Suppr超能文献

短时间心脏停搏再给药间隔是否有理论依据?

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

作者信息

Durandy Yves D

机构信息

Yves D Durandy, Department of Intensive Care and Perfusion, Centre Chirurgical Marie Lannelongue, F-92350 Le Plessis, Robinson, France.

出版信息

World J Cardiol. 2015 Oct 26;7(10):658-64. doi: 10.4330/wjc.v7.i10.658.

Abstract

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.

摘要

在过去几十年里,虽然数百万患者都接受了心脏停搏技术,但关于最佳技术的争论仍在继续。心脏停搏不仅旨在使心脏停止收缩并提供无血手术视野,从而避免气体栓塞风险,还用于心肌保护。其机电效应可通过直接观察心脏和持续心电图监测轻易得到证实,但在评估心肌保护质量的最佳方法上尚无共识。因此,最佳方法远未明确,大量关于该主题的文献也未能给出明确答案。心脏停搏液的成分(晶体液与血液,有无各种底物增强剂)、温度和注射部位都已得到广泛研究。虽然研究较少,但再次给药间隔也是一个重要因素。一个常见且直观的观点是,较短的再次给药间隔可改善心肌保护。绝大多数外科医生在冠状动脉搭桥手术中使用20 - 30分钟甚至更短的再次给药间隔,多剂量心脏停搏液几十年来一直是“金标准”。然而,单次剂量心脏停搏液的使用越来越普遍,并且可能是一种有价值的替代方法。一些外科医生更喜欢单次剂量心脏停搏液的简便性,而另一些医生则对较短的再次给药间隔更有信心。无论患者年龄、合并症或心脏病情况如何,都不能保证单一策略能安全地应用于所有患者。本综述的目的是讨论短再次给药间隔的理论依据。

相似文献

本文引用的文献

4
Warm blood microplegia redosing interval in pediatric surgery.
Ann Thorac Surg. 2013 Dec;96(6):2285-6. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2013.06.076.
8
Prolonged warm ischemia for transfusion-free arterial switch and ventricular septal defect surgery in a 4.5-Kg baby.
Perfusion. 2012 May;27(3):230-4. doi: 10.1177/0267659112437775. Epub 2012 Feb 15.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验