ObjectiveTo investigate whether there is a protecting effect of remote ischemic preconditioning (RIPC) on patients underwent cardiac valvular surgery. MethodWe retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 72 adult patients underwent cardiac valvular surgery in our hospital from Febuary 2014 through April 2015 year. There were 26 males and 46 females with an age ranging from 23-68 years. We devided 72 patients into a RIPC group and a control group. There were 14 males and 28 females with a mean age of 48.87±12.28 years in the RIPC group. After the induction of anesthesia, the RIPC group was induced by three cycles of right upper limb ischemia and reperfusion using a blood pressure cuff. The blood pressure cuff was inflated to 200 mm Hg and we held it on for 5 minutes, deflated to 0 mm Hg and maintained for 5 minutes, which was defined as one cycle. There were 10 males and 20 females with a mean age of 47.70±8.07 years in the control group. We placed a standard blood pressure gasbag on the right upper limb for 30 minutes without inflation in the control group. We recorded the clinical data including cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) time, the cross-clamping time of ascending aorta, preoperative ejection fraction (EF), EF after discharging, postoperative complica-tion and mortality. Blood were sampled preoperatively (T0), 30 minutes after RIPC (T1), 30 minutes aftr the cardiopul-monary bypass finished (T2), 24 hours (T3), 48 hours (T4) and 72 hours (T5) after surgery to detect the concentration of troponin T (cTnT) and creatine kinase-MB (CK-MB). We counted the person-time used dopamine and norepinephrine. ResultThere was no death in both groups. The mechanical ventilation time, the time of ICU stay, the time of hospital stay, the number of person used vasoactive agent, and the EF when discharging showed no statistical difference between the two groups. Levels of cTNT in the RIPC group were statistically lower than those in the control group at T2 and T3 (P=0.001, P=0.001). Levels of CK-MB in the RIPC group were statistically lower than those in the control group at T2, T3, and T4 (P=0.011, P=0.010, P=0.033). ConclusionRIPC may have protective effect on myocardium for patients underwent cardiac valvular surgery.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the in-hospital and long-term outcomes of patients receiving mitral valve replacement with mechanical or biological prosthesis.MethodsThe clinical data of patients undergoing mitral valve replacement in our center between January 2005 and August 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients with emergency, reoperation, bleeding or embolic events or incomplete clinical data were ruled out.ResultsTotally 569 patients were enrolled, including 325 with mechanical prosthesis (a mechanical prosthesis group, 111 males and 214 females with a mean age of 55.54±4.09 years) and 244 bioprosthesis (a bioprosthesis group, 90 males and 154 females with a mean age of 60.02±4.28 years). There was no significant difference in the in-hospital mortality between the two groups (P=0.250). The survival rate at postoperative 15 years of the bioprosthesis group was higher than that of mechanical prosthesis group (78.69% vs. 66.25%, χ2=8.844, P=0.003). No remarkable differences were found in prosthesis failure (P=0.183) and thromboembolism events (P=0.505) between the two groups. Bleeding occurred more frequently in the mechanical prosthesis group (P=0.040). After the propensity-score matched analysis based on the age, the survival rate was still higher in the bioprosthesis group than in the mechanical prosthesis group (P=0.032).ConclusionBiological prosthesis can be considered as the preferable choice in mitral valve replacement procedure in order to improve the long-term survival and decrease the frequent of bleeding events.