• D A Stump, T J Jones, and K D Rorie.
• Department of Anesthesiology, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC 27157-1009, USA.
• J. Cardiothorac. Vasc. Anesth. 1999 Oct 1;13(5):600-13.

AbstractThe first step to make in improving neurologic outcome is to recognize and accept neurologic injury occurs in all patient groups undergoing CPB. Fortunately, that stage has now been passed. Accurate detection and documentation of the incidence of brain injury is the next progression. At the same time, the cause of the injury needs to be established. Since the introduction of CPB, numerous improvements and refinements have been achieved, making it the acceptable, everyday clinical tool that has enabled the development of cardiac surgery. Despite these improvements, CPB-related morbidity persists. The advent of new technologic advances drives the quest for new techniques. New protective strategies for many end organs, including the heart, kidney, and brain, are evolving. No organ system should be viewed in isolation; otherwise, organ-specific protective strategies may arise in conflict. A strategy that confers absolute myocardial protection would be ideal, but at what cost to the protection of the kidneys, intestines, and brain? A neuroprotective strategy would ideally eliminate brain injury and be beneficial for all organs. The only way to continue to make progress is by the scientific evaluation of new techniques. The use of appropriate monitoring and outcome measures is fundamental to this process.

15 keywords...

hide…