Department of Anesthesiology, New Tokyo Hospital, 1271 Wanagaya, Matsudo, Chiba, 270-2232, Japan.
Department of Anesthesiology, National Cerebral and Cardiovascular Center, 5-7-1 Fujishirodai, Suita, Osaka, 565-8565, Japan.
J Anesth. 2019 Apr;33(2):304-310. doi: 10.1007/s00540-019-02625-5. Epub 2019 Mar 12.
Fulminant myocarditis is uncommon, but life-threatening, and some patients need mechanical circulatory support. This study was performed to evaluate how different types of mechanical circulatory support-biventricular assist device (BiVAD) or left ventricular assist device (LVAD) placement-affect intraoperative hemodynamic status.
From January 2013 to September 2016, the patients who underwent BiVAD or LVAD placement for fulminant myocarditis were analyzed. The mean arterial pressure (MAP), mean pulmonary arterial pressure, central venous pressure (CVP), vasoactive score, and inotropic score were recorded at five time points: after the induction of anesthesia; at weaning, 30 min after weaning, and 60 min after weaning from cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB); and at the end of surgery. The vasoactive and inotropic scores were calculated as follows: vasoactive score = norepinephrine (µg/kg/min) × 100 + milrinone (µg/kg/min) × 10 + olprinone (µg/kg/min) × 25: inotropic score = dopamine (µg/kg/min) × 1 + dobutamine (µg/kg/min) × 1 + epinephrine (µg/kg/min) × 100.
We enrolled 16 patients of fulminant myocarditis. Ten of them underwent BiVAD placement, and the other underwent LVAD placement. After weaning from CPB, the BiVAD group had a significantly lower MAP but no difference in CVP. The vasoactive score was significantly higher in the BiVAD group at weaning of CPB (p = 0.015), 30 min after weaning (p = 0.004), 60 min after weaning (p = 0.005), and at the end of surgery (p < 0.016).
Patients with BiVAD placement required more vasoactive support to maintain optimal hemodynamic status compared with those with LVAD placement. This result indicates that BiVAD placement was more associated with vasoplegic syndrome.
暴发性心肌炎并不常见,但可能危及生命,部分患者需要机械循环支持。本研究旨在评估不同类型的机械循环支持-双心室辅助装置(BiVAD)或左心室辅助装置(LVAD)置入对术中血流动力学状态的影响。
从 2013 年 1 月至 2016 年 9 月,分析了因暴发性心肌炎而行 BiVAD 或 LVAD 置入的患者。记录了麻醉诱导后、脱机时、脱机后 30min、脱机后 60min 和手术结束时的平均动脉压(MAP)、平均肺动脉压、中心静脉压(CVP)、血管活性评分和正性肌力评分。血管活性评分和正性肌力评分计算方法如下:血管活性评分=去甲肾上腺素(µg/kg/min)×100+米力农(µg/kg/min)×10+奥普力农(µg/kg/min)×25;正性肌力评分=多巴胺(µg/kg/min)×1+多巴酚丁胺(µg/kg/min)×1+肾上腺素(µg/kg/min)×100。
纳入了 16 例暴发性心肌炎患者。其中 10 例行 BiVAD 置入,另 1 例行 LVAD 置入。脱机后,BiVAD 组的 MAP 明显降低,但 CVP 无差异。BiVAD 组在脱机时(p=0.015)、脱机后 30min(p=0.004)、脱机后 60min(p=0.005)和手术结束时(p<0.016)的血管活性评分明显升高。
与 LVAD 置入相比,BiVAD 置入的患者需要更多的血管活性支持来维持最佳的血流动力学状态。这一结果表明,BiVAD 置入与血管扩张综合征的相关性更高。