Is There Still a Role for Aprotinin in Cardiac Surgery?

The effect of ulinastatin on postoperative blood loss in patients undergoing open heart surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass

This prospective, randomized, double-blind study evaluated the effect of ulinastatin on postoperative blood loss and transfusion requirements of patients undergoing open-heart surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) and aortic cross-clamping (ACC). CPB and ACC produce variable systemic inflammatory reactions that are associated with multiorgan dysfunction via leucocytes, especially polymorphonuclear neutrophils (PMNs). PMNs increase blood loss and transfusion requirements. Ulinastatin, a urinary trypsin inhibitor, inhibits PMN activity and reduces the systemic inflammatory response. Patients received either 5000 U/kg ulinastatin or the equivalent volume of normal saline (control group) before ACC. Postoperative blood loss and transfusion requirements were recorded. Duration of intubation and length of stay in the intensive care unit (ICU) were also noted. There were no statistically significant between-group differences in postoperative blood loss and transfusion requirements. Ulinastatin caused a non-significant decrease in duration of intubation. Patients who received ulinastatin had significantly shorter ICU stays than control patients.

The effect of aprotinin on outcome after coronary-artery bypass grafting

BACKGROUND

Aprotinin has recently been associated with adverse outcomes in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. We reviewed our experience with this agent in patients undergoing cardiac surgery at Duke University Medical Center.

METHODS

We retrieved data on 10,275 consecutive patients undergoing surgical coronary revascularization at Duke between January 1, 1996, and December 31, 2005. We fit data to a logistic-regression model predicting each patient's likelihood of receiving aprotinin on the basis of preoperative characteristics and to models predicting long-term survival (up to 10 years) and decline in renal function, as measured by increases in serum creatinine levels.

RESULTS

A total of 1343 patients (13.2%) received aprotinin, 6776 patients (66.8%) received aminocaproic acid, and 2029 patients (20.0%) received no antifibrinolytic therapy. All patients underwent coronary-artery bypass grafting, and 1181 patients (11.5%) underwent combined coronary-artery bypass grafting and valve surgery. In the risk-adjusted model, survival was worse among patients treated with aprotinin, with a main-effects hazard ratio for death of 1.32 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.12 to 1.55) for the comparison with patients receiving no antifibrinolytic therapy (P=0.003) and 1.27 (95% CI, 1.10 to 1.46) for the comparison with patients receiving aminocaproic acid (P=0.004). As compared with the use of aminocaproic acid or no antifibrinolytic agent, aprotinin use was also associated with a larger risk-adjusted increase in the serum creatinine level (P<0.001) but not with a greater risk-adjusted incidence of dialysis (P=0.56).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who received aprotinin had a higher mortality rate and larger increases in serum creatinine levels than those who received aminocaproic acid or no antifibrinolytic agent.