Why the study?
Do cardiac markers in pericardial fluid reflect preoperative myocardial injury differently than serum markers in patients undergoing heart surgery?
Do cardiac markers in pericardial fluid reflect preoperative myocardial injury differently than serum markers in patients undergoing heart surgery?
Preoperative pericardial accumulation of cTnI is higher than serum levels and may reflect subclinical myocardial injury not demonstrated by usual laboratory tests.
Pericardial cTnI may signal subclinical injury missed by serum; hypothesis-generating for its role in preoperative assessment.
The purpose of this study was to compare cardiac markers in the pericardial fluid and serum in order to evaluate preoperative myocardial injury. Thirty patients were divided into three groups. The first group (AVR; n=10) received an aortic valve replacement. The second group (SA; n=10) included patients with stable angina who underwent elective coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). The third group (ACS; n=10) included patients with acute coronary syndrome who underwent urgent CABG. Pericardial fluid and venous samples were taken after opening the pericardium and 24 h postoperatively. Serum and pericardial concentration of troponin I (cTnI), creatine kinase (CK), its MB isoenzyme (CK-MB) and myoglobin were determined. Preoperative pericardial cTnI was significantly (P<0.01) higher than in serum in all groups. Preoperative pericardial CK, CK-MB and myoglobin were significantly (P<0.01) lower than in serum in groups AVR and SA. Preoperative pericardial and serum cTnI were significantly higher in the ACS than in AVR and SA groups (P<0.01). Postoperative pericardial concentration of all markers was significantly higher (P<0.01) than in serum in all groups. We conclude that preoperative pericardial accumulation of cTnI may reflect subclinical injury which may not be demonstrated by the usual laboratory tests.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Fernández et al. (2008) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: