ArticleJournal of cardiothoracic surgery2024
Comparative analysis of del Nido cardioplegia versus blood cardioplegia in isolate coronary artery bypass grafting.
Article in Journal of cardiothoracic surgery, 2024. 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.
- Molecular and Cellular Mechanisms of Cardioplegic Protection in Surgical Myocardial Revascularization.Cells · 2026Review
- Comparison of the effect of cardioplegic solutions used in cardiac surgery on myocardial protection.Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study examined the efficacy of del Nido cardioplegia compared with traditional blood cardioplegia in adult cardiac surgery for isolated coronary artery bypass grafting by evaluating the early postoperative outcomes.
methodsA total of 119 patients who underwent isolated conventional coronary artery bypass grafting were enrolled and divided into two groups (del Nido cardioplegia group [n = 36] and blood cardioplegia group [n = 50]) based on the type of cardioplegia used. This study compared the preoperative characteristics, intraoperative data, and early postoperative outcomes. Further subgroup analyses were conducted for high-risk patient groups.
resultsThe 30-day mortality and morbidity rates were not significantly different between groups. The del Nido cardioplegia group exhibited advantageous myocardial protection outcomes, demonstrated by a significantly smaller rise in Troponin I levels post-surgery (2.8 [-0.4; 4.2] vs. 4.5 [2.9; 7.4] ng/mL, p = 0.004) and fewer defibrillation attempts during weaning off of cardiopulmonary bypass (0.0 ± 0.2 vs. 0.4 ± 1.1 times, p = 0.011) when compared to the blood cardioplegia group. Additionally, the del Nido group achieved a reduction in surgery duration, as evidenced by the reduced aortic cross-clamping time (64.0 [55.5; 75.5] vs. 77.5 [65.0; 91.0] min, p = 0.001) and total operative time (287.5 [270.0; 305.0] vs. 315.0 [285.0; 365.0] min, p = 0.008). Subgroup analyses consistently demonstrated that the del Nido cardioplegia group had a significantly smaller postoperative increase in Troponin I levels across all subgroups (p < 0.05).
conclusionsdel Nido cardioplegia provided myocardial protection and favorable early postoperative outcomes compared to blood cardioplegia, making it a viable option for conventional coronary artery bypass grafting. Establishing a consensus on the protocol for Del Nido cardioplegia administration in adult surgeries is needed.
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.