4.6 Article

Remote ischemic preconditioning reduces myocardial injury after coronary artery bypass surgery with crystalloid cardioplegic arrest

期刊

BASIC RESEARCH IN CARDIOLOGY
卷 105, 期 5, 页码 657-664

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s00395-010-0104-5

关键词

Cardioprotection; Coronary artery disease; Bypass surgery; Remote ischemic preconditioning; Reperfusion; Revascularization

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Remote ischemic preconditioning (RIPC) with transient upper limb ischemia reduces myocardial injury in patients undergoing on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) with cross-clamp fibrillation or blood cardioplegia for myocardial protection. Whether or not such protection is still operative when standard crystalloid cardioplegic arrest is used is uncertain. Fifty-three consecutive, non-diabetic patients with triple-vessel disease and 64 +/- A 12 years of age (mean +/- A SD), who underwent elective CABG surgery with crystalloid (Bretschneider) cardioplegic arrest, were allocated in a prospective, randomized, single-blinded protocol to receive either a RIPC protocol (3 cycles of 5 min transient left upper arm ischemia induced by inflating a blood pressure cuff to 200 mmHg with 5 min of reperfusion) or control, respectively, after induction of anesthesia. Cardiac troponin I (cTnI) concentration was measured preoperatively and over 72 h postoperatively, and the area under the curve (AUC) was calculated. Peak postoperative cTnI concentration was significantly reduced from 13.7 +/- A 7.7 ng/mL in controls to 8.9 +/- A 4.4 ng/mL in RIPC (P = 0.008). Mean cTnI concentration was significantly lower at 6, 12, 24, and 48 h after surgery (ANOVA; P < 0.0001) in the RIPC patients (N = 27) than in controls (N = 26), resulting in a 44.5% reduction of cTnI (AUC at 72 h). RIPC by repetitive inflation of a cuff around the left upper arm before surgery enhances myocardial protection in patients undergoing CABG surgery with antegrade cold crystalloid cardioplegia.

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