Minimal invasive extracorporeal circulation in comorbid patients

Q4 Medicine
A.Sh. Revishvili, R.A. Kornelyuk, G.P. Plotnikov, L.B. Berikashvili, I.P. Komkov, E.S. Malyshenko, V.M. Zemskov, V.A. Popov
{"title":"Minimal invasive extracorporeal circulation in comorbid patients","authors":"A.Sh. Revishvili, R.A. Kornelyuk, G.P. Plotnikov, L.B. Berikashvili, I.P. Komkov, E.S. Malyshenko, V.M. Zemskov, V.A. Popov","doi":"10.21688/1681-3472-2023-3-62-73","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: As the severity of comorbid diseases increases, risks of cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) complications significantly increase. A complex of the procedure’s damaging factors provokes a systemic inflammatory response that in some cases is accompanied by the damage to target organs, transitioning from chronic organ dysfunctions into acute ones. Some studies on the use of minimal invasive extracorporeal circulation (MiECC) systems show their advantage over conventional extracorporeal circulation (CECC); however, the diversity of MiECC systems, patients, and outcomes precludes us from confidently extrapolating these data to older comorbid patients.Objective: To compare the severity of systemic inflammation and treatment outcomes in comorbid patients who underwent cardiac surgery with CECC and MiECC.Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 760 patients who consecutively underwent elective cardiac operations in 2019-2022. Inclusion criteria: comorbid status (age-adjusted Charlson Comorbidity Index score of ≥6); CPB time ≥90 min. Exclusion criteria: emergency surgery, refusal to participate in the study. A total of 68 patients met the inclusion criteria. We formed 2 study groups based on the extracorporeal circulation method: CECC group (n = 51) and MiECC group (n = 17). Control points: before CPB and 24 hours after the surgery (lactate; creatinine; oxygenation index, hemolysis level). For systemic inflammatory response markers: 1 hour after the CPB start and 24 hours after the CPB end (interleukin 6; interleukin 10; procalcitonin; C-reactive protein; soluble Triggering Receptor Expressed on Myeloid Cells-1 [sTREM-1]). We evaluated respiratory and renal complications, drainage-related hemorrhages, hemostatic disorders, the need for sympathomimetic drugs, and the length of stay in an intensive care unit and inpatient hospital.Results: Between the groups there were no statistically significant differences in gender and anthropometric characteristics, surgery types, and main perfusion parameters. In the CECC group, we observed significantly higher doses of vasoconstrictors (norepinephrine) as well as a decrease in urine output and lung injury and an increase in lactate and hemolysis. The systemic inflammatory response markers were also significantly higher.Conclusion: Compared with CECC, MiECC does not significantly affect the frequency of organ dysfunctions; however, it reduces the severity of the systemic inflammatory response and immune suppression that are trigger mechanisms for multiple organ dysfunction syndrome. It is particularly important for patients with chronic organ dysfunctions. A range of indications for MiECC systems should be defined given its high cost and off-target effect on pleiotropic factors of systemic inflammatory response development. Received 6 April 2023. Revised 17 August 2023. Accepted 18 August 2023. Funding: The study was conducted within the framework of the research project \"Development of minimally invasive and hybrid technologies for surgical treatment of heart diseases\". Conflict of interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. Contribution of the authorsConception and study design: A.Sh. Revishvili, G.P. Plotnikov, V.A. PopovData collection and analysis: R.A. Kornelyuk, L.B. Berikashvili, I.P. Komkov, E.S. Malyshenko, V.M. ZemskovStatistical analysis: L.B. BerikashviliDrafting the article: R.A. Kornelyuk, G.P. Plotnikov, L.B. Berikashvili Critical revision of the article: G.P. PlotnikovFinal approval of the version to be published: A.Sh. Revishvili, R.A. Kornelyuk, G.P. Plotnikov, L.B. Berikashvili, I.P. Komkov, E.S. Malyshenko, V.M. Zemskov, V.A. Popov","PeriodicalId":19853,"journal":{"name":"Patologiya krovoobrashcheniya i kardiokhirurgiya","volume":"47 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Patologiya krovoobrashcheniya i kardiokhirurgiya","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21688/1681-3472-2023-3-62-73","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: As the severity of comorbid diseases increases, risks of cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) complications significantly increase. A complex of the procedure’s damaging factors provokes a systemic inflammatory response that in some cases is accompanied by the damage to target organs, transitioning from chronic organ dysfunctions into acute ones. Some studies on the use of minimal invasive extracorporeal circulation (MiECC) systems show their advantage over conventional extracorporeal circulation (CECC); however, the diversity of MiECC systems, patients, and outcomes precludes us from confidently extrapolating these data to older comorbid patients.Objective: To compare the severity of systemic inflammation and treatment outcomes in comorbid patients who underwent cardiac surgery with CECC and MiECC.Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 760 patients who consecutively underwent elective cardiac operations in 2019-2022. Inclusion criteria: comorbid status (age-adjusted Charlson Comorbidity Index score of ≥6); CPB time ≥90 min. Exclusion criteria: emergency surgery, refusal to participate in the study. A total of 68 patients met the inclusion criteria. We formed 2 study groups based on the extracorporeal circulation method: CECC group (n = 51) and MiECC group (n = 17). Control points: before CPB and 24 hours after the surgery (lactate; creatinine; oxygenation index, hemolysis level). For systemic inflammatory response markers: 1 hour after the CPB start and 24 hours after the CPB end (interleukin 6; interleukin 10; procalcitonin; C-reactive protein; soluble Triggering Receptor Expressed on Myeloid Cells-1 [sTREM-1]). We evaluated respiratory and renal complications, drainage-related hemorrhages, hemostatic disorders, the need for sympathomimetic drugs, and the length of stay in an intensive care unit and inpatient hospital.Results: Between the groups there were no statistically significant differences in gender and anthropometric characteristics, surgery types, and main perfusion parameters. In the CECC group, we observed significantly higher doses of vasoconstrictors (norepinephrine) as well as a decrease in urine output and lung injury and an increase in lactate and hemolysis. The systemic inflammatory response markers were also significantly higher.Conclusion: Compared with CECC, MiECC does not significantly affect the frequency of organ dysfunctions; however, it reduces the severity of the systemic inflammatory response and immune suppression that are trigger mechanisms for multiple organ dysfunction syndrome. It is particularly important for patients with chronic organ dysfunctions. A range of indications for MiECC systems should be defined given its high cost and off-target effect on pleiotropic factors of systemic inflammatory response development. Received 6 April 2023. Revised 17 August 2023. Accepted 18 August 2023. Funding: The study was conducted within the framework of the research project "Development of minimally invasive and hybrid technologies for surgical treatment of heart diseases". Conflict of interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. Contribution of the authorsConception and study design: A.Sh. Revishvili, G.P. Plotnikov, V.A. PopovData collection and analysis: R.A. Kornelyuk, L.B. Berikashvili, I.P. Komkov, E.S. Malyshenko, V.M. ZemskovStatistical analysis: L.B. BerikashviliDrafting the article: R.A. Kornelyuk, G.P. Plotnikov, L.B. Berikashvili Critical revision of the article: G.P. PlotnikovFinal approval of the version to be published: A.Sh. Revishvili, R.A. Kornelyuk, G.P. Plotnikov, L.B. Berikashvili, I.P. Komkov, E.S. Malyshenko, V.M. Zemskov, V.A. Popov
微创体外循环在合并症患者中的应用
背景:随着合并症严重程度的增加,体外循环(CPB)并发症的风险显著增加。手术过程中损伤因素的复合体会引发全身炎症反应,在某些情况下,炎症反应会伴随着对目标器官的损害,从慢性器官功能障碍转变为急性器官功能障碍。一些关于使用微创体外循环(MiECC)系统的研究显示其优于传统体外循环(CECC);然而,MiECC系统、患者和结果的多样性使我们无法自信地将这些数据外推到老年合并症患者。目的:比较心脏手术合并CECC和MiECC合并症患者全身炎症的严重程度和治疗结果。方法:对760例2019-2022年连续接受心脏择期手术的患者进行回顾性队列研究。纳入标准:共病状态(年龄校正Charlson共病指数评分≥6);CPB时间≥90 min。排除标准:急诊手术,拒绝参与研究。共有68例患者符合纳入标准。我们根据体外循环方法分为2个研究组:CECC组(n = 51)和MiECC组(n = 17)。控制点:CPB前、术后24小时(乳酸;肌酐;氧合指数,溶血水平)。对于全身炎症反应标志物:CPB开始后1小时和CPB结束后24小时(白细胞介素6;白介素10;原降钙素;c反应蛋白;髓样细胞表达的可溶性触发受体-1 [sTREM-1])。我们评估了呼吸和肾脏并发症、引流相关出血、止血障碍、对拟交感神经药物的需求以及在重症监护病房和住院医院的住院时间。结果:两组患者在性别、人体测量特征、手术类型、主要灌注参数等方面无统计学差异。在CECC组中,我们观察到血管收缩剂(去甲肾上腺素)的剂量明显增加,尿量和肺损伤减少,乳酸和溶血增加。全身炎症反应指标也明显升高。结论:与CECC相比,MiECC对脏器功能障碍发生频率无显著影响;然而,它降低了作为多器官功能障碍综合征触发机制的全身炎症反应和免疫抑制的严重程度。这对慢性器官功能障碍患者尤为重要。鉴于MiECC系统的高成本和对全身性炎症反应发展的多效因子的脱靶效应,应该确定其适应症范围。收到2023年4月6日。2023年8月17日修订。2023年8月18日接受。资助:这项研究是在"开发用于心脏疾病手术治疗的微创和混合技术"研究项目框架内进行的。利益冲突:作者声明无利益冲突。作者贡献:构思与研究设计:A.Sh。数据收集和分析:R.A. Kornelyuk, L.B. Berikashvili, I.P. Komkov, E.S. Malyshenko, V.M. zemskov统计分析:L.B. Berikashvili文章起草:R.A. Kornelyuk, G.P. Plotnikov, L.B. Berikashvili文章评论修改:G.P. Plotnikov最终批准出版版本:A.Sh。雷维什维利,R.A. Kornelyuk, G.P. Plotnikov, L.B. Berikashvili, I.P. Komkov, E.S. Malyshenko, V.M. Zemskov, V.A. Popov
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Patologiya krovoobrashcheniya i kardiokhirurgiya
Patologiya krovoobrashcheniya i kardiokhirurgiya Medicine-Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
42
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信