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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |