Custodiol versus Blood Cardioplegia: Comparison of Myocardial Immunohistochemical Analysis and Clinical Outcomes

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q4 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS Revista Brasileira De Cirurgia Cardiovascular Pub Date : 2022-03-03 DOI:10.21470/1678-9741-2020-0662
Onur Şen, U. Aydin, Ersin Kadiroğulları, Salih Güler, S. Gonca, S. Solakoğlu, M. Karaçalılar, B. Timur, B. Onan
{"title":"Custodiol versus Blood Cardioplegia: Comparison of Myocardial Immunohistochemical Analysis and Clinical Outcomes","authors":"Onur Şen, U. Aydin, Ersin Kadiroğulları, Salih Güler, S. Gonca, S. Solakoğlu, M. Karaçalılar, B. Timur, B. Onan","doi":"10.21470/1678-9741-2020-0662","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction Custodiol (histidine-tryptophan-ketoglutarate) and repetitive blood cardioplegia are the solutions for myocardial protection and cardiac arrest. In this study, we aimed to compare immunohistochemical analysis, clinical outcomes, and cardiac enzyme values of Custodiol and blood cardioplegia groups. Methods This was a randomized prospective study consisting of 2 groups and 20 patients, 10 patients for each group, who underwent mitral and mitral/tricuspid valve surgery. Group 1 was formed for Custodiol cardioplegia and group 2 for blood cardioplegia. Perioperative and postoperative cardiac events were recorded, cardiac enzymes were analyzed with intervals, and myocardial samples were taken for immunohistochemical analysis. Recorded data were statistically evaluated. Results There was no significant difference for the Custodiol and blood cardioplegia groups in perioperative and postoperative cardiac performance and adverse events. Cardiac enzyme analysis showed no significant difference between groups. However, two parameters (eNOS, Bcl-2) were in favor of the Custodiol group in immunohistochemical studies. Custodiol performed better in cellular oxidative stress resistance and cellular viability. Conclusion Clinical outcomes and cardiac enzyme analysis results were similar regarding myocardial protection. However, Custodiol performed better in the immunohistochemical analysis.","PeriodicalId":54481,"journal":{"name":"Revista Brasileira De Cirurgia Cardiovascular","volume":"37 1","pages":"680 - 687"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Brasileira De Cirurgia Cardiovascular","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21470/1678-9741-2020-0662","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction Custodiol (histidine-tryptophan-ketoglutarate) and repetitive blood cardioplegia are the solutions for myocardial protection and cardiac arrest. In this study, we aimed to compare immunohistochemical analysis, clinical outcomes, and cardiac enzyme values of Custodiol and blood cardioplegia groups. Methods This was a randomized prospective study consisting of 2 groups and 20 patients, 10 patients for each group, who underwent mitral and mitral/tricuspid valve surgery. Group 1 was formed for Custodiol cardioplegia and group 2 for blood cardioplegia. Perioperative and postoperative cardiac events were recorded, cardiac enzymes were analyzed with intervals, and myocardial samples were taken for immunohistochemical analysis. Recorded data were statistically evaluated. Results There was no significant difference for the Custodiol and blood cardioplegia groups in perioperative and postoperative cardiac performance and adverse events. Cardiac enzyme analysis showed no significant difference between groups. However, two parameters (eNOS, Bcl-2) were in favor of the Custodiol group in immunohistochemical studies. Custodiol performed better in cellular oxidative stress resistance and cellular viability. Conclusion Clinical outcomes and cardiac enzyme analysis results were similar regarding myocardial protection. However, Custodiol performed better in the immunohistochemical analysis.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
库斯托二醇与血液心脏骤停:心肌免疫组化分析和临床结果的比较
库斯托二醇(组氨酸-色氨酸-酮戊二酸)和重复血停搏是心肌保护和心脏骤停的解决方案。在这项研究中,我们的目的是比较免疫组织化学分析、临床结果和心脏酶值的库斯托二醇和血液心脏骤停组。方法采用随机前瞻性研究,随机分为两组,每组10例,共20例患者行二尖瓣及二尖瓣/三尖瓣手术。1组为固二醇心脏骤停,2组为血液心脏骤停。记录围术期和术后心脏事件,每隔一段时间分析心肌酶,并取心肌样本进行免疫组织化学分析。对记录的数据进行统计学评价。结果两组患者围手术期和术后心脏功能及不良事件无显著性差异。心肌酶分析结果显示各组间差异无统计学意义。然而,在免疫组织化学研究中,两个参数(eNOS, Bcl-2)有利于Custodiol组。固二醇在细胞抗氧化应激和细胞活力方面表现较好。结论心肌保护的临床效果与心肌酶分析结果相似。然而,在免疫组织化学分析中,固二醇表现更好。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Revista Brasileira De Cirurgia Cardiovascular
Revista Brasileira De Cirurgia Cardiovascular CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-SURGERY
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
176
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊介绍: Brazilian Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery (BJCVS) is the official journal of the Brazilian Society of Cardiovascular Surgery (SBCCV). BJCVS is a bimonthly, peer-reviewed scientific journal, with regular circulation since 1986. BJCVS aims to record the scientific and innovation production in cardiovascular surgery and promote study, improvement and professional updating in the specialty. It has significant impact on cardiovascular surgery practice and related areas.
期刊最新文献
Effect of Aortic Cross-Clamping Time on Development of Postoperative Atrial Fibrillation in Isolated CABG: A Single-Center Prospective Clinical Study Three Different Strategies for Repair of Symptomatic or Aneurysmatic Aberrant Right Subclavian Arteries. Short-Term Results of Ivabradine versus Metoprolol: The Effects on Atrial Fibrillation in Patients Undergoing Off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting. A Surgical Technique to Preserve the Subvalvular Apparatus in Patients Undergoing Mitral Valve Replacement for Severe Ischemic Regurgitation. BOUNDS ON THE CONDITIONAL AND AVERAGE TREATMENT EFFECT WITH UNOBSERVED CONFOUNDING FACTORS.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1