Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28329148›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery2017

Myocardial energy metabolism and ultrastructure with polarizing and depolarizing cardioplegia in a porcine model.

Terje Aass, Lodve Stangeland, David J Chambers, Seth Hallström, Christine Rossmann, Bruno K Podesser, Malte Urban, Knut Nesheim, Rune Haaverstad, Knut Matre and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 39% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Cardioprotection in cardiovascular surgery.Basic research in cardiology · 2024
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Terje AassDepartment of Heart Disease, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway.
Lodve StangelandDepartment of Clinical Science, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
David J ChambersCardiac Surgical Research, The Rayne Institute (King's College London), Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, St Thomas' Hospital, London, UK.
Seth HallströmInstitute of Physiological Chemistry, Center of Physiological Medicine, Medical University Graz, Graz, Austria.
Christine RossmannInstitute of Physiological Chemistry, Center of Physiological Medicine, Medical University Graz, Graz, Austria.
Bruno K PodesserDepartment of Biomedical Research, Ludwig Boltzmann Cluster for Cardiovascular Research, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Malte UrbanDepartment of Heart Disease, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway.
Knut NesheimDepartment of Heart Disease, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway.
Rune HaaverstadDepartment of Heart Disease, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway.
Knut MatreDepartment of Clinical Science, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
Ketil GrongDepartment of Clinical Science, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
University of Bergen · NOHaukeland University Hospital · NOMedical University of Graz · ATGuy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust · GBMedical University of Vienna · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThis study investigated whether the novel St. Thomas' Hospital polarizing cardioplegic solution (STH-POL) with esmolol/adenosine/magnesium offers improved myocardial protection by reducing demands for high-energy phosphates during cardiac arrest compared to the depolarizing St. Thomas' Hospital cardioplegic solution No 2 (STH-2).

methodsTwenty anaesthetised pigs on tepid cardiopulmonary bypass were randomized to cardiac arrest for 60 min with antegrade freshly mixed, repeated, cold, oxygenated STH-POL or STH-2 blood cardioplegia every 20 min. Haemodynamic variables were continuously recorded. Left ventricular biopsies, snap-frozen in liquid nitrogen or fixed in glutaraldehyde, were obtained at Baseline, 58 min after cross-clamp and 20 and 180 min after weaning from bypass. Adenine nucleotides were evaluated by high-performance liquid chromatography, myocardial ultrastructure with morphometry.

resultsWith STH-POL myocardial creatine phosphate was increased compared to STH-2 at 58 min of cross-clamp [59.9 ± 6.4 (SEM) vs 44.5 ± 7.4 nmol/mg protein; P  <   0.025], and at 20 min after reperfusion (61.0 ± 6.7 vs 49.0 ± 5.5 nmol/mg protein; P  <   0.05), ATP levels were increased at 20 min of reperfusion with STH-POL (35.4 ± 1.1 vs 32.4 ± 1.2 nmol/mg protein; P  <   0.05). Mitochondrial surface-to-volume ratio was decreased with polarizing compared to depolarizing cardioplegia 20 min after reperfusion (6.74 ± 0.14 vs 7.46 ± 0.13 µm 2 /µm 3 ; P  =   0.047). None of these differences were present at 180 min of reperfusion. From 150 min of reperfusion and onwards, cardiac index was increased with STH-POL; 4.8 ± 0.2 compared to 4.0 ± 0.2 l/min/m 2 ( P  =   0.011) for STH-2 at 180 min.

conclusionsPolarizing STH-POL cardioplegia improved energy status compared to standard STH-2 depolarizing blood cardioplegia during cardioplegic arrest and early after reperfusion.

Indexed as

AnimalsBiopsyCardioplegic SolutionsCreatinineDisease Models, AnimalEnergy MetabolismFemaleHeart ArrestHeart Arrest, InducedMaleMyocardial Reperfusion InjuryMyocardiumPhosphocreatineROC CurveSwineCardioplegic SolutionsCreatininePhosphocreatineCardioplegiaEnergy metabolismMyocardial protectionUltrastructure

Identifiers

PMID28329148
PMCPMC5848816
OpenAlexW2605940282

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.