ArticlePerfusion2019
Left ventricular dysfunction after two hours of polarizing or depolarizing cardioplegic arrest in a porcine model.
Article in Perfusion, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Relevance and Recommendations for the Application of Cardioplegic Solutions in Cardiopulmonary Bypass Surgery in Pigs.Biomedicines · 2021Review
- Transthoracic Echocardiography of the Neonatal Laboratory Piglet.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis experimental study compares myocardial function after prolonged arrest by St. Thomas' Hospital polarizing cardioplegic solution (esmolol, adenosine, Mg
methodsTwenty anaesthetized pigs on tepid (34°C) cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) were randomised to cardioplegic arrest for 120 min with antegrade, repeated, cold, oxygenated, polarizing (STH-POL) or depolarizing (STH-2) blood cardioplegia every 20 min. Cardiac function was evaluated at Baseline and 60, 150 and 240 min after weaning from CPB, using a pressure-conductance catheter and epicardial echocardiography. Regional tissue blood flow, cleaved caspase-3 activity and levels of malondialdehyde were evaluated in myocardial tissue samples.
resultsPreload recruitable stroke work (PRSW) was increased after polarizing compared to depolarizing cardioplegia 150 min after declamping (73.0±3.2 vs. 64.3±2.4 mmHg, p=0.047). Myocardial tissue blood flow rate was high in both groups compared to the Baseline levels and decreased significantly in the STH-POL group only, from 60 min to 150 min after declamping (p<0.005). Blood flow was significantly reduced in the STH-POL compared to the STH-2 group 240 min after declamping (p<0.05). Left ventricular mechanical efficiency, the ratio between total pressure-volume area and blood flow rate, gradually decreased after STH-2 cardioplegia and was significantly reduced compared to STH-POL cardioplegia after 150 and 240 min (p<0.05 for both).
conclusionMyocardial protection for two hours of polarizing cardioplegic arrest with STH-POL in oxygenated blood is non-inferior compared to STH-2 blood cardioplegia. STH-POL cardioplegia alleviates the mismatch between myocardial function and perfusion after weaning from CPB.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.