ArticleJTCVS open2026
Cardioplegia practices in pediatric cardiovascular surgery: Survey across Asia, Europe, and North America.
Article in JTCVS open, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Cardioplegia and myocardial protection strategies continue to evolve, with wide variation in reported practices. However, there is no contemporary report of these practices in pediatrics. We conducted a survey of pediatric cardioplegia practice among major institutions across Asia, Europe, and North America. Methods: A survey was distributed to members of the Congenital Heart Surgeons Society, European Congenital Heart Surgeons Association, and Asian Association for Pediatric and Congenital Heart Surgery. Responses were collected from March to September 2024. Questions focused on cardioplegia type, delivery, adjunct protection, del Nido usage, and differences in practices based on patient age or complexity. Results: Complete responses were obtained from 71 surgeons and 7 perfusionists representing 70 institutions. Although the types of solutions used vary across Asia and Europe, >80% of North America respondents reported using del Nido. Cold cardioplegia (<10 °C) was the predominant strategy (92%; n = 72 of 78 respondents). The most frequent dosing was induction between 20 and 30 mL/kg (76%; n = 59) and redosing between 10 and 20 mL/kg (63%; n = 49), with a wide range of redose timing (10-120 minutes). Notably, 28% of respondents (n = 22) reported giving only single-dose cardioplegia, and 56% (n = 44) reported using topical cooling, with only 8% (n = 6) using "hot shot" cardioplegia. Among respondents using del Nido, 91% (n = 43 of 47) reported using it exclusively for all cases. Conclusions: Institutions in North America are using primarily del Nido, while heterogeneity remains in cardioplegia use across Asia and Europe. There also remains significant variation in practices, highlighting the need for clinical outcomes studies to determine an optimal cardioplegia strategy.
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.