Does the venous cannulation method affect gaseous embolic load to the patient during extracorporeal circulation?

IntroductionCardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) is essential for cardiac surgery but poses risks, including gaseous micro emboli (GME). While the incidence of stroke-a common clinical consequence of embolism-ranges from 1-5% in cardiac surgery, prevalence of GME during CPB remain poorly understood.ObjectivesTo quantitatively compare GME incidence in the arterial line between cavoatrial and bicaval cannulation during open-heart surgery. Secondary exploratory objectives include evaluating the impact of venous reservoir volume on GME, and the correlation between GME in the venous and arterial lines.MethodsThis single center randomized controlled trial was conducted at Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Sweden. Patients ≥18 years undergoing planned aortic valve repair/replacement with cavoatrial cannulation, or mitral valve repair/replacement with bicaval cannulation, with or without coronary artery revascularization, were screened for eligibility. Patients were further randomized to either venous reservoir volume of ≥300 mL (control) or 200-300mL (intervention). GME detection was performed using GAMPT BCC300 with probes positioned at multiple locations within the CPB circuit.Results39 patients were included. No significant differences in GME quantity in the arterial line were observed between the cannulation methods (count p=.444; volume p=967). Similarly, no significant differences were found based on venous reservoir volume (count p=.074; volume p=.166). Furthermore, no significant correlation was observed between GME in venous line entering the arterial line (count p-value=492; volume p-value=.750). The CPB circuit effectively removed 99.14% of GME, with no adverse events reported.ConclusionNo significant differences were found in arterial GME count or volume between cavoatrial and bicaval cannulation during CPB. These findings underscore the importance of the bypass circuit's air-handling capacity, as well as the role of modern oxygenators and arterial line filters in effectively minimizing the passage of GME. Trial Registration:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05820828URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05820828.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Perfusion
Published
2025-05-20
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/02676591251344859
Primary Topic
Cardiac and Coronary Surgery Techniques
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Does the venous cannulation method affect gaseous embolic load to the patient during extracorporeal circulation?

Anna Corderfeldt Keiller, Tor Damén, Petronella Torild
Perfusion
Cardiac and Coronary Surgery Techniques
article

Does the venous cannulation method affect gaseous embolic load to the patient during extracorporeal circulation?

Anna Corderfeldt Keiller, Tor Damén, Petronella Torild
article en

Abstract

IntroductionCardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) is essential for cardiac surgery but poses risks, including gaseous micro emboli (GME). While the incidence of stroke-a common clinical consequence of embolism-ranges from 1-5% in cardiac surgery, prevalence of GME during CPB remain poorly understood.ObjectivesTo quantitatively compare GME incidence in the arterial line between cavoatrial and bicaval cannulation during open-heart surgery. Secondary exploratory objectives include evaluating the impact of venous reservoir volume on GME, and the correlation between GME in the venous and arterial lines.MethodsThis single center randomized controlled trial was conducted at Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Sweden. Patients ≥18 years undergoing planned aortic valve repair/replacement with cavoatrial cannulation, or mitral valve repair/replacement with bicaval cannulation, with or without coronary artery revascularization, were screened for eligibility. Patients were further randomized to either venous reservoir volume of ≥300 mL (control) or 200-300mL (intervention). GME detection was performed using GAMPT BCC300 with probes positioned at multiple locations within the CPB circuit.Results39 patients were included. No significant differences in GME quantity in the arterial line were observed between the cannulation methods (count p=.444; volume p=967). Similarly, no significant differences were found based on venous reservoir volume (count p=.074; volume p=.166). Furthermore, no significant correlation was observed between GME in venous line entering the arterial line (count p-value=492; volume p-value=.750). The CPB circuit effectively removed 99.14% of GME, with no adverse events reported.ConclusionNo significant differences were found in arterial GME count or volume between cavoatrial and bicaval cannulation during CPB. These findings underscore the importance of the bypass circuit's air-handling capacity, as well as the role of modern oxygenators and arterial line filters in effectively minimizing the passage of GME. Trial Registration:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05820828URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05820828.

PerfusionVol. 41(1)
Sahlgrenska University Hospital (SE), Swedish Academy (SE), University of Gothenburg (SE)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 80%
Cardiac and Coronary Surgery Techniques
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.