Think "better bypass" before thinking "off-pump"?

Heart

Volumn 95, Issue 12, 2009, Pages 955-956

  Chukwuemeka, Andrew ^a  

^a ST MARY S HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTIFICIAL EMBOLISM; BIOCOMPATIBILITY; BLOOD CELL; CARDIOPULMONARY BYPASS; CLINICAL TRIAL; EDITORIAL; HEMODILUTION; HUMAN; META ANALYSIS; OFF PUMP CORONARY SURGERY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW;

CARDIOPULMONARY BYPASS; CORONARY ARTERY BYPASS; CORONARY ARTERY BYPASS, OFF-PUMP; EMBOLISM; HEMODILUTION; HUMANS; STRESS, PHYSIOLOGICAL;

EID: 67649234450     PISSN: 13556037     EISSN: 1468201X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/hrt.2008.163865     Document Type: Editorial

References (12)

1. Parker DJ, Cantrell G, Stroud K, et al. Changes in serum complement and immunoglobulins after cardiopulmonary bypass. Br J Surg 1972;59:910-911
2. Levy JH, Tanaka KA. Inflammatory response to cardiopulmonary bypass. Ann Thorac Surg 2003;75:715-20S. (Pubitemid 36184553)
3. Chukwuemeka A, Weisel A, Maganti M, et al. Renal dysfunction in high-risk patients after on-pump and off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery: a propensity score analysis. Ann Thorac Surg 2005;80:2148-2153 (Pubitemid 41718043)
4. Ferreira-Gonzalez IJ, Ribera A, Cascant P, et al. Outcomes in off-pump vs. on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting by pre-operative risk profile: an assessment using propensity score. Eur Heart J 2006;27:2473-2480 (Pubitemid 44522155)
5. Biancari F, Rimpiläinen R. Meta-analysis of randomised trials comparing the effectiveness of miniaturised versus conventional cardiopulmonary bypass in adult cardiac surgery. Heart 2009;95:964-969
6. de Vroege R, Rutten PM, Kalkman C, et al. Biocompatibility of three different membrane oxygenators: effects on complement, neutrophil and monocyte activation. Perfusion 1997;12:369-375 (Pubitemid 27493956)
7. Mulholland JW, Massey W, Shelton JC. Investigation and quantification of the blood trauma caused by combined dynamic forces experienced during cardiopulmonary bypass. Perfusion 2000;15:485-494
8. Jewell AE, Akowuah EF, Suvarna SK, et al. A prospective randomised comparison of cardiotomy suction and cell saver for recycling shed blood during cardiac surgery. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2003;24:633-636 (Pubitemid 36411895)
9. Skrabal CA, Khosravi A, Choi YH, et al. Pericardial suction blood separation attenuates inflammatory response and hemolysis after cardiopulmonary bypass. Scand Cardiovasc J 2006;40:219-222 (Pubitemid 44241461)
10. Appelblad M, Engström G. Fat contamination of pericardial suction blood and its influence on in vitro capillary-pore flow properties in patients undergoing routine coronary artery bypass grafting. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2002;124:377-386 (Pubitemid 35025615)
11. Prasongsukarn K, Borger MA. Reducing cerebral emboli during cardiopulmonary bypass. Semin Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 2005;9:153-158 (Pubitemid 40791780)
12. Nollert G, Schwabenland I, Maktav D, et al. Miniaturised cardiopulmonary bypass in coronary artery bypass surgery: marginal impact on inflammation and coagulation but loss of safety margins. Ann Thorac Surg 2005;80:2326-2332 (Pubitemid 41718082)