Acute Right Ventricular Failure in Cardiac Surgery During Cardiopulmonary Bypass Separation: A Retrospective Case Series of 12 Years' Experience With Intratracheal Milrinone Administration.

OBJECTIVE: To report the authors' 12 years of experience with intratracheal milrinone administration and to assess the efficacy and limitations of intratracheal milrinone bolus administration for the treatment of unexpected acute right ventricular (RV) failure in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis. SETTING: Single-center university hospital. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred seventy-six patients (4.6%) undergoing on-pump cardiac surgery. INTERVENTIONS: Endotracheal tube administration of milrinone (5-mg bolus) after unexpected acute RV failure during separation from cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) weaning. RV failure was defined as the simultaneous presence of all of the following criteria: (1) hemodynamic instability or difficult separation from CPB with associated elevated central venous pressure or abnormal RV pressure waveform, (2) >20% reduction of RV fractional area change from baseline evaluated by transesophageal echocardiography, and (3) anatomical visualization of impaired or absent RV wall motion by direct intraoperative visual inspection. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Intratracheal milrinone administration was found to improve RV failure in 109 patients (61.9%) whereas RV failure persisted in 67 patients (38.1%). Using a multiple logistic regression model, severely decreased left ventricular ejection fraction (<35% v >50%) (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 3.72; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2-11.3; p = 0.012), longer CPB time (adjusted OR 1.014; CI 1.01-1.02; p = 0.001) and elevated postoperative fluid balance (adjusted OR 1.39; CI 1.1-1.8; p = 0.02) were found to be significant predictors of persistent RV failure. CONCLUSION: Intratracheal instillation of milrinone was associated with clinical improvement of RV failure occurring during separation from CPB in almost two-thirds of patients. Factors limiting its therapeutic efficacy include severe left ventricular dysfunction, increased fluid balance, and long CPB time.

Aerosolized Vasodilators for the Treatment of Pulmonary Hypertension in Cardiac Surgical Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: In cardiac surgery, pulmonary hypertension is an important prognostic factor for which several treatments have been suggested over time. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we compared the efficacy of inhaled aerosolized vasodilators to intravenously administered agents and to placebo in the treatment of pulmonary hypertension during cardiac surgery. We searched MEDLINE, CENTRAL, EMBASE, Web of Science, and clinicaltrials.gov databases from inception to October 2015. The incidence of mortality was assessed as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included length of stay in hospital and in the intensive care unit, and evaluation of the hemodynamic profile. METHODS: Of the 2897 citations identified, 10 studies were included comprising a total of 434 patients. RESULTS: Inhaled aerosolized agents were associated with a significant decrease in pulmonary vascular resistance (-41.36 dyne·s/cm, P= .03) and a significant increase in mean arterial pressure (8.24 mm Hg, P= .02) and right ventricular ejection fraction (7.29%, P< .0001) when compared to intravenously administered agents. No significant hemodynamically meaningful differences were observed between inhaled agents and placebo; however, an increase in length of stay in the intensive care unit was shown with the use of inhaled aerosolized agents (0.66 days, P= .01). No other differences were observed for either comparison. CONCLUSIONS: The administration of inhaled aerosolized vasodilators for the treatment of pulmonary hypertension during cardiac surgery is associated with improved right ventricular performance when compared to intravenously administered agents. This review does not support any benefit compared to placebo on major outcomes. Further investigation is warranted in this area of research and should focus on clinically significant outcomes.