Cargando…

Custodiol versus Blood Cardioplegia: Comparison of Myocardial Immunohistochemical Analysis and Clinical Outcomes

INTRODUCTION: Custodiol (histidine-tryptophan-ketoglutarate) and repetitive blood cardioplegia are the solutions for myocardial protection and cardiac arrest. In this study, we aimed to compare immunohistochemical analysis, clinical outcomes, and cardiac enzyme values of Custodiol and blood cardiopl...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sen, Onur, Aydin, Unal, Kadirogullari, Ersin, Güler, Salih, Gonca, Süheyla, Solakoğlu, Seyhun, Karaçalılar, Mehmet, Timur, Barış, Onan, Burak
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Sociedade Brasileira de Cirurgia Cardiovascular 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9670357/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35244373
http://dx.doi.org/10.21470/1678-9741-2020-0662
_version_ 1784832318069800960
author Sen, Onur
Aydin, Unal
Kadirogullari, Ersin
Güler, Salih
Gonca, Süheyla
Solakoğlu, Seyhun
Karaçalılar, Mehmet
Timur, Barış
Onan, Burak
author_facet Sen, Onur
Aydin, Unal
Kadirogullari, Ersin
Güler, Salih
Gonca, Süheyla
Solakoğlu, Seyhun
Karaçalılar, Mehmet
Timur, Barış
Onan, Burak
author_sort Sen, Onur
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Custodiol (histidine-tryptophan-ketoglutarate) and repetitive blood cardioplegia are the solutions for myocardial protection and cardiac arrest. In this study, we aimed to compare immunohistochemical analysis, clinical outcomes, and cardiac enzyme values of Custodiol and blood cardioplegia groups. METHODS: This was a randomized prospective study consisting of 2 groups and 20 patients, 10 patients for each group, who underwent mitral and mitral/tricuspid valve surgery. Group 1 was formed for Custodiol cardioplegia and group 2 for blood cardioplegia. Perioperative and postoperative cardiac events were recorded, cardiac enzymes were analyzed with intervals, and myocardial samples were taken for immunohistochemical analysis. Recorded data were statistically evaluated. RESULTS: There was no significant difference for the Custodiol and blood cardioplegia groups in perioperative and postoperative cardiac performance and adverse events. Cardiac enzyme analysis showed no significant difference between groups. However, two parameters (eNOS, Bcl-2) were in favor of the Custodiol group in immunohistochemical studies. Custodiol performed better in cellular oxidative stress resistance and cellular viability. CONCLUSION: Clinical outcomes and cardiac enzyme analysis results were similar regarding myocardial protection. However, Custodiol performed better in the immunohistochemical analysis.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9670357
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Sociedade Brasileira de Cirurgia Cardiovascular
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-96703572022-11-21 Custodiol versus Blood Cardioplegia: Comparison of Myocardial Immunohistochemical Analysis and Clinical Outcomes Sen, Onur Aydin, Unal Kadirogullari, Ersin Güler, Salih Gonca, Süheyla Solakoğlu, Seyhun Karaçalılar, Mehmet Timur, Barış Onan, Burak Braz J Cardiovasc Surg Original Article INTRODUCTION: Custodiol (histidine-tryptophan-ketoglutarate) and repetitive blood cardioplegia are the solutions for myocardial protection and cardiac arrest. In this study, we aimed to compare immunohistochemical analysis, clinical outcomes, and cardiac enzyme values of Custodiol and blood cardioplegia groups. METHODS: This was a randomized prospective study consisting of 2 groups and 20 patients, 10 patients for each group, who underwent mitral and mitral/tricuspid valve surgery. Group 1 was formed for Custodiol cardioplegia and group 2 for blood cardioplegia. Perioperative and postoperative cardiac events were recorded, cardiac enzymes were analyzed with intervals, and myocardial samples were taken for immunohistochemical analysis. Recorded data were statistically evaluated. RESULTS: There was no significant difference for the Custodiol and blood cardioplegia groups in perioperative and postoperative cardiac performance and adverse events. Cardiac enzyme analysis showed no significant difference between groups. However, two parameters (eNOS, Bcl-2) were in favor of the Custodiol group in immunohistochemical studies. Custodiol performed better in cellular oxidative stress resistance and cellular viability. CONCLUSION: Clinical outcomes and cardiac enzyme analysis results were similar regarding myocardial protection. However, Custodiol performed better in the immunohistochemical analysis. Sociedade Brasileira de Cirurgia Cardiovascular 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC9670357/ /pubmed/35244373 http://dx.doi.org/10.21470/1678-9741-2020-0662 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Sen, Onur
Aydin, Unal
Kadirogullari, Ersin
Güler, Salih
Gonca, Süheyla
Solakoğlu, Seyhun
Karaçalılar, Mehmet
Timur, Barış
Onan, Burak
Custodiol versus Blood Cardioplegia: Comparison of Myocardial Immunohistochemical Analysis and Clinical Outcomes
title Custodiol versus Blood Cardioplegia: Comparison of Myocardial Immunohistochemical Analysis and Clinical Outcomes
title_full Custodiol versus Blood Cardioplegia: Comparison of Myocardial Immunohistochemical Analysis and Clinical Outcomes
title_fullStr Custodiol versus Blood Cardioplegia: Comparison of Myocardial Immunohistochemical Analysis and Clinical Outcomes
title_full_unstemmed Custodiol versus Blood Cardioplegia: Comparison of Myocardial Immunohistochemical Analysis and Clinical Outcomes
title_short Custodiol versus Blood Cardioplegia: Comparison of Myocardial Immunohistochemical Analysis and Clinical Outcomes
title_sort custodiol versus blood cardioplegia: comparison of myocardial immunohistochemical analysis and clinical outcomes
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9670357/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35244373
http://dx.doi.org/10.21470/1678-9741-2020-0662
work_keys_str_mv AT senonur custodiolversusbloodcardioplegiacomparisonofmyocardialimmunohistochemicalanalysisandclinicaloutcomes
AT aydinunal custodiolversusbloodcardioplegiacomparisonofmyocardialimmunohistochemicalanalysisandclinicaloutcomes
AT kadirogullariersin custodiolversusbloodcardioplegiacomparisonofmyocardialimmunohistochemicalanalysisandclinicaloutcomes
AT gulersalih custodiolversusbloodcardioplegiacomparisonofmyocardialimmunohistochemicalanalysisandclinicaloutcomes
AT goncasuheyla custodiolversusbloodcardioplegiacomparisonofmyocardialimmunohistochemicalanalysisandclinicaloutcomes
AT solakogluseyhun custodiolversusbloodcardioplegiacomparisonofmyocardialimmunohistochemicalanalysisandclinicaloutcomes
AT karacalılarmehmet custodiolversusbloodcardioplegiacomparisonofmyocardialimmunohistochemicalanalysisandclinicaloutcomes
AT timurbarıs custodiolversusbloodcardioplegiacomparisonofmyocardialimmunohistochemicalanalysisandclinicaloutcomes
AT onanburak custodiolversusbloodcardioplegiacomparisonofmyocardialimmunohistochemicalanalysisandclinicaloutcomes