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

This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map 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 Author home page(s): Akio Wakabayashi Permission Requests Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Nishi, T. Articles by Wakabayashi, A. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Nishi, T. Articles by Wakabayashi, A.

Ann Thorac Surg 1980;30:349-355
© 1980 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons

---

Articles

Experimental Evaluation of Myocardial Preservation Techniques: V. A Membrane-Stabilizing Agent, Procaine Hydrochloride

From the Department of Surgery, University of California at Irvine, CA

^* Address reprint requests to Dr. Wakabayashi, The Department of Surgery, University of California at Irvine, Irvine, CA 92717

The protective effects of procaine hydrochloride on the anoxic heart were investigated using the papillary muscle contractility of an isolated, blood-perfused rabbit heart as an index of myocardial function. Fifty-four experiments were divided into nine groups of six experiments each, in which anoxic periods (30, 45, 60 minutes) and concentration of procaine (solution 1 or control, no procaine; solution 2, 0.03%; and solution 3, 0.3%) were the variables. The hearts arrested significantly faster with solution 3 compared with solution 2 or 1 (p < 0.01). After 30 minutes of anoxia, the recovery of the contractility was 81.1 ± 4.2% with solution 1, 90.7 ± 3.4% with solution 2, and 90.6 ± 3.3% with solution 3. After 45 minutes of anoxia, the recovery was 31.8 ± 19.0% with control, 67.5 ± 15.8% with 0.03% procaine, and 58.1 ± 22.8% with 0.3% procaine. After 60 minutes of anoxia, the recovery was 2.2 ± 2.7% with control, 18.7 ± 14.1% with 0.03% procaine, and 5.0 ± 7.3% with 0.3% procaine. After each anoxic period, the best recovery occurred with those hearts arrested by solution 2. Although the difference in recovery between the procaine groups was not statistically significant, a longer time was required for the hearts arrested with solution 3 to reach full functional recovery.

This study indicated that procaine per se has a protective effect on the anoxic hearts and that although high concentration (0.3%) of procaine arrests the heart rapidly, it delays the recovery of contractions. We recommend the use of 0.03% procaine in cardioplegic solution.