Prolonged warm ischemia for transfusion-free arterial switch and ventricular septal defect surgery in a 4.5-Kg baby

Rationale for Implementation of Warm Cardiac Surgery in Pediatrics

Cardiac surgery was developed thanks to the introduction of hypothermia and cardiopulmonary bypass in the early 1950s. The deep hypothermia protective effect has been essential to circulatory arrest complex cases repair. During the early times of open-heart surgery, a major concern was to decrease mortality and to improve short-term outcomes. Both mortality and morbidity dramatically decreased over a few decades. As a consequence, the drawbacks of deep hypothermia, with or without circulatory arrest, became more and more apparent. The limitation of hypothermia was particularly evident for the brain and regional perfusion was introduced as a response to this problem. Despite a gain in popularity, the results of regional perfusion were not fully convincing. In the 1990s, warm surgery was introduced in adults and proved to be safe and reliable. This option eliminates the deleterious effect of ischemia-reperfusion injuries through a continuous, systemic coronary perfusion with warm oxygenated blood. Intermittent warm blood cardioplegia was introduced later, with impressive results. We were convinced by the easiness, safety, and efficiency of warm surgery and shifted to warm pediatric surgery in a two-step program. This article outlines the limitations of hypothermic protection and the basic reasons that led us to implement pediatric warm surgery. After tens of thousands of cases performed across several centers, this reproducible technique proved a valuable alternative to hypothermic surgery.

Is there a rationale for short cardioplegia re-dosing intervals?

While cardioplegia has been used on millions of patients during the last decades, the debate over the best technique is still going on. Cardioplegia is not only meant to provide a non-contracting heart and a field without blood, thus avoiding the risk of gas emboli, but also used for myocardial protection. Its electromechanical effect is easily confirmed through direct vision of the heart and continuous electrocardiogram monitoring, but there is no consensus on the best way to assess the quality of myocardial protection. The optimal approach is thus far from clear and the considerable amount of literature on the subject fails to provide a definite answer. Cardioplegia composition (crystalloid vs blood, with or without various substrate enhancement), temperature and site(s) of injection have been extensively researched. While less frequently studied, re-dosing interval is also an important factor. A common and intuitive idea is that shorter re-dosing intervals lead to improved myocardial protection. A vast majority of surgeons use re-dosing intervals of 20-30 min, or even less, during coronary artery bypass graft and multidose cardioplegia has been the “gold standard” for decades. However, one-shot cardioplegia is becoming more commonly used and is likely to be a valuable alternative. Some surgeons prefer the comfort of single-shot cardioplegia while others feel more confident with shorter re-dosing intervals. There is no guarantee that a single strategy can be safely applied to all patients, irrespective of their age, comorbidities or cardiopathy. The goal of this review is to discuss the rationale for short re-dosing intervals.