Key result
Ischaemic arrest followed by coronary perfusion on a fibrillating heart caused a statistically significantly higher efflux of enzymes after bypass compared to either technique alone.
Why the study?
Does ischaemic arrest continued by coronary perfusion on a fibrillating heart increase myocardial enzyme efflux compared to coronary perfusion or ischaemic arrest alone in patients undergoing cardiopulmonary bypass?
Observational (n=40)
Does ischaemic arrest continued by coronary perfusion on a fibrillating heart increase myocardial enzyme efflux compared to coronary perfusion or ischaemic arrest alone in patients undergoing cardiopulmonary bypass?
Ischaemic arrest followed by extended coronary perfusion on a fibrillating heart increases myocardial enzyme efflux and should be avoided during cardiopulmonary bypass.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Was associated with greater myocardial enzyme efflux; hypothesis-generating and should not yet change bypass protection practice.
H.E. Hansson (1976) conducted an observational in Aortic or mitral valve disease (n=40). Ischaemic arrest continued by coronary perfusion vs. Coronary perfusion alone or ischaemic arrest alone was evaluated on Efflux of enzymes (GOT, GPT, CPK, LDH) in lymph and serum after bypass. Ischaemic arrest followed by coronary perfusion on a fibrillating heart caused a statistically significantly higher efflux of enzymes after bypass compared to either technique alone.
Synapse has enriched one closely related paper. Consider it for comparative context: