Why the study?
Does crystalloid cardioplegia compared to blood cardioplegia improve operative mortality in patients undergoing isolated aortic valve replacement?
Does crystalloid cardioplegia compared to blood cardioplegia improve operative mortality in patients undergoing isolated aortic valve replacement?
Crystalloid and blood cardioplegia provide equivalent outcomes after isolated aortic valve replacement, though blood cardioplegia may be beneficial for patients with severely reduced left ventricular ejection fraction.
No difference in mortality with CCP or BCP after isolated AVR; leaves open possible BCP benefit in low LVEF pending randomized data.
OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to assess the impact of crystalloid cardioplegia (CCP) and blood cardioplegia (BCP) on short- and long-term outcome after isolated aortic valve replacement (AVR). METHODS: A total of 7263 patients undergoing AVR at our institution between November 1994 and June 2015 were identified. CCP (Custodiol ® ) was used in 83% ( n = 5998) and intermittent cold BCP in 1007 patients (14%). For 4790 patients, propensity scores were calculated from baseline data, risk factors, comorbidities and characteristics of the disease, resulting in 825 pairs. The primary outcome was operative mortality (OM). RESULTS: There was no significant difference in OM between CCP and BCP cohorts [33 of 825 (4.0%) vs 35 of 825 (4.2%), P = 0.90]. The incidence of postoperative complications was comparable between both groups. Long-term survival was also not different between CCP and BCP (log-rank test: P = 0.9). Multiple Cox regression analysis demonstrated that mortality was significantly affected by renal function ( P < 0.001), logistic EuroSCORE ( P < 0.001), male sex ( P = 0.005) and diabetes ( P = 0.037). Patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction ≤30% showed improved survival when receiving BCP intraoperatively [odds ratio: 2.28 (1.12-4.63); P = 0.03]. CONCLUSIONS: CCP and BCP provide equivalent outcome after isolated AVR. However, BCP seems to be beneficial for patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hoyer et al. (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: