ArticleBrazilian journal of cardiovascular surgery2023
Myocardial Protection in Isolated Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: Del Nido versus Blood Cardioplegia.
Article in Brazilian journal of cardiovascular surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cardioplegia strategy in isolated CABG: a comparative evaluation of del Nido, microplegia and St. Thomas II.General thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionOur study aimed to examine the impacts of blood cardioplegia (BC) and del Nido cardioplegia (DNC) solutions - which we used in isolated coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) - on early mortality and major adverse events (MAE).
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed 329 consecutive patients who underwent CABG in our clinic between January 2016 and January 2020. Myocardial infarction, reoperation, cardiac tamponade, stroke, renal failure, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation requirement, and cardiopulmonary resuscitation were defined as MAE. The group in which DNC was used was Group D (181 [55%] patients), and the group in which BC was used was Group B (141 [45%] patients).
resultsNo statistically significant difference was determined between the groups regarding age, weight, body surface area, gender, or European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation score (P=0.615, P=0.560, P=0.934, P=0.365, P=0.955, respectively). Although there was no statistically significant difference between the groups in terms of aortic cross-clamping time (P=0.712), cardiopulmonary bypass duration was longer in Group B (P=0.001). Even though the incidence of stroke was higher in Group B (P=0.030), no statistically significant difference was observed between the groups regarding total incidence of MAE, mortality, mechanical ventilation time, length of stay in the intensive care unit, or length of hospital stay (P=0.153, P=0.130, P=0.689, P=0.710, P=0.613, respectively).
conclusionWe found no significant difference in MAE, mortality, duration of mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit stay, or hospital stay between the DNC and BC groups. We believe that both solutions can be used safely for cardiac protection in the adult patient population.
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.