ObjectiveTo study the effectiveness of simplified blood management in cardiovascular surgery, minimize the need for blood transfusions and decrease the medical care costs. MethodsFrom March 2010 to May 2013, the simplified blood management was applied in 655 patients who underwent cardiovascular surgery in the department of cardiac surgery, Guangdong General Hospital. There were 316 males and 339 females with their age of 13-78 (45.0±13.8) years. The techniques of simplified blood management consisted of preoperative strategies, intraoperative strategies, and postoperative strategies. ResultsThere were 437 patients (66.7%) avoiding red cell transfusion in cardiac surgery. Of the 437 patients, 403 (61.5%) without any blood products transfusion, 29 had transfusion of plasma transfusion, 3 of plasma and cryoprecipitation, one of plasma and platelet, and one of platelet only. Two patients died within 30 days postoperative with 0.5% mortality rate:one died of multiple organ failure, one died of cardiac arrest. The procedures and special etiologies of 437 patients avoiding red cell transfusion included mitral valve replacement in 86 patients, double valve (aortic and mitral) replacement in 75 patients, aortic valve replacement in 51 patients, mitral valve replacement plus modified Maze procedure in 41 patients, atrial septal defect repair in 41 patients, mitral valve repair in 38 patients, double valve replacement plus modified Maze procedure in 25 patients, re-do operation in 23 patients, ventricular septal defect repair in 18 patients, coronary artery bypass grafting plus valve replacement in 10 patients, myxoma excision in 8 patients, subacute bacterial endocarditis in 8 patients, pericardium dissection in 5 patients, off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting in 4 patients, Bentall procedure in 4 patients. Of 65 patients with cardiac surgery history, 23 (35.4%) were free from red cell transfusion in the second operation. ConclusionSimplified blood management is of benefit to reduce the blood transfusion safely and effectively, no using additional expensive medication and medical devices and therefore without increasing hospital costs. The technique is suitable to any institute and patient. It is worthwhile to be used widely in clinical practice. Cell salvage system is not necessary.
ObjectiveTo compare the outcomes of mechanical prosthetic versus bioprosthetic replacement of tricuspid valve. Methods We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 344 patients underwent tricuspid valve replacement (TVR) in Guangdong General Hospital between January 2000 and December 2010. There were 227 female and 117 male patients with their age of 8-74 (42.0±13.3) years. We allocated the patients into two groups: 168 patients (48.8%) at age of 37.0±11.6 years underwent mechanical tricuspid valve replacement (the MTVR group) and 176 (51.2%) patients at age of 46.0±13.4 years underwent biological tricuspid valve replacement (the BTVR group). Follow-up data were obtained via patients' visiting the outpatient clinic, telephone or mail contacts. ResultsThe mean follow-up time was 5.7 years (ranged from 2 months to 12.6 years). In the BTVR group, 149 patients survived to discharge from hospital, and 144 patients were followed-up successfully, giving a 96.6% follow-up rate. Early mortality (within 30 days post-operation) occurred in 29 patients (16.5%), and 14 patients (7.9%) died after 30 days post-operation. Eighteen bioprosthetic valve degeneration was found during follow-up, and infective endocarditis in 3 patients. In the MTVR group, 152 patients survived to discharge from hospital, 142 patients (93.4%) were followed-up. Early mortality in 13 patients (7.7%), and 14 patients (8.3%) died after 30 days post-operation. Nineteen patients suffered from mechanical prosthesis obstruction, no infective endocarditis patients was found in the MTVR group. There was no statistical difference between the BTVR group and the MTVR group in mortality rate (24.4% versus 16.1%, P=0.054) and in reoperation rate (4.2% versus 9.9%, P=0.051), respectively．There were statistical differences in long-term survival rates between the BTVR group and the MTVR group with 1 year survival rate(78% vs. 89%), 5 years survival rate(74% vs. 86%), and 10 years survival rate (66% versus 78%) with P value at 0.003. ConclusionsThis study suggests that the type of implanted prosthesis in tricuspid replacement does not affect long-term outcomes or the reoperation rate. The survival rate is higher in the MTVR group than that in the BTVR group, which may contribute to younger age in the MTVR group. There is a tendency in higher infective endocarditis incidence in the BTVR group than that in the MTVR group.