{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.07445442875481387, 'fraction_numerical': 0.036585365853658534, 'mean_word_length': 4.8389513108614235, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Miniaturized versus conventional cardiopulmonary bypass in high-risk patients undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery

Objective: To review our results with the use of miniaturized cardiopulmonary bypass (Mini-CPB) versus conventional cardiopulmonary bypass (C-CPB) in high-risk patients (additive EuroSCORE≥6) who have undergone coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG). Patients and methods: This study includes a consecutive series of 236 patients with an additive EuroSCORE≥6 who underwent CABG, employing either C-CPB or Mini-CPB. Propensity score analysis was performed. Results: The study groups had similar EuroSCOREs. Stroke rate was significantly higher among C-CPB patients (5.4% vs. 0%, p=0.026). In-hospital mortality (4.8% vs. 3.4%, p=0.75) and combined adverse end-point rate were higher in C-CPB patients (20.4% vs. 13.5%, p=0.18). Postoperative bleeding and need for transfusion were similar in the study groups, but re-sternotomy for bleeding was more frequent among C-CPB patients (4.8% vs. 1.1%, p=0.26). Seventy-four propensity matched pairs had similar immediate postoperative results: C-CPB patients had higher mortality (6.8% vs. 4.1%, p=0.72), stroke (5.4% vs. 0%, p=0.12) and combined adverse end-point rates (27.0% vs. 16.2%, p=0.11), but such differences failed to reach statistical significance. Conclusions: Mini-CPB achieved somewhat better results than C-CPB in these high-risk patients undergoing isolated CABG. This study confirmed that cerebral protection could be the main benefit associated with the use of Mini-CPB.