Prospective study on cardiopulmonary bypass prime reduction and its effect on intraoperative blood product and hemoconcentrator use

• Published in: Perfusion Vol. 20; no. 1; pp. 31 - 37
• Main Authors: Sobieski, Michael A, Slaughter, Mark S, Hart, David E, Pappas, Patroklos S, Tatooles, Antone J
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Thousand Oaks, CA SAGE Publications 01-01-2005; Sage Publications Ltd
• Subjects: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Cardiac Surgical Procedures - methods; Cardiopulmonary Bypass - instrumentation; Cardiopulmonary Bypass - methods; Cardiopulmonary Bypass - standards; Erythrocyte Transfusion - utilization; Feasibility Studies; Female; Hemofiltration - instrumentation; Hemofiltration - methods; Hemofiltration - utilization; Humans; Intraoperative Period - statistics & numerical data; Isotonic Solutions; Male; Middle Aged; Plasma Substitutes - administration & dosage; Prospective Studies; Treatment Outcome
• DOI: 10.1191/0267659105pf783oa
• EISSN: 1477-111X
• ISSN: 0267-6591

Purpose: Evaluate the feasibility and clinical significance of crystalloid prime reduction during the initiation of cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) using a modified bridge on the cardioplegia delivery system.
Methods: Prospective trial of crystalloid prime reduction using a standard Duraflow®-coated CPB circuit and Vanguard® 2:1 cardio plegia delivery system. Standard prime volume was 1500 cc of Plasmalyte. Prime was reduced via the bridge in the cardioplegia system during initiation of CPB. Packed red blood cells (PRBC) were transfused for hematocrit (Hct) less than 24% while rewarming. A hemoconcentrator was used if the patient’s circulating blood volume exceeded 150% of calculated. All data were prospectively collected.
Results: Two hundred and twenty-two consecutive patients undergoing cardiac surgery utilizing CPB were evaluated. There were 107 patients with normal prime volume (NPV) and 115 patients with reduced prime volume (RPV). There was no significant difference in sex, mean age, weight, body surface area (BSA), pre-op Hct, procedure time or procedure between the two groups. There was no difference in total crystalloids infused by the anesthetists (average NPV 1205 cc versus RPV 1148 cc). The average RPV was 622 cc (range 400 - 1100 cc) or a 59% reduction. Post-op Hct revealed no difference (NPV 28% versus RPV 29%). There was a 24% reduction in patients requiring PRBC (NPV n=23 versus RPV n=18). The use of hemoconcentrators was reduced by 49% (NPV n=18 versus RPV n=11). The average urine output for both groups exceeded 100 cc/hour while on CPB.
Conclusion: Using a modified cardioplegia delivery system is a safe and effective method of CPB prime reduction. A RPV resulted in fewer patients requiring PRBC transfusions and fewer hemoconcentrators used. Based on our experience, we would recommend attempting to reduce prime volume in all patients undergoing CPB.