ArticleGeneral thoracic and cardiovascular surgery2026
Cardioplegia strategy in isolated CABG: a comparative evaluation of del Nido, microplegia and St. Thomas II.
Article in General thoracic and cardiovascular surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe optimal cardioplegia strategy in adult coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) remains controversial. This study compared the efficacy of del Nido, microplegia, and St. Thomas II cardioplegic solutions for myocardial protection using clinical, biochemical, and echocardiographic parameters in isolated CABG.
methodsIn this prospective single-center study, 157 adult patients undergoing isolated CABG were grouped according to cardioplegia strategy: del Nido (n = 88), microplegia (n = 32), and St. Thomas II (n = 37). Baseline demographic, laboratory, and echocardiographic characteristics were comparable. Intraoperative variables included cross-clamp (XC) and cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) times, cardioplegia characteristics, defibrillation requirement, and vasoactive support. Postoperative assessment comprised arterial blood gas values, cardiac biomarkers, organ function tests, echocardiographic findings, clinical outcomes, and in-hospital mortality.
resultsTotal cardioplegia volume and number of doses were significantly lower in the del Nido group (p < 0.001). XC time was shorter with St. Thomas II (p < 0.001), likely due to operative technique differences. Intraoperative defibrillation and adrenaline requirement were more frequent in the St. Thomas II group (p = 0.001 and p = 0.027). Postoperative arterial blood gas parameters and end-organ function were similar. The del Nido group demonstrated significantly lower 1-h troponin I, 1-h CK-MB, and 24-h troponin I levels compared with St. Thomas II (p = 0.002, p = 0.004, p = 0.013). Postoperative increases in troponin I and CK-MB were also lower with del Nido. LVEF decline was least pronounced in the microplegia group (p = 0.013). ICU and hospital stays were significantly longer with St. Thomas II (p = 0.034 and p = 0.027). Morbidity and in-hospital mortality were comparable.
conclusionDel Nido cardioplegia and microplegia provide comparable and effective myocardial protection, both demonstrating superior biochemical preservation compared with St. Thomas II. Del Nido offers practical advantages without increasing morbidity or mortality.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42268321What 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.