The heart surgery forum · 2020
Comparison of Levosimendan Versus IABP in Patients with Poor Left Ventricular Function Undergoing Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Omar Alaa, Eldegwy Mahmoud, Allam Mohamed, Rouchdy Amr, Soliman Soliman Abdel Hei, Dawou Omar, Elshihy Ehab
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the use of levosimendan versus intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) in patients with poor left ventricular function undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) with ejection fraction less than 35%.
METHODS: Between February 2016 and March 2019, a prospective randomized study was performed on a group of 279 consecutive patients with left ventricular ejection fraction < 35%, who underwent elective CABG without concomitant procedures. These patients were divided into 2 groups, according to the treatment they received - either levosimendan (Group A) or intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation (Group B).
RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups, regarding mortality and morbidity. In the IABP group, the mean arterial blood pressure (2 hours post cardiopulmonary bypass) significantly was higher, and the heart rate in postoperative Day 1 significantly was lower. The levosimendan group had a significantly lower ICU stay than the IABP group.
CONCLUSION: We found that starting levosimendan infusion after induction of anesthesia is an acceptable option in comparison to IABP. The use of levosimendan in high-risk cardiac patients is comparable to IABP in improving hemodynamics during and after conventional on-pump CABG and results in a shorter ICU stay.
METHODS: Between February 2016 and March 2019, a prospective randomized study was performed on a group of 279 consecutive patients with left ventricular ejection fraction < 35%, who underwent elective CABG without concomitant procedures. These patients were divided into 2 groups, according to the treatment they received - either levosimendan (Group A) or intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation (Group B).
RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups, regarding mortality and morbidity. In the IABP group, the mean arterial blood pressure (2 hours post cardiopulmonary bypass) significantly was higher, and the heart rate in postoperative Day 1 significantly was lower. The levosimendan group had a significantly lower ICU stay than the IABP group.
CONCLUSION: We found that starting levosimendan infusion after induction of anesthesia is an acceptable option in comparison to IABP. The use of levosimendan in high-risk cardiac patients is comparable to IABP in improving hemodynamics during and after conventional on-pump CABG and results in a shorter ICU stay.