HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Personal Folders Download to citation manager Permission Requests Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Mulder, D. G. Articles by Buckberg, G. D. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Mulder, D. G. Articles by Buckberg, G. D.

The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, Vol 21, 123-130, Copyright © 1976 by The Society of Thoracic Surgeons

ARTICLES

Myocardial protection during aortic valve replacement

DG Mulder, GN Olinger, DH McConnell, JV Maloney Jr and GD Buckberg

The results following aortic valve replacement (AVR) were compared in 40 patients in whom the myocardium was protected by topical hypothermic arrest or continuous coronary perfusion with sustained electrical fibrillation (Group A) and 40 similar patients in whom the hearts were also continuously perfused but were kept in the beating state (Group B). The operative mortality was not greatly different between the two groups, being 10 and 5%, respectively. The postperfusion cardiac performance was strikingly different, however. Seventeen patients (43%) in Group A required inotropic support, while this was necessary in only 1 patient (3%) in Group B. In this instance, recurrent ventricular fibrillation persisted despite attempts at reversion. These data show that the myocardium is preserved best during AVR when continuous coronary perfusion is used and the heart is maintained in the beating state.