Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
Rationale: The choice of strategy for myocardial protection during procedures with cardiopulmonary bypass and cardioplegic arrest in children is not regulated by clinical guidelines due to insufficient data from clinical studies. The issue of methods to assess myocardial injury remains unresolved. Aim: To assess the frequency and specifics of the development of intraoperative myocardial injury syndrome in children of the first year of life with ventricular septal defect depending on the strategy for cardioplegia. Materials and methods: In a single center, prospective, randomized controlled trial we compared two cardioplegia strategies during surgical closure of ventricular septal defect in infants aged from 1 to 12 months: del Nido blood cardioplegia (n = 102) and cold crystalloid cardioplegia with Custodiol solution (n = 102). The primary endpoint was a persistent over 10-fold increase above the upper limit of the normal in the plasma concentration of high-sensitivity troponin I at 6 hours after surgery persisting after 24 hours. The secondary combined endpoint was myocardial damage verified by persistent increase in troponin I level more than 10-fold above the upper limit of the normal, persisting at 6 and 24 hours, accompanied by new pathological Q waves, acute complete left bundle branch block, abnormalities of the end part of the ventricular complex on the electrocardiography (ST segment elevation 1 mm or ST depression of 1 mm in more than 2 adjacent leads), and a decrease in the global longitudinal strain of the left ventricle by 50% from the initial value at 6 hours after surgery. Results: In 53/204 (26%) patients, the increase in troponin I persisted at 24 hours after the surgery and was associated with electrocardiography abnormalities, changes in the parameters of left ventricle longitudinal mechanics, and in some cases required greater inotropic support. By the end of the 1st postoperative 24 hours, the longitudinal strain of the left ventricle showed more negative changes over time in the Custodiol group compared to that in the del Nido group (-10 [-14.1; -6.27] versus -14.8 [- 16.5; -10]%; p 0.0001). The same was true for the left ventricle global strain rate (-0.71 [-0.9; -0.52] s-1 in the del Nido group and -0.57 [-0.760; - 0.44] s-1 in the Custodiol group; p = 0.0049). The primary endpoint was achieved by 21 (20.6%) and 55 (53.9%) patients in the del Nido and Custodiol groups, respectively (p = 0.032). The combined endpoint in the Custodiol group was achieved by 34 (33.3%) versus 19 (18.6%) patients in the del Nido group (p = 0.049, χ2 = 3.875, DF = 1, φ = 0.191). Conclusion: Del Nido blood cardioplegia compared to cold crystalloid cardioplegia with Custodiol has advantages in terms of preventing intraoperative myocardial damage and minimizing its severity. When assessing myocardial damage, such indicators as left ventricle global longitudinal strain and left ventricle global strain rate are informative, along with an increase in the troponin I level.
Rationale: The choice of strategy for myocardial protection during procedures with cardiopulmonary bypass and cardioplegic arrest in children is not regulated by clinical guidelines due to insufficient data from clinical studies. The issue of methods to assess myocardial injury remains unresolved. Aim: To assess the frequency and specifics of the development of intraoperative myocardial injury syndrome in children of the first year of life with ventricular septal defect depending on the strategy for cardioplegia. Materials and methods: In a single center, prospective, randomized controlled trial we compared two cardioplegia strategies during surgical closure of ventricular septal defect in infants aged from 1 to 12 months: del Nido blood cardioplegia (n = 102) and cold crystalloid cardioplegia with Custodiol solution (n = 102). The primary endpoint was a persistent over 10-fold increase above the upper limit of the normal in the plasma concentration of high-sensitivity troponin I at 6 hours after surgery persisting after 24 hours. The secondary combined endpoint was myocardial damage verified by persistent increase in troponin I level more than 10-fold above the upper limit of the normal, persisting at 6 and 24 hours, accompanied by new pathological Q waves, acute complete left bundle branch block, abnormalities of the end part of the ventricular complex on the electrocardiography (ST segment elevation 1 mm or ST depression of 1 mm in more than 2 adjacent leads), and a decrease in the global longitudinal strain of the left ventricle by 50% from the initial value at 6 hours after surgery. Results: In 53/204 (26%) patients, the increase in troponin I persisted at 24 hours after the surgery and was associated with electrocardiography abnormalities, changes in the parameters of left ventricle longitudinal mechanics, and in some cases required greater inotropic support. By the end of the 1st postoperative 24 hours, the longitudinal strain of the left ventricle showed more negative changes over time in the Custodiol group compared to that in the del Nido group (-10 [-14.1; -6.27] versus -14.8 [- 16.5; -10]%; p 0.0001). The same was true for the left ventricle global strain rate (-0.71 [-0.9; -0.52] s-1 in the del Nido group and -0.57 [-0.760; - 0.44] s-1 in the Custodiol group; p = 0.0049). The primary endpoint was achieved by 21 (20.6%) and 55 (53.9%) patients in the del Nido and Custodiol groups, respectively (p = 0.032). The combined endpoint in the Custodiol group was achieved by 34 (33.3%) versus 19 (18.6%) patients in the del Nido group (p = 0.049, χ2 = 3.875, DF = 1, φ = 0.191). Conclusion: Del Nido blood cardioplegia compared to cold crystalloid cardioplegia with Custodiol has advantages in terms of preventing intraoperative myocardial damage and minimizing its severity. When assessing myocardial damage, such indicators as left ventricle global longitudinal strain and left ventricle global strain rate are informative, along with an increase in the troponin I level.
Background:Conventional methods of closure of ventricular septal defects involve placement of sutures 4-5 mm from the posterior inferior margin. This study compares the conventional method with an alternative technique wherein sutures are placed along the edge of the defect thereby “excluding” the conduction system and the tensor apparatus of the tricuspid valve from the suture line.Materials and Methods:Between January 2013 and January 2016, 409 consecutive patients were retrospectively reviewed and divided into two matched groups. Group A (n = 174) underwent closure using the alternative technique and Group B (n = 235) with the conventional technique. Patients with isolated ventricular septal defects (VSDs) (n = 136) were separately analyzed as were infants within this subset.Results:Immediate postoperative results were similar with no statistically significant differences in either group in terms of incidence of residual defects or postoperative tricuspid regurgitation. There was however a significantly increased incidence of post operative complete heart block (CHB) among patients in the conventional group (P = 0.02). Incidence of temporary heart block that reverted to sinus rhythm was also more in the conventional method group (Group B) (P = 0.03) as was right bundle branch block (P ≤ 0.05) in all the subsets of patients analyzed.Conclusion:Surgical closure of VSDs can be accomplished by placing sutures along the margins or away with comparable results. The incidence of CHB, however, seems to be less when the “excluding” technique is employed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.