Safe cross-clamp time using Custodiol®-histidine-tryptophan-ketoglutarate cardioplegia in the adult

Comparison of Bretschneider HTK cardioplegia solution and blood cardioplegia in terms of postoperative results in patients who underwent isolated supracoronary ascending aortic replacement

INTRODUCTION

Cardiac arrest with cardioplegia is the most common and reliable method of myocardial protection in cardiac surgery, but there is no definite consensus on the use of different types of cardioplegia. Two of the commonly used types of cardioplegia are Bretschneider histidine-tryptophan-ketoglutarate solution (Custodiol) and conventional blood cardioplegia. In this study, Custodiol solution and conventional blood cardioplegia used in patients with type A aortic dissection who underwent supracoronary ascending aortic replacement were aimed to be compared in terms of postoperative results.

METHODS

70 patients with type A aortic dissection who underwent supracoronary ascending aortic replacement in our clinic between January 2011 - October 2020 were included. Patients were divided into two groups, blood cardioplegia group (n = 48) and Custodiol group (n = 22) and they were compared regarding preoperative, perioperative and postoperative variables.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference between cardiopulmonary bypass time and cross-clamp time (p = 0.17 and p = 0.16, respectively). Mechanical ventilator weaning time, intensive care unit stay and hospital stay were shorter in Custodiol group (p = 0.04,p = 0.03 and p = 0.05, respectively). While inotropic support need was higher in the blood cardioplegia group (p = 0.001), there was no significant difference in terms of mortality, arrhythmia, neurological complications and renal complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results show that Custodiol cardioplegia solution may be superior to blood cardioplegia in reducing mechanical ventilation weaning period, intensive care and hospital stay, and reducing the use of inotropic agents in patients with type A aortic dissection undergoing supracoronary ascending aorta replacement.

Effect of Urine Output on the Predictive Precision of NephroCheck in On-Pump Cardiac Surgery With Crystalloid Cardioplegia: Insights from the PrevAKI Study

OBJECTIVES

Previous studies in other settings suggested that urine output (UO) might affect NephroCheck predictive value. We investigated the correlation between NephroCheck and UO in cardiac surgery patients.

DESIGN

Post hoc analysis of a multicenter study.

SETTING

University hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients who underwent cardiac surgery using cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) and crystalloid cardioplegia.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

All patients underwent NephroCheck testing 4 hours after CPB discontinuation. The primary outcome was the correlation between UO, NephroCheck results, and acute kidney injury (AKI, defined according to Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes). Of 354 patients, 337 were included. Median NephroCheck values were 0.06 (ng/mL)2/1,000) for the overall population and 0.15 (ng/mL)2/1,000) for patients with moderate to severe AKI. NephroCheck showed a significant inverse correlation with UO (ρ = -0.17; p = 0.002) at the time of measurement. The area under the receiver characteristic curve (AUROC) for NephroCheck was 0.60 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.54-0.65), whereas for serum creatinine was 0.82 (95% CI, 0.78-0.86; p < 0.001). When limiting the analysis to the prediction of moderate to severe AKI, NephroCheck had a AUROC of 0.82 (95% CI, 0.77 to 0.86; p<0.0001), while creatinine an AUROC of 0.83 (95% CI, 0.79-0.87; p = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

NephroCheck measured 4 hours after the discontinuation from the CPB predicts moderate to severe AKI. However, a lower threshold may be necessary in patients undergoing cardiac surgery with CPB. Creatinine measured at the same time of the test remains a reliable marker of subsequent development of renal failure.

Comparison of modified Del Nido and Custodiol® cardioplegia in minimally invasive mitral valve surgery

OBJECTIVES

In this study, we evaluated if modified Del Nido cardioplegia delivers comparable cardiac protection in comparison to Custodiol® in patients undergoing isolated minimally invasive mitral valve repair.

METHODS

From January 2018 to October 2021, all patients undergoing non-emergent isolated minimally invasive mitral valve repair were included in this study. The cardioplegia was chosen at the surgeons' discretion. The primary end points of this study were peak postoperative cardiac enzyme levels. Secondary end points were in-hospital mortality, hospital stay, occurrence of cardiac arrhythmias, pacemaker implantations, postoperative lactate and sodium levels and postoperative incidence of renal failure requiring dialysis.

RESULTS

A total of 355 patients were included in this study. The mean age of patients was 57. After propensity score matching, a total of 156 pairs were identified. There was no difference in cross-clamp time between both groups. Postoperative creatine kinase levels were higher in patients receiving Custodiol on the 1st and 2nd postoperative days. Creatine kinase isoenzyme MB levels were higher in patients receiving Custodiol on the 2nd postoperative day (0.5 ± 0.2 vs 0.4 ± 0.1 µmol/l s; P < 0.001). Postoperative Troponin T concentrations were similar between both groups. Maximum lactate concentrations were higher in patients receiving Custodiol on the day of surgery (2.4 ± 1.9 vs 2.0 ± 1.1 mmol/l; P = 0.04). The overall hospital stay was longer in patients receiving Del Nido cardioplegia (10.6 ± 3.2 vs 8 ± 4.1 days; P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Modified Del Nido cardioplegia based on Ionosteril® solution offers equivalent protection compared to Custodiol for isolated minimally invasive mitral valve repair.

Single-Dose St. Thomas Versus Custodiol® Cardioplegia for Right Mini-thoracotomy Mitral Valve Surgery

OBJECTIVE

Custodiol® and St. Thomas cardioplegia are widely employed in mini-thoracotomy mitral valve (MV) operations. One-dose of the former provides 3 h of myocardial protection. Conversely, St. Thomas solution is usually reinfused every 30 min and safety of single delivery is unknown. We aimed to compare single-shot St. Thomas versus Custodiol® cardioplegia.

METHODS

Primary endpoint of the prospective observational study was cardiac troponin T level at different post-operative time-points. Propensity-weighted treatment served to adjust for confounding factors.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine patients receiving St. Thomas were compared with 25 patients receiving Custodiol® cardioplegia; cross-clamping always exceeded 45 min. No differences were found in postoperative markers of myocardial injury. Ventricular fibrillation at the resumption of electric activity was more frequent following Custodiol® cardioplegia (P = .01).

CONCLUSION

Effective myocardial protection exceeding 1 h of ischemic arrest can be achieved with a single-dose St. Thomas cardioplegia in selected patients undergoing right mini-thoracotomy MV surgery.

Theoretical and Practical Aspects in the Use of Bretschneider Cardioplegia

The race for an ideal cardioplegic solution has remained enthusiastic since the beginning of the modern cardiac surgery era. The Bretschneider solution, belonging to the “intracellular cardioplegic” group, is safe and practical in myocardial protection during ischemic time. Over time, some particular concerns have arisen regarding the effects on cardiac metabolism and postoperative myocardial functioning. This paper reviews the most important standpoints in terms of theoretical and practical analyses.

Safety of Custodiol cardioplegia: a cohort study in patients undergoing cardiac surgery with elongated aortic cross-clamp time

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

The increasing complexity of patients undergoing cardiac surgery requires extended myocardial ischaemic periods. Cardiac surgeons demand a cardioplegic solution with prolonged myocardial protection. Therefore, we introduced Custodiol in our centre in 2011. The aim of this study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of Custodiol compared with the standard method of cardioplegia.

METHODS

Between 2011 and 2016, 188 adult patients who underwent mitral valve surgery combined with coronary artery bypass grafting were included in this retrospective study. In 113 patients, Custodiol cardioplegia was used to achieve cardiac arrest, while St. Thomas Hospital solution was used in 75 patients. The primary endpoint of the study was the degree myocardial damage which was estimated by the measurement of creatine kinase-myocardial band on the first postoperative day. A linear regression analysis was performed to compare the aortic cross-clamp time with the postoperative myocardial damage in both groups.

RESULTS

The extracorporeal circulation time and aortic cross-clamp were significantly longer in the Custodiol group than in the St. Thomas group: 125.6 ± 32.5 minutes versus 93.1 ± 27.7 minutes (p < 0.001), respectively. However, there was no significant difference between the two groups regarding the postoperative levels of creatine kinase-myocardial band (96 (70-140) U/L vs. 86 (69-120) U/L, respectively; p = 0.321). There was no significant differences between the two groups regarding the 30-day mortality (6.1% vs. 5.5%, respectively; p = 1.000) or 120-day mortality (9.6% vs. 11.0%, respectively; p = 0.806).

CONCLUSION

Our findings demonstrate that Custodiol is a safe method of myocardial protection for patients who underwent mitral valve surgery with coronary artery bypass grafting in our hospital. Further investigations extended to more cardiac surgery populations are needed to confirm clinical benefits of Custodiol cardioplegia.