冠状动脉中冷晶体与含血停搏液灌注比较  

Comparison of Efficacy of Myocardial Protection Between Cold Crystalloid and Blood Cardioplegia

作　　者：镡朝晖[1] 朱洪生[1] 富皓白[1] 葛云霞[1] 冯缘[1] 

机构地区：[1]上海第二医科大学仁济医院胸外科,上海200001

出　　处：《上海第二医科大学学报》2001年第2期119-121,共3页Acta Universitatis Medicinalis Secondae Shanghai

摘　　要：目的比较冷晶体停搏液和含血停搏液心肌保护效果。　方法应用冷晶体或含血停搏液灌注施行冠状动脉搭桥术 3 5例。冷晶体组采用间断灌注 ;含血停搏液组灵活交替采用温血、冷血停搏液。　结果含血停搏液组与冷晶体停搏液组术前心功能及血清CK -MB值、冠状动脉搭桥支数、体外循环时间无差异 ,但含血停搏液组主动脉阻断时间显著延长 (P<0 .0 1)。术后血清CK -MB值、自动复跳率无显著差异。　结论含血停搏液心肌保护效果不逊于冷晶体停搏液 ;主动脉阻断时间对心肌保护有更重要影响。Objective The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of cold crystalloid cardioplegia with integrated blood cardioplegia for evaluating the adequacy of myocardial protection. Thirty-five patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting were randomly allocated to receive intermittent cold crystalloid or blood cardioplegia. Preoperative heart function (NYHA), serum CK-MB, number of coronary artery bypass grafts, total bypass time were similar in both groups. However, aortic cross-clamping time in the blood cardioplegia group was significantly longer than in the cold crystalloid cardioplegia group (P<0.01). Postoperative serum CK-MB was similar in both groups. Blood cardioplegia is at least not worse than cold crystalloid cardioplegia. Shortening the aortic cross-clamping time is more important for myocardial protection.

关 键 词：心停搏液 心肌保护 体外循环 冠状动脉搭桥术 

分 类 号：R654.1[医药卫生—外科学]