• R Rimpiläinen, F Biancari, J O Wistbacka, P Loponen, S P Koivisto, J Rimpiläinen, K Teittinen, and J Nissinen.
• Department of Anesthesiology, Oulu University Hospital, Oulu, Finland.
• Perfusion. 2008 Nov 1;23(6):361-7.

AbstractWe have reviewed the results of our experience with the use of miniaturized (Mini-CPB) versus conventional (C-CPB) cardiopulmonary bypass in coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG). This study included 365 patients who underwent CABG with C-CPB and 101 patients with Mini-CPB. In-hospital mortality was lower in the C-CPB group (1.4% vs. 3.0%, P = 0.38). A better, but not statistically significant, immediate outcome was observed in the C-CPB group as indicated by a shorter length of stay in the intensive care unit as well as a lower incidence of combined adverse end-point. However, this was probably due to significantly higher operative risk in the Mini-CPB group (logistic EuroSCORE: 8.5 +/- 10.0 vs. 4.6 +/- 7.1, P < 0.0001). Seventy-seven propensity score-matched pairs had similar immediate postoperative results after Mini-CPB and C-CPB (30-day mortality: 1.3% vs. 1.3%; stroke: 0% vs. 0%; intensive care unit stay > or = 5 days: 6.5% vs. 9.1%; combined adverse events: 14.3% vs. 11.7%). Mini-CPB achieves similar results to C-CPB in patients undergoing isolated CABG. The potential efficacy of Mini-CPB is expected to be more evident in high-risk patients or in complex cardiac surgery requiring much longer cardiopulmonary perfusion.

12 keywords...

hide…