Prevention of remote organ injury in cardiopulmonary bypass: the impact of flow generation technique

Protective effects of penehyclidine hydrochloride on liver injury in a rat cardiopulmonary bypass model

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Hepatic injury after cardiac surgery is considered to be a consequence of cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that penehyclidine hydrochloride (PHC) could attenuate hepatic injury using a rat CPB model.

METHODS

Male Sprague-Dawley rats were randomly divided into six groups (eight per group), including sham-operated control, sham low-dose PHC control (0.6 mg kg), sham high-dose PHC control (2.0 mg kg), vehicle control, low-dose PHC (0.6 mg kg) and high-dose PHC (2.0 mg kg)-treated groups. Blood samples were collected from the femoral artery at the cessation of CPB and the serum levels of the liver enzymes, including alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and aspartate aminotransferase (AST), were determined. The ultrastructure of liver tissue was also examined under an electron microscope.

RESULTS

In the sham-operated groups, high-dose PHC and low-dose PHC had no significant impact on the levels of respiratory rate, heart rate, blood pressure, ECG, ALT or AST. Compared with the sham group, the serum levels of ALT and AST were increased significantly in the surgical groups. PHC alleviated all the biochemical and histopathological changes in a dose-dependent manner. The ALT and AST levels in the high-dose PHC-treated groups were significantly lower than those in the vehicle control group.

CONCLUSION

Treatment with penehyclidine hydrochloride could improve liver function during CPB.

Pulsatile Versus Nonpulsatile Cardiopulmonary Bypass Flow: An Evidence-Based Approach

OBJECTIVE

To derive evidence-based recommendations for the use of pulsatile perfusion (PP) technique for the reduction of mortality and nonfatal complications after elective coronary artery bypass grafting surgery (CABG).

OUTCOMES

Incidence of total mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and renal failure during hospital stay.

EVIDENCE

Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane controlled trial register (CCTR) on the Cochrane library were searched from the earliest achievable date of each database to March 2005. No language restrictions were applied. Retrieved reprints were evaluated according to a priori inclusion criteria, and those included were critically appraised using established internal validity criteria. BENEFITS AND HARMS: Only one fair quality randomized controlled trial demonstrated the beneficial effect of PP in reducing the incidence of total mortality and MI. No studies demonstrated the beneficial effect of PP in reducing the incidence of stoke or renal failure. One randomized controlled trial demonstrated that PP was associated with increased hemolysis compared to nonpulsatile (NP) perfusion.

CONCLUSION

The evidence is conflicting and therefore does not support making recommendation for or against routinely providing the PP to reduce the incidence of mortality or MI. The evidence is insufficient to recommend for or against routinely providing the pulsatile profusion to reduce the incidence of stroke or renal failure.