Logo image
Back
Myocardial Protection during Aortic Valve Replacement
Journal article   Open access   Peer reviewed

Myocardial Protection during Aortic Valve Replacement

Donald G. Mulder, Gordon N. Olinger, Douglas H. McConnell, James V. Maloney, Gerald D. Buckberg and Dov Jaron
The Annals of thoracic surgery, v 21(2), pp 123-130
1976
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-4975(10)64274-9
PMID: 1267908
url
https://doi.org/10.1016/s0003-4975(10)64274-9View
Published, Version of Record (VoR)Maybe Open Access (Publisher Bronze),  Open
url
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-4975(10)64274-9View
Published, Version of Record (VoR) Open

Abstract

The results following aortic valve replacement (AVR) were compared in 40 patients in whom the myocardium was protected by topical hypothermic arrest or continuous coronary perfusion with sustained electrical fibrillation (Group A) and 40 similar patients in whom the hearts were also continuously perfused but were kept in the beating state (Group B). The operative mortality was not greatly different between the two groups, being 10 and 5%, respectively. The postperfusion cardiac performance was strikingly different, however. Seventeen patients (43%) in Group A required inotropic support, while this was necessary in only 1 patient (3%) in Group B. In this instance, recurrent ventricular fibrillation persisted despite attempts at reversion. These data show that the myocardium is preserved best during AVR when continuous coronary perfusion is used and the heart is maintained in the beating state.

Metrics

4 Record Views
14 citations in Web of Science
12 citations in Scopus

Details

Logo image