Duraflo II coating of cardiopulmonary bypass circuits reduces complement activation, but does not affect the release of granulocyte enzymes: a European multicentre study
1997 (English)In: European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, ISSN 1010-7940, E-ISSN 1873-734X, Vol. 11, no 2, 320-327 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
OBJECTIVE: This study was carried out to: (a) compare complement and granulocyte activation during cardiac operations in patients operated with cardiopulmonary bypass coated with heparin by the Duraflo II method, with activation in patients operated with uncoated circuits; and (b) relate complement, and granulocyte activation to selected adverse effects.
METHODS: In a multicentre study among Rikshospitalet, Ullevaal Hospital in Norway and Uppsala University Hospital in Sweden, plasma concentrations of the complement activation products C4b/iC4b/C4c (C4bc), C3b/iC3b/C3c (C3bc), the terminal SC5b-9 complement complex (TCC), and the granulocyte proteins myeloperoxidase and lactoferrin were assessed in two groups of patients undergoing aortocoronary bypass. Seventy-six patients underwent surgery operated with circuits coated by the Duraflo II heparin coating and 75 uncoated circuits. The same amount of systemic heparin was administered to all patients.
RESULTS: In both groups a significant increase in C4bc was first seen by the end of operation, from 86.7 +/- 12.5 to 273.0 +/- 277.4 nM in controls and from 86.9 +/- 18.5 to 320.2 +/- 190.5 nM in the control group, confirming previous documentation that the classical pathway is not activated during CPB, but as a consequence of protamin administration. The formation of C4bc did not differ significantly between the two groups. In the uncoated group the C3bc concentration increased from 124.0 +/- 15.3 to a maximum of 1176.1 +/- 64.7 nM (P < 0.01) and in the coated group it increased from 129.8 +/- 16.1 to a maximum of 1019.4 +/- 54.9 nM (P < 0.01) during CPB. Summary values but not peak values differed significantly between the groups. In the uncoated group the TCC concentration increased from 0.52 +/- 0.03 to a maximum value of 8.09 +/- 0.57 AU/ml (P < 0.01) while in the coated group the TCC concentration increased from a baseline of 0.53 +/- 0.03 to a peak value of 5.2 +/- 0.24 AU/ml (P <0.01). The difference between the peak values was statistically significant (P = 0.00002). In both groups a significant increase in myeloperoxidase and lactoferrin release was observed by the end of operation. There was no difference in myeloperoxidase or lactoferrin release between the two groups. TCC levels were compared to the occurrence of perioperative infarction, development of lung or renal failure, postoperative bleeding, time on ventilator and days in hospital. Three patients developed perioperative infarction; the peak levels of TCC were significantly higher in these patients than in the 148 patients that did not develop infarction. The reduction in TCC formation in the heparin-coated group was not associated with differences in any of the other clinical parameters. Few adverse effects occurred in the study. The peak values of C3bc were higher in the patients needing inotropic support that in those who did not, the relevance of this finding remains uncertain.
CONCLUSION: It is concluded that the Duraflo II heparin coating reduces complement activation, particularly TCC formation, during CPB, but not the release of specific neutrophil granule enzymes. No certain correlation was established between complement and granulocyte activation and clinical outcome.
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
1997. Vol. 11, no 2, 320-327 p.
Cardiac surgery, Complement activation, Granulocyte activation, Heparin treated extracorporeal circulation circuits, Multicentre clinical evaluation
Medical and Health Sciences
IdentifiersURN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-55706DOI: 10.1016/S1010-7940(96)01062-7PubMedID: 9080162OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-55706DiVA: diva2:83614