Tweet
Share
Myworld |
Sign Up
|
Login
Home
Browse
Featured
Latest
Popular
Templates
Patients
Blog
Low molecular starch versus gealtin plasma expander during CPB does it make a difference
×
Send This
Download
Comment
Favourite
more
Add to your Conference/Group
Please Select--
Add your comments:
Insert YouTube Videos inside your Slideworld presentation Copy and paste the video URL from YouTube, choose where to insert the video, and press “Submit”. The video will play in your slideshow after sometime.
Enter YouTube video URL
Enter Slide No where you want to insert youtube videos
Rating :
Rate It:
Embed :
Post a comment
Post Comment on Twitter
Post Comment on SlideWorld
Comments:
Subscribe to follow-up comments
SlideWorld will not store your password. SlideWorld will maintain your privacy.
Twitter Username:
Twitter Password:
Comments:
Email:
Subscribe to follow-up comments
Notes
Show Notes
Hide Notes
Slide 1 :
Low Molecular Starch Versus Gelatin Plasma Expander During CPB: Does It Make A Difference? Ricardo H Boks, BSc, Marianne J Wijers, Jan Hofland, MD, PhD, Johanna J M Takkenberg, MD, PhD and Ad J J Bogers, MD, PhD .
Slide 2 :
Types of plasma expanders
Slide 3 :
Prime additives Mannitol 20 g/l NaHCO3 1mol/l Aprotinin 1.5 ~ 2 KIU/l
Slide 4 :
Overview Plasma expanders
Slide 5 :
Characteristics Voluven® Lower Molecular weight then Elohaes,HES Short half life time 3-4 hours Maximum dosage of 50ml / Kg Bodyweight / 24h Less allergic then Gelatins 0.006% versus 0.038% No chance for Prions ? (BSE)
Slide 6 :
Objective pilot study Is it possible to replace Gelofusin for Voluven without exceeding the maximum dosage of Voluven of 50ml/Kg/24 hours ?
Slide 7 :
Criteria pilot study Population of 50 patients BSA ? 1.6 M2 Primary surgery CABG and Valves
Slide 8 :
Patient demography
Slide 9 :
Results use of plasma expanders per/post operative
Slide 10 :
Transfused bloodproducts
Slide 11 :
The total used volume of plasma expanders; Gelofusin, Elohaes and Voluven pre, per and post operation did not exceed 50ml/Kg/24 hours therefore replacement of Gelofusin for Voluven is possible. Conclusion Pilot
Slide 12 :
Randomized study Gelatin versus Starch 130/4.0 Objective: To use a single type of synthetic plasma expander. Hypothesis: No difference effect on transfusion, urine production blood loss and fluid resistance.
Slide 13 :
Methods Randomized study of 180 patients divided in a Gelatin group GPE and Starch 130/4.0 group LMSRL Stratified into 3 series of 60 patients of the routinely used oxygenators
Slide 14 :
Materials Capiox RX-25 Terumo Duo CML Cobe Quadrox-D Jostra Biomedicus centrifugal pump or roller pump CPB circuit coated with X-coating or Safeline
Slide 15 :
Materials en Methods Priming GPE group LMSRL group 1300 – 1500 ml Gelofusin 1000 ml Voluven + 300 – 500 ml Ringer 200 ml 200 g/l Mannitol 200 ml 200 g/l Mannitol 30 ml NaHCO3 1 mmol/l 30 ml NaHCO3 1 mmol/l 7500 IU Heparin on request Aprotinin 2 million KIU
Slide 16 :
Inclusion and exclusion criteria BSA ?1.8 m2 Hemoglobin ? 6.0 mmol/l < 75 years Primary surgery
Slide 17 :
Table 1. Patients Characteristics Patients Characteristics Variable, unit GPE (n=90) LMSRL (n=90) p Gender (m/f) 78 / 12 72 /18 Age (years) 64 ± 0.98 63 ± 1.04 ns Weight (Kg) 82 ± 1.4 83 ± 1.5 ns Length (cm) 175 ± 0.93 174 ± 0.83 ns BSA (M2) 1.97 ± 0.02 1.97 ± 0.02 ns CPB (minutes) 128 ± 5.0 133 ± 5.1 ns Aox (minutes) 84 ± 3.6 88 ± 4.1 ns CABG 54 52 AVR 12 11 MVR 13 14 CABG + AVR 11 13 ICU stay (hours) 22.9 ± 0.7 22.8 ± 0.7 ns
Slide 18 :
Results AFR Oxygenator Variable Unit GPE (n=30) LMSRL (n=30 p Capiox RX-25® AFR mmHg/l/min 26 ± 0.3 24 ± 0.4 0.02 Jostra Quadrox-D® AFR mmHg/l/min 25 ± 0.6 26 ± 0.5 ns Cobe Duo CML ® AFR mmHg/l/min 44 ± 0.6 45 ± 0.9 ns Values are expressed as mean ± SEM
Slide 19 :
Slide 20 :
Slide 21 :
Lactate mmol/l COP mmHg
Slide 22 :
Slide 23 :
Fluid balance Values are expressed as mean ± SEM in ml
Slide 24 :
Transfusion, Blood loss and Urine production Values are expressed as mean ± SEM in ml
Slide 25 :
Conclusions No difference in blood loss, transfusion, urine production, AFR Lower need for plasma-expanders by using starch solutions only Ratio Ringer / LMS is important for the COP LMS can replace Gelatin for the prime of the CPB circuit
Exercise During Preg...
A Hands On Approach ...
Ethnic Differences i...
Low Back Pain
Low Back Pain
Diagnosing Low Back ...
Free Powerpoint Templates
rhboks@planet.nl
5 Years ago.
1110 Views, 0 favourite
PowerPoint Presentation on Low molecular starch versus gealtin plasma expander during CPB: does it
more
PowerPoint Presentation on Low molecular starch versus gealtin plasma expander during CPB: does it make a difference? or PowerPoint Presentation on Randomized study between the use of gelatin and starch plasma expander for CPB
less
More By User
Flag as inappropriate
Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate. If needed, use the
feedback
form to let us know more details.
None
Pornographic
Defamatory
Illegal/Unlawful
Other Terms Of Service Violation
Copy Right
Cancel
Browse
|
Powerpoint Templates
|
Tags
|
Contact
|
About Us
|
Privacy
|
FAQ
|
Blog
© Slideworld