In patients operated on with this system, the clinical outcome seems to be better than in patients operated on with CECC. This promising and less damaging perfusion technology has the potential to replace CECC systems in CABG surgery.

Objective: Minimal extracorporeal circulation (mini-ECC) is a new technology, consisting of a centrifugal pump, an oxygenator, and a modified suction system. The main advantage of mini-ECC is the reduction of tubing length (reduction of the priming volume). Additional beneficial effects are a decrease of coagulation cascade and a reduction of blood transfusion in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery. We compared the intraoperative and early postoperative myocardial damage and outcome of patients who underwent CABG surgery with conventional cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) or mini-ECC., Methods: One hundred and thirty-six consecutive patients who underwent isolated CABG surgery at our institution were prospectively studied. Fifty-four patients (39.7%) were operated with mini-ECC. Patient characteristics were similar in both groups. The most interesting intraoperative details as well as in-hospital outcome were assessed., Results: There was no difference in mortality between the two groups. Cross-clamping time was similar in both groups (p = 0.07). Defibrillation was required in one patient in the mini-ECC group (1.9%) and in 38 patients (46.3%) in the CPB group (p < 0.001). In the mini-ECC group, the requirement of inotropic support and incidence of atrial fibrillation was significantly lower than in the CPB group. Postoperative creatine kinase isoenzyme MB (CK-MB) and cardiac Troponin I (cTnI) were significantly lower in the mini-ECC group (p < 0.05). Duration of ventilation, length of stay in the intensive care unit and total hospitalization time were significantly shorter in patients operated with mini-ECC (p < 0.05)., Conclusion: Mini-ECC is a safe procedure and is followed by a diminished release of CK-MB and cTnI than after CPB. Postoperative recovery is accelerated following mini-ECC and there is a significantly lower incidence of postoperative atrial fibrillation.

In cardiac surgery a reduction of homologous blood products is mainly achieved by autologous blood salvage. Unprocessed retransfusion of autologous blood may induce changes in hemostasis. We assessed changes of activated clotting times (ACT) after retransfusion of unprocessed (1) oxygenator blood and (2) shed mediastinal blood. In 41 patients undergoing cardiac surgery (37 revascularization and 4 valve procedures) with a mean cardiopulmonary bypass time of 116.3 min, ACT was measured at the following time points: pre- and postoperatively, and before and after retransfusion of oxygenator blood and shed mediastinal blood. A significant prolongation of ACT values was only seen between pre- to postoperative blood (p < 0.003). Retransfusion of oxygenator blood changed ACT from 120 +/- 25 vs 116 +/- 17 sec and retransfusion of shed mediastinal blood showed a mean ACT of 118 +/- 14 vs 115 +/- 20 sec from before to after transfusion. There was a significant correlation between the ACT value in the unprocessed oxygenator blood and the ACT value measured in the patient after retransfusion (r = 0.41, p < 0.02). 6 patients receiving over 1 litre of unprocessed autologous blood (either from the oxygenator or the mediastinum) in less than 60 minutes showed a significant increase of ACT value after transfusion (p < 0.05). Hence, under normal conditions, retransfusion of unprocessed autologous blood will not significantly alter hemostasis measured by the ACT test in patients undergoing cardiac surgery.