首页> 外文期刊>European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery: Official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery >Excessive negative venous line pressures and increased arterial air bubble counts during miniaturized cardiopulmonary bypass: An experimental study comparing miniaturized with conventional perfusion systems
【24h】

Excessive negative venous line pressures and increased arterial air bubble counts during miniaturized cardiopulmonary bypass: An experimental study comparing miniaturized with conventional perfusion systems

机译:小型化体外循环期间负静脉管路压力过大和动脉气泡计数增加:一项比较常规化和常规灌注系统的实验研究

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Objectives: Miniaturized cardiopulmonary bypass (MCPB) is increasingly used in cardiac surgery, because it can lower clinically significant complications such as systemic inflammatory response, haemolysis and high transfusion requirements. A limitation of MCPB is the risk of excessive negative pressure in the venous line during volume depletion, probably leading to gaseous microembolism. Methods: In an experimental study with 24 pigs, we compared conventional open cardiopulmonary bypass (CCPB group, n = 11) with MCPB (n = 13). The same pump and identical tubing materials were used in both groups. Primary endpoints were pressure values in the venous line and the right atrium as well as the amount of air bubbles >500 μm. Secondary endpoints were biochemical parameters of systemic inflammatory response, ischaemia, haemodilution and haemolysis. Results: Nearly 20% of venous pressure values were below -150 mmHg and approximately 10% of the right atrial pressure values were below -100 mmHg in the MCPB group, during the experiment. No such low values were observed in the CCPB group. In addition, the number of large arterial air bubbles was higher in the MCPB group compared with the CCPB group (mean ± standard deviation [SD]: 13 444 ± 5709 vs 0.9 ± 0.6, respectively; P < 0.001). Bubble volume was also significantly larger during MCPB compared with CCPB (mean ± SD: 1522 ± 654 vs 4.1 ± 2.5 μl, respectively; P < 0.001). Blood levels of interleukin-6, free haemoglobin and creatine kinase were significantly higher in the CCPB group compared with the MCPB group. Conclusions: Despite the benefits of MCPB regarding systemic inflammatory response and haemolysis, this technique is associated with excessive negative venous line pressures and a significant increase in the number and volume of arterial air bubbles compared with CCPB. Mini-perfusion systems and the management of MCPB require further refinements to avoid such adverse effects.
机译:目的:小型化体外循环(MCPB)在心脏外科手术中越来越多地使用,因为它可以降低临床上显着的并发症,例如全身性炎症反应,溶血和高输血需求。 MCPB的局限性是在容量减少期间静脉管路中负压过高的风险,这可能导致气态微栓塞。方法:在对24头猪的实验研究中,我们比较了传统的开放式体外循环(CCPB组,n = 11)和MCPB(n = 13)。两组均使用相同的泵和相同的管道材料。主要终点为静脉和右心房中的压力值以及> 500μm的气泡量。次要终点是全身性炎症反应,局部缺血,血液稀释和溶血的生化参数。结果:在实验过程中,MCPB组中近20%的静脉压力值低于-150 mmHg,约10%的右心室压力值低于-100 mmHg。在CCPB组中未观察到如此低的值。另外,与CCPB组相比,MCPB组的大动脉气泡数量更多(平均值±标准差[SD]:分别为13444±5709和0.9±0.6; P <0.001)。与CCPB相比,MCPB期间的气泡体积也明显更大(平均值±SD:1522±654与4.1±2.5μl; P <0.001)。与MCPB组相比,CCPB组的白细胞介素6,游离血红蛋白和肌酸激酶的血药浓度明显更高。结论:尽管MCPB在全身性炎症反应和溶血方面具有优势,但与CCPB相比,该技术与静脉负压过高以及动脉气泡数量和体积的显着增加有关。小型灌注系统和MCPB的管理需要进一步完善,以避免此类不利影响。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号