Abstract

Conventional cardiopulmonary bypass is the most commonly used means of artificial circulation in cardiac surgery. However, it suffers from the effects of haemodilution and activation of inflammatory/coagulation cascades. Prime displacement (PD) can offset haemodilution and mini-extracorporeal technology (MIECT) can offset both. So far, no study has compared all of these modalities together; hence, we compared the outcomes of these 3 modalities at our institution. This was a retrospective analysis of our cardiac surgical database. A total of 9626 patients underwent conventional bypass (CB), 3125 patients underwent a modification of CB, called PD, and 904 underwent MIECT. A 1:1 propensity-matching algorithm was employed using IBM SPSS 24 to match (i) 813 MIECT patients with 813 CB patients and (ii) 717 MIECT patients with 717 PD patients. The patients included coronary artery bypass grafting and valve surgery. MIECT had significantly (P < 0.05) longer bypass and cross-clamp times compared to CB and PD. MIECT had significantly higher rates of postoperative atrial fibrillation associated with it compared to CB. The mean red cell blood transfusion was significantly lower in the MIECT group compared to the CB group as was the mean platelet transfusion and fresh frozen plasma transfusion. The overall 5-year survival was higher in the MIECT group compared to the CB group (log-rank, P = 0.018). Between the MIECT and the PD groups, we found the incidence of renal failure and gastrointestinal complications to be significantly higher in the PD group compared to the MIECT group. MIECT has short-term advantages over CB and PD. However, due to the retrospective limitations of the study, including calendar time bias, a multicentre randomized controlled trial comparing all 3 modalities will be beneficial for the larger cardiac community.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call