Re-exploration for excessive bleeding after coronary artery bypass surgery: how early is better?

Intraoperative Use of Epsilon Amino Caproic Acid and Tranexamic Acid in Surgeries Performed Under Cardiopulmonary Bypass: a Comparative Study To Assess Their Impact On Reopening Due To Postoperative Bleeding

Background

Open heart surgeries under cardiopulmonary bypass are associated with excessive perioperative bleeding that often requires reoperation. Antifibrinolytics like epsilon aminocaproic acid and tranexamic acid are widely used to control bleeding. There are limited studies primarily showing the impact of these drugs on the incidence of reopening following open heart surgical procedures. The goal of this study was to compare incidence of reopening following open heart surgeries in patients who were administered either epsilon amino caproic acid or tranexamic acid for control of perioperative bleeding.

Methods

A prospective, randomized, controlled trial was performed among seventy-eight patients of either sex in the age group of 18 to 65 years scheduled for open heart surgeries under cardiopulmonary bypass. They were randomly allocated into three groups where group A (n=26) received epsilon aminocaproic acid, group B (n=26) received tranexamic acid and group C (control group, n=26) received intravenous 0.9% normal saline. Patients had similar anaesthetic protocols, and were monitored for twenty-four hours postoperatively to assess reopening rates because of excessive bleeding.

Results

Two patients in each group receiving either tranexamic acid or epsilon aminocaproic acid had excessive bleeding requiring reopening after surgery whereas three patients in the control group had undergone reopening for excessive bleeding (p>0.05).

Conclusions

Epsilon aminocaproic acid and tranexamic acid exhibit similar and comparable effect to placebo on incidence of reopening for excessive bleeding following open heart surgeries under cardiopulmonary bypass

Multifilament Cable Wire versus Conventional Wire for Sternal Closure in Patients Undergoing Major Cardiac Surgery

Background

Stainless steel wiring remains the most popular technique for primary sternal closure. Recently, a multifilament cable wiring system (Pioneer Surgical Technology Inc., Marquette, MI, USA) was introduced for sternal closure and has gained wide acceptance due to its superior resistance to tension. We aimed to compare conventional steel wiring to multifilament cable fixation for sternal closure in patients undergoing major cardiac surgery.

Methods

Data were collected retrospectively on 1,354 patients who underwent sternal closure after major cardiac surgery, using either the multifilament cable wiring system or conventional steel wires between January 2009 and October 2010. The surgical outcomes of these two groups of patients were compared using propensity score matching based on 18 baseline patient characteristics.

Results

Propensity score matching yielded 392 pairs of patients in the two groups whose baseline profiles showed no significant differences. No significant differences between the two groups were observed in the rates of early mortality (2.0% vs. 1.3%, p=0.578), major wound complications requiring reconstruction (1.3% vs. 1.3%, p>0.99), minor wound complications (3.6% vs. 2.0%, p=0.279), or mediastinitis (0.8% vs. 1.0%, p=1.00). Patients in the multifilament cable group had fewer sternal bleeding events than those in the conventional wire group, but this tendency was not statistically significant (4.3% vs. 7.4%, p=0.068).

Conclusion

The surgical outcomes of sternal closure using multifilament cable wires were comparable to those observed when conventional steel wires were used. Therefore, the multifilament cable wiring system may be considered a viable option for sternal closure in patients undergoing major cardiac surgery.