Key result
Two-phase leukocyte filtration lowers inflammatory markers and preserves myocardial function vs no filtration in high-risk patients.
Why the study?
The clinical outcome, inflammatory response, and myocardial function associated with different leukocyte depletion strategies in high-risk patients undergoing coronary revascularization required investigation.
Does two-phase leukocyte filtration reduce inflammatory response and myocardial injury in high-risk patients undergoing coronary revascularization with cardiopulmonary bypass?
RCT (n=40)
Investigator-blinded
Prospective randomization
No
Does two-phase leukocyte filtration reduce inflammatory response and myocardial injury in high-risk patients undergoing coronary revascularization with cardiopulmonary bypass?
p-value: p=<0.05
Two-phase leukocyte filtration during cardiopulmonary bypass in high-risk patients may reduce the systemic inflammatory response and preserve myocardial function compared to no filtration or single-filter strategies.
May support two-phase filtration in high-risk CPB revascularization; confirms anti-inflammatory and myocardial benefits in RCT.
The purpose of this study was to investigate the clinical outcome, inflammatory response and myocardial function in high-risk patients undergoing three different leukocyte depletion strategies. Over a four-month period, forty patients (EuroSCORE 6+) undergoing coronary revascularization were prospectively randomized to one of the four perfusion protocols: Group 1 (N=10): Conventional circuits (ECC) + two leukocyte filters (LG6B, Pall, USA) with the method of two-phase (continuous + strategic) leukofiltration; Group 2 (N=10): ECC + single leukocyte filter with the method of continuous leukofiltration; Group 3 (N=10): ECC + single leukocyte filter with the method of strategic leukofiltration; Group 4 (N=10) CONTROL: ECC without leukocyte filtration. Blood samples were collected at T1: Baseline, T2: On CPB, T3: X-Clamp, T4: Off CPB, T5: ICU24 and T6: ICU48. Perioperative follow-up was thoroughly monitored. Leukocyte counts in double filter and strategic filtration groups demonstrated significant differences at T4 (p < .05 vs. control). TNFalpha levels were significantly lower in Group 1 at T4 and procalcitonin levels at T5 and T6 (p < .05 vs. control). CKMB levels demonstrated well preserved myocardium in double filter group (p < .05 vs. control). Brain natriuretic peptide levels in double filter group were significantly lower at T5 and T6 with respect to Group 2 (p <.05) and control (p <.001). Matrixmetallopeptidase 9 and D-Dimer levels in double filter group were significantly lower at T5 and T6 (p <.05 vs. control).Two-phase leukofiltration is associated with some compound benefit over continuous deployment in high-risk patients. A larger more powerful study than this pilot one is warranted for further evaluation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Günaydın et al. (2009) conducted an RCT in High-risk patients undergoing coronary revascularization with cardiopulmonary bypass (n=40). Two-phase leukocyte filtration vs. Conventional circuits without leukocyte filtration was evaluated on Inflammatory response (leukocyte counts, TNF-alpha, procalcitonin) and myocardial function (CKMB) (p=<0.05). Two-phase leukocyte filtration significantly reduced inflammatory markers, including TNF-alpha and procalcitonin, and better preserved myocardial function compared to no filtration in high-risk patients.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: