Background: Current research is engaged in innovative technologies of extracorporeal circulation (ECC) systems in an effort to eliminate negative effetcs. Some studies have shown that, due to the complexity of technical settings of mini-ECC, they invoke a weaker immune response compared to classic ECC. The clinical benefits of using these systems have not been clearly proven yet. Methods: A group of 54 patients who were indicated for elective coronary surgery were randomised into two groups — Group A (patients operated on using classic ECC - open modification) and Group B (patients operated on using mini-ECC). The concentrations of IL-6, PMN elastase and MCP-1 in both groups were monitored per- and postoperatively, along with the postoperative clinical course. Results: The groups did not differ in the basic pre- and peroperative characteristics. We recorded a lower priming for mini-ECC (p < 0.001) and significantly reduced hemodilution during ECC. There were no differences in the clinical outcome in either group. Serum concentrations of monitored markers of immune reaction towards ECC showed higher activity during standard ECC. Conclusion: New technologies used in mini-systems have proven to lower activation of the immune system, which can be monitored using kinetics of proinflammatory mediators. In spite of these comparable laboratory results, we did not find differences in short-term clinical results when comparing both these groups of low-risk patients.
Paparella D. , Yau TM, Young E.Cardiopulmonary bypass induced inflammation: pathophysiology and treatment. An update. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg2002; 21: 232-244.
2.
Wan S., LeClerc JL, Vincent JLInflammatory response to cardiopulmonary bypass: mechanisms involved and possible therapeutic strategies. Chest1997; 112: 676-692.
3.
Rubens FD, Mesana T.The inflammatory response to cardiopulmonary bypass: a therapeutic overview . Perfusion2004; 19: S5-S12.
4.
Fromes Y., Gaillard D., Ponzio O., et al. Reduction of the inflammatory response following coronary bypass grafting with total minimal extracorporeal circulation. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg2002; 22: 527-533.
5.
Remadi JP, Marticho P., Butoi I., et al. Clinical experience with the mini-extracorporeal circulation system: an evolution or a revolution?Ann Thorac Surg2004; 77: 2172-2176.
6.
Bical OM, Fromes Y., Gaillard D., et al. Comparison of the inflammatory response between miniaturized and standard CPB circuits in aortic valve surgery. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg2006; 29: 699-702.
7.
Huybregts Rajm , Morariu AM, Rakhorst G., et al. Attenuated renal and intestinal injury after use of a mini-cardiopulmonary bypass system. Ann Thorac Surg2007; 83: 1760-1767.
8.
Wippermann J. , Albes JM, Hartrumpf M., et al. Comparison of minimally invasive closed circuit extracorporeal circulation with conventional cardiopulmonary bypass and with off-pump technique in CABG patients: selected parameters of coagulation and inflammatory system. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg2005; 28: 127-132.
9.
Mazzei V., Nasso G., Salamone G., et al. Prospective randomized comparison of coronary bypass grafting with minimal extracorporeal circulation system (MECC) versus off-pump coronary surgery. Circulation2007; 116: 1-7.
10.
Immer FF, Pirovino CH, Gygax E. et al. Minimal versus conventional cardiopulmonary bypass: assessment of intraoperative myocardial damage in coronary bypass surgery. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg2005; 28: 701-704.
11.
Immer FF, Pirovino CH, Gygax E., et al. Minimal versus conventional cardiopulmonary bypass: assessment of intraoperative myocardial damage in coronary bypass surgery. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg2005; 28: 701-704.
12.
Castiglioni A., Verzini A., Pappalardo F., et al. Minimally invasive closed circuit versus standard extracorporeal circulation for aortic valve replacement. Ann Thorac Surg2007; 83: 586-591.
13.
Perhtel M., El-Ayoubi L., Bendisch A., Laas J., Gerigk M.Clinical advantages of using mini-bypass systems in terms of blood product use, postoperative bleeding and air entrainment: an in vivo clinical perspective . Eur J Cardiothorac Surg2007; 31: 1070-1075.
14.
Abdel-Rahman U., Ozaslan F., Risteski PS, et al. Initial experience with a minimized extracorporeal bypass system: is there a clinical benefit?Ann Thorac Surg2005; 80: 238-244.
15.
Nollert G., Schwabenland I., Maktav D., et al. Miniaturized cardiopulmonary bypass in coronary artery bypass surgery: marginal impact on inflammation and coagulation but loss of safety margins. Ann Thorac Surg2005; 80: 2326-2332.
16.
Beghi C., Nicolini F., Agostinelli A., et al. Mini-cardiopulmonary bypass system: results of a prospective randomized study. Ann Thorac Surg2006; 81: 1396-1400.
17.
Magovern JA, Singh D., Teekell-Taylor L., et al. Preoperative clinical factors are important determinants of the inflammatory state before and after heart surgery. ASAIO Journal2007; 53: 316-319.
18.
Just SS, Muller T., Hartrumpf M., Albes JMFirst experience with closed circuit/centrifugal pump extracorporeal circulation: cellular trauma, coagulatory and inflammatory response. Interact CardioVasc Thorac Surg2006; 5: 646-648.
19.
Prondzinsky R., Knũpfer A., Loppnow H., et al. Surgical trauma affects the proinflammatory status after cardiac surgery to a higher degree than cardiopulmonary bypass. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg2005; 129: 760-766.
20.
Kawahito K. , Adachi H., Ino T.Influence of surgical procedures on interleukin-6 and monocyte chemotactic and activating factor responses: CABG vs. valvular surgery. J Interferon Cytokine Res2000; 20: 1-6.
21.
Pereira KC, Mendonca-Filho HF, Gomes GS, et al. Macrophage chemoattractant protein 1 and outcome in cardiopulmonary bypass. Crit Care2005; 9: (suppl 2).
22.
Mair P., Mair J., Seibt I., et al. Plasma elastase concentrations and pulmonary function after cardiopulmonary bypass. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg1994; 108: 184-185.
