European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery · 2001
Single-clamp technique does not protect against cerebrovascular accident in coronary artery bypass grafting.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Kim R W, Mariconda D C, Tellides G, Kopf G S, Dewar M L, Lin Z, Elefteriades J A
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: By potentially avoiding the embolic consequences of a side-biting aortic clamp, the single-clamp technique may decrease cerebrovascular accidents in coronary artery bypass grafting. However, this theoretical superiority in stroke prevention has not been conclusively demonstrated and use of this technique may lead to adverse myocardial effects due to longer cross-clamp times. In this study, we sought to determine if the single-clamp technique prevents postoperative stroke in clinical practice.
METHODS: Of 607 consecutive isolated coronary bypass operations completed over a 3 year period, 301 (50%) were performed by one surgeon using exclusively the single-clamp technique and 306 (50%) were performed by a second surgeon using exclusively the two-clamp technique. Postoperative adverse events were retrospectively compared between these two groups.
RESULTS: There were no differences between groups in terms of postoperative stroke (1.7% single-clamp vs. 2.0% two-clamp, P=0.78), hospital mortality (2.7% single-clamp vs. 1.6% two-clamp, P=0.38), or perioperative myocardial infarction (2.6% single-clamp vs. 0.7% two-clamp, P=0.052). The two-clamp technique was not a significant predictor of stroke by logistic regression analysis (P=0.72).
CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that there are no statistically significant differences between clamp techniques with regard to stroke prevention or myocardial protection. We find no compelling evidence for surgeons successfully utilizing one technique to change to the other.
METHODS: Of 607 consecutive isolated coronary bypass operations completed over a 3 year period, 301 (50%) were performed by one surgeon using exclusively the single-clamp technique and 306 (50%) were performed by a second surgeon using exclusively the two-clamp technique. Postoperative adverse events were retrospectively compared between these two groups.
RESULTS: There were no differences between groups in terms of postoperative stroke (1.7% single-clamp vs. 2.0% two-clamp, P=0.78), hospital mortality (2.7% single-clamp vs. 1.6% two-clamp, P=0.38), or perioperative myocardial infarction (2.6% single-clamp vs. 0.7% two-clamp, P=0.052). The two-clamp technique was not a significant predictor of stroke by logistic regression analysis (P=0.72).
CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that there are no statistically significant differences between clamp techniques with regard to stroke prevention or myocardial protection. We find no compelling evidence for surgeons successfully utilizing one technique to change to the other.