The effect of vacuum-assisted venous drainage on hemolysis during cardiopulmonary bypass.
CABG
Venous drainage
cardiopulmonary bypass
hemolysis
vacuum-assistance
Journal
American journal of cardiovascular disease
ISSN: 2160-200X
Titre abrégé: Am J Cardiovasc Dis
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101569582
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2020
2020
Historique:
received:
01
07
2020
accepted:
25
09
2020
entrez:
23
11
2020
pubmed:
24
11
2020
medline:
24
11
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
In cardiac surgery, systemic venous drainage is provided by gravity. During the procedure, the amount of venous drainage can be increased by using a vacuum-assisted venous drainage (VAVD) technique. The purpose of this study is to compare the effects of VAVD and gravitational drainage (GD) techniques on hemolysis. Totally, 60 patients were included in the study. The patients were separated into three groups, and each group designed with 20 patients: Groups are defined as Group 1 (-40 mmHg VAVD), Group 2 (-60 mmHg VAVD), and Group 3 (GD). Preoperative and postoperative values of lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), haptoglobin (Hpt), mean platelet volume (MVP), and platelet count (Plt) were evaluated. The duration of cardiopulmonary bypass, cross-clamp, and vacuum assistance times were similar in all groups (P > 0.05), whereas Group GD required more additional volume to maintain adequate perfusion (P = 0.034). Preoperative and postoperative measurements showed no significant difference in terms of LDH, MVP, Plt, and Hpt among the groups (P > 0.05). There was no significant increase in hemolysis among the groups, which demonstrates that the VAVD technique, even if lower negative pressure is preferred, can be applied safely and effectively to improve venous drainage and consequently, cardiac decompression, even if smaller venous cannulas are used, and also avoid from superfluous fluid addition to sustain adequate extracorporeal perfusion.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
In cardiac surgery, systemic venous drainage is provided by gravity. During the procedure, the amount of venous drainage can be increased by using a vacuum-assisted venous drainage (VAVD) technique. The purpose of this study is to compare the effects of VAVD and gravitational drainage (GD) techniques on hemolysis.
METHODS
METHODS
Totally, 60 patients were included in the study. The patients were separated into three groups, and each group designed with 20 patients: Groups are defined as Group 1 (-40 mmHg VAVD), Group 2 (-60 mmHg VAVD), and Group 3 (GD). Preoperative and postoperative values of lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), haptoglobin (Hpt), mean platelet volume (MVP), and platelet count (Plt) were evaluated.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The duration of cardiopulmonary bypass, cross-clamp, and vacuum assistance times were similar in all groups (P > 0.05), whereas Group GD required more additional volume to maintain adequate perfusion (P = 0.034). Preoperative and postoperative measurements showed no significant difference in terms of LDH, MVP, Plt, and Hpt among the groups (P > 0.05).
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
There was no significant increase in hemolysis among the groups, which demonstrates that the VAVD technique, even if lower negative pressure is preferred, can be applied safely and effectively to improve venous drainage and consequently, cardiac decompression, even if smaller venous cannulas are used, and also avoid from superfluous fluid addition to sustain adequate extracorporeal perfusion.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
473-478Informations de copyright
AJCD Copyright © 2020.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
None.
Références
Perfusion. 2000 Jan;15(1):63-7
pubmed: 10676869
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2001 Sep;20(3):621-6
pubmed: 11509289
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2007 Jun;31(6):1044-51
pubmed: 17336540
Rev Bras Cir Cardiovasc. 2014 Apr-Jun;29(2):266-71
pubmed: 25140478
J Extra Corpor Technol. 2015 Sep;47(3):160-6
pubmed: 26543250
J Extra Corpor Technol. 2008 Dec;40(4):249-56
pubmed: 19192754
Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2020 Jan;68(1):2-14
pubmed: 31679152
Perfusion. 2019 Mar;34(2):136-142
pubmed: 30124127
Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2012 Jun;60(4):262-8
pubmed: 21789761
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2001 Aug;20(2):233-8
pubmed: 11463537
ASAIO J. 2009 Sep-Oct;55(5):469-73
pubmed: 19730004
ASAIO J. 2001 Nov-Dec;47(6):651-4
pubmed: 11730205
Perfusion. 2002 Jan;17(1):57-61
pubmed: 11817531
J Extra Corpor Technol. 2019 Jun;51(2):78-82
pubmed: 31239580
Perfusion. 2006 Nov;21(6):361-5
pubmed: 17312860
J Artif Organs. 2005;8(2):91-4
pubmed: 16094512
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2003 Sep;126(3):680-7
pubmed: 14502139
Ann Thorac Surg. 2002 Dec;74(6):2132-7
pubmed: 12643407
J Extra Corpor Technol. 2008 Dec;40(4):257-67
pubmed: 19192755
World J Pediatr Congenit Heart Surg. 2017 Mar;8(2):161-165
pubmed: 28329457