4.6 Article Proceedings Paper

Tissue oxygenation index is a useful monitor of histologic and neurologic outcome after cardiopulmonary bypass in piglets

期刊

出版社

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2005.02.058

关键词

-

资金

  1. NHLBI NIH HHS [2R01HL60922] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: Tissue oxygenation index is a novel monitoring indicator derived by near-infrared spectroscopy. We hypothesized that tissue oxygenation index could predict a minimum safe flow rate for specific bypass conditions. Methods: Thirty-six piglets (age, 43 +/- 5 days; weight, 9.0 +/- 1.1 kg) underwent cardiopulmonary bypass with cerebral near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRO-300; Hamamatsu Photonics K.K., Hamamatsu City, Japan). Animals were cooled for 40 minutes to 15 degrees C, 25 degrees C, or 34 degrees C (pH-stat, hematocrit value of 20% or 30%, and pump flow of 100 mL center dot kg(-1) center dot min(-1)), followed by low-flow perfusion (10, 25, or 50 mL center dot kg(-1) center dot min(-1)) for 2 hours. Neurologic and behavioral evaluations were determined for 4 days. The brain was then fixed for histologic assessment. Tissue oxygenation index was defined as the average signal during low-flow bypass. Results: Animals with an average tissue oxygenation index of less than 55% showed cerebral injury, whereas animals with an index of greater than 55% showed minimal or no evidence of injury. Correlations were found between average tissue oxygenation index and histologic score (Spearman rho = -0.65, P < .001) and neurologic deficit score (Pearson r = -0.50, P = .002) on the first postoperative day. Temperature (P < .001), flow rate (P < .001), and hematocrit value (P = .002) were multivariable predictors of tissue oxygenation index, as determined by means of multivariable analysis of variance. Conclusion: Tissue oxygenation index is a useful monitor for defining the minimum safe flow rate during cardiopulmonary bypass. An index value of less than 55% is a strong predictor of neurologic injury.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据