Scholarlink

Background <p>There is no solid evidence on the clinical benefits of blood cardioplegia or Custodiol™ in procedures other than coronary artery bypass grafting. We aimed to compare mortality and the risk of major cardiovascular events in patients undergoing valve or aortic surgery.</p> Methods <p>This retrospective single-center study included patients who underwent valve or ascending aortic surgery between 2016 and 2024. The sample was divided based on the type of cardioplegia for myocardial protection: Custodiol™ or blood cardioplegia. The comparison of outcomes between the two groups was adjusted using propensity score.</p> Results <p>2909 patients were included, with 1426 (49%) receiving Custodiol™. In a propensity score-matched analysis that included 930 pairs, we observed higher perioperative mortality in the blood cardioplegia group (5.3% vs. 2.9%, <i>p</i> = 0.014) and worse long-term survival (<i>p</i> = 0.004). In an IPTW analysis, we confirmed significant differences in favor of Custodiol™ for early mortality (-2.2%, 95% CI -4; -0.4), long-term mortality (2.6 years, 95% CI 2.1; 3.2), and renal failure (-4.7%, 95% CI -7.9; -1.6), and low cardiac output syndrome requiring mechanical circulatory support (-2.2%, 95% CI -3.6;-0.9), but a higher siks of postoperative denovo atrial fibrillation (6.8%, 95% CI 2.5;11).</p> Conclusions <p>In this retrospective study including patients undergoing on-pump valve and aortic surgery, Custodiol™ compared to blood cardioplegia was associated with lower short- and medium-term mortality, although no robust evidence was found for differences in other clinical events.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Blood cardioplegia or custodiol for myocardial protection during valvular or aortic surgery: a propensity score adjusted comparison

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年6月4日

查看全文
  • Manuel Carnero- Alcazar,
  • Lourdes Montero- Cruces,
  • Rosa Beltrao- Sial,
  • Raquel Blazquez,
  • Ivan Nuñez- Gil,
  • Daniel Perez- Camargo,
  • Javier Cobiella- Carnicer,
  • Juan Miguel Miranda Torron,
  • Maria Alejandra Giraldo,
  • Luis Maroto Castellanos

摘要

Background

There is no solid evidence on the clinical benefits of blood cardioplegia or Custodiol™ in procedures other than coronary artery bypass grafting. We aimed to compare mortality and the risk of major cardiovascular events in patients undergoing valve or aortic surgery.

Methods

This retrospective single-center study included patients who underwent valve or ascending aortic surgery between 2016 and 2024. The sample was divided based on the type of cardioplegia for myocardial protection: Custodiol™ or blood cardioplegia. The comparison of outcomes between the two groups was adjusted using propensity score.

Results

2909 patients were included, with 1426 (49%) receiving Custodiol™. In a propensity score-matched analysis that included 930 pairs, we observed higher perioperative mortality in the blood cardioplegia group (5.3% vs. 2.9%, p = 0.014) and worse long-term survival (p = 0.004). In an IPTW analysis, we confirmed significant differences in favor of Custodiol™ for early mortality (-2.2%, 95% CI -4; -0.4), long-term mortality (2.6 years, 95% CI 2.1; 3.2), and renal failure (-4.7%, 95% CI -7.9; -1.6), and low cardiac output syndrome requiring mechanical circulatory support (-2.2%, 95% CI -3.6;-0.9), but a higher siks of postoperative denovo atrial fibrillation (6.8%, 95% CI 2.5;11).

Conclusions

In this retrospective study including patients undergoing on-pump valve and aortic surgery, Custodiol™ compared to blood cardioplegia was associated with lower short- and medium-term mortality, although no robust evidence was found for differences in other clinical events.