Point-of-Care Viscoelastic Hemostatic Assays in Cardiac Surgery Patients: Comparison of Thromboelastography 6S, Thromboelastometry Sigma, and Quantra.

OBJECTIVES: Viscoelastic tests allow a reduction in blood product transfusion. Three modern devices are currently available (rotational thromboelastometry [ROTEM] sigma, thromboelastography [TEG] 6S, and Quantra). No study has compared the performances of these 3 devices simultaneously. DESIGN: An observational, nonrandomized cohort study. SETTING: A single-center of cardiac surgery in a university hospital. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 30 consecutive measurements from at least 10 adult patients presenting significant bleeding in the intensive care unit after cardiac surgery INTERVENTION: Viscoelastic tests using ROTEM sigma, TEG 6S, and Quantra were performed concomitantly with conventional coagulation measurements MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The authors included 16 patients with 31 blood samples. After the exclusion of missing values, 27 samples were analyzed. Correlation with platelet count was as follows: ROTEM, r = 0.84 [0.66-0.93], p < 0.0001; Quantra, r = 0.83 [0.64-0.92], p < 0.0001; TEG 6S, r = 0.64 [0.29-0.83], p = 0.001. Correlation with fibrinogen (Clauss assay) was as follows: ROTEM, r = 0.85 [0.68-0.93], p < 0.0001; Quantra, r = 0.88 [0.74-0.95], p < 0.0001; TEG 6S, r = 0.79 [0.55-0.91], p < 0.0001. No difference was observed for the detection of residual circulating heparin (anti-Xa activity >0.1), with 87% of correct identification for Quantra and 80% for both ROTEM and TEG 6S (p = 0.3). Time to first results after the beginning of the test was shorter for Quantra than ROTEM and TEG 6S (136 [126-152] seconds v 205 [176-221] seconds, p = 0.003 and v 450 [372-516] seconds, p < 0.0001 respectively). CONCLUSION: ROTEM sigma, TEG 6S, and Quantra performed similarly for exploring platelet count or residual circulating heparin. Thromboelastography 6S presented a weaker correlation with fibrinogen Clauss.

Effect of mechanical ventilation during cardiopulmonary bypass on end-expiratory lung volume in the perioperative period of cardiac surgery: an observational study.

BACKGROUND: Many studies explored the impact of ventilation during cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) period with conflicting results. Functional residual capacity or End Expiratory Lung Volume (EELV) may be disturbed after cardiac surgery but the specific effects of CPB have not been studied. Our objective was to compare the effect of two ventilation strategies during CPB on EELV. METHODS: Observational single center study in a tertiary teaching hospital. Adult patients undergoing on-pump cardiac surgery by sternotomy were included. Maintenance of ventilation during CPB was left to the discretion of the medical team, with division between "ventilated" and "non-ventilated" groups afterwards. Iterative intra and postoperative measurements of EELV were carried out by nitrogen washin-washout technique. Main endpoint was EELV at the end of surgery. Secondary endpoints were EELV one hour after ICU admission, PaO2/FiO2 ratio, driving pressure, duration of mechanical ventilation and post-operative pulmonary complications. RESULTS: Forty consecutive patients were included, 20 in each group. EELV was not significantly different between the ventilated versus non-ventilated groups at the end of surgery (1796 ± 586 mL vs. 1844 ± 524 mL, p = 1) and one hour after ICU admission (2095 ± 562 vs. 2045 ± 476 mL, p = 1). No significant difference between the two groups was observed on PaO2/FiO2 ratio (end of surgery: 339 ± 149 vs. 304 ± 131, p = 0.8; one hour after ICU: 324 ± 115 vs. 329 ± 124, p = 1), driving pressure (end of surgery: 7 ± 1 vs. 8 ± 1 cmH2O, p = 0.3; one hour after ICU: 9 ± 3 vs. 9 ± 3 cmH2O), duration of mechanical ventilation (5.5 ± 4.8 vs 8.2 ± 10.0 h, p = 0.5), need postoperative respiratory support (2 vs. 1, p = 1), occurrence of pneumopathy (2 vs. 0, p = 0.5) and radiographic atelectasis (7 vs. 8, p = 1). CONCLUSION: No significant difference was observed in EELV after cardiac surgery between not ventilated and ventilated patients during CPB.

Reliability of the Minto model for target-controlled infusion of remifentanil during cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass.

BACKGROUND: The Minto pharmacokinetic model is used for target-controlled infusion of remifentanil. The reliability of this model has never been evaluated during normothermic cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). The aim of this study was to assess the predictive performance of the model during CPB to determine its reliability during cardiac surgery. METHODS: This was a single-centre observational study. Arterial blood samples were drawn at five time points: T1, after tracheal intubation; T2, immediately before CPB; T3, 10 min after starting CPB; T4, 45 min after starting CPB; T5, 10 min after weaning off CPB. Prediction error (PE) and absolute prediction error (APE) were calculated for each sample and used to determine median prediction error (MDPE) and median absolute prediction error (MDAPE) per patient. Risk factors for APE >30% were assessed using multivariable analysis. Results are presented as medians with inter-quartile ranges. RESULTS: Fifty-eight patients with 283 blood samples (110 during CPB) were included. In the pre-CPB period, MDPE and MDAPE were -17.3 [-32.9 to 2.3] and 24.6 [12-37.7]%, whereas during CPB, they were -1.8 [-15.6 to 11.1] and 14.0 [6.74-27.1]%, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between measured and predicted remifentanil plasma concentrations during CPB. Age, preoperative albumin concentrations, temperature, and haemodilution were not independently associated with MDAPE >30%. CONCLUSIONS: The Minto model accurately predicts plasma remifentanil concentrations during cardiac surgery with CPB. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: 2017-A03153-50.