Cited by 35Cardiac and Coronary Surgery TechniquesTransplantation: Methods and OutcomesBlood transfusion and management

Microplegia during coronary artery bypass grafting was associated with less low cardiac output syndrome: a propensity-matched comparison

Algarni, Khaled D., Weisel, Richard D., Caldarone, Christopher A., Maganti, Manjula, Tsang, Katherine, Yau, Terrence M.·2013·The Annals of Thoracic Surgery

Abstract

Background Microplegia delivers blood and additives for cardioplegia with minimal crystalloid. We retrospectively compared microplegia with standard 8:1 blood cardioplegia with a propensity-matched analysis in patients undergoing isolated coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery.Methods Prospectively collected data for 2,630 consecutive patients who underwent isolated CABG surgery (2004 to 2006) with the exclusive use of microplegia was compared with an equivalent 3-year cohort (1998 to 2000) of 5,058 consecutive isolated CABG patients with the exclusive use of 8:1 diluted blood cardioplegia. Propensity score matching identified 1,980 matched pairs (in each group) for analysis.Results In the matched groups, the hospital mortality was identical (1.2%). The prevalence of low cardiac output syndrome was significantly (p< 0.001) lower in the later period when microplegia was employed (2.7%) compared with the standard cardioplegia group (5.0%). Although these results may also reflect improvements in care with time, a multivariable logistic regression analysis of the entire cohort (not matched) also demonstrated a twofold independent reduction in low cardiac output syndrome in microplegia patients (odds ratio, 1.9; 95% confidence interval 1.4 to 2.5).Conclusions Compared with 8:1 blood cardioplegia, microplegia during isolated CABG surgery was associated with a lower incidence of postoperative low cardiac output syndrome. Microplegia may reduce postoperative cardiac edema, increase buffering, and permit more rapid recovery of ventricular function. Randomized trials are required to determine whether the relationship between microplegia and reduced low output syndrome is causal or is merely an association.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2012.09.056

Cites

26 of 26 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Algarni, K. D., Weisel, R. D., Caldarone, C. A., Maganti, M., Tsang, K., & Yau, T. M.
Affiliations
University of Toronto (CA)
Corresponding author
Yau, Terrence M.
Venue
The Annals of Thoracic Surgery
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-05
Volume
95
Issue
5
Pages
1532-1538
ISSN
0003-4975 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2160496834
Cited by
35
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 6
FWCI
3.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Annals of Thoracic Surgery (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Cardiac and Coronary Surgery Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Transplantation: Methods and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Biochemistry › Blood transfusion and management
Keywords
cardioplegia, coronary artery bypass grafting, low cardiac output syndrome, ventricular function recovery
MeSH terms
Aged, Coronary Artery Bypass, Cardiac Output, Low, Female, Heart Arrest, Induced, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Postoperative Complications, Prospective Studies, Hospital Mortality, Propensity Score

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review