PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
March 1, 1990Journal of ExtraCorporeal Technology7 citationsOpen Access

Hematologic Derangements of Cardiopulmonary Bypass: AComparison of Two Perfusion Systems

GZGretchen M. ZirbelMLMary Elizabeth LetsonJKJeffrey N. Kauffman

Key Points

Key points are not available for this paper at this time.

Abstract

A major goal of new perfusion equipment is minimal trauma to blood elements. This study compares two perfusion systems, quantifies the change in blood components and generation of microemboli, as well as compares the hospital courses of each perfusion system. Forty-four coronary patients were assigned to either Group S, a silicone rubber membrane (SciMed) and centrifugal pump (Bio-Medicus) (N=19) or Group C (our routine equipment), a microporous polypropylene membrane (COBE CML) and roller pump (COBE)(N=25). The rise in plasma hemoglobin (26±14mg* in Group S and 26±17mg* in Group C), the drop in hematocrit (-15.0±3.9* in GroupS and -14.7±3.8* in Group Cat the second post-op day), and the decrease in platelet count (-152,000±78,000* in Group S and -129,000±52,000* in Group C) were similar in both groups. There was no difference in rise in post-op alveolararterial oxygen gradients or debris generated by each system. 27.7% in Group S required red cell transfusions and only 8% required red cell transfusions in Group C. There was no significant difference in clinical endpoints such as ICU stay, hospital stay and complication rate. We found no advantage to more expensive perfusion devices and no improvement upon the extensive CPB damage to formed blood elements.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Zirbel et al. (1990) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a1fdf63702b8f8c062e41a5https://doi.org/10.1051/ject/1990221015
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper