Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Perfusion
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kalpokas, M. V
Right arrow Articles by Silbert, B. S
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kalpokas, M. V
Right arrow Articles by Silbert, B. S
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

Carbon dioxide field flooding versus mechanical de-airing during open-heart surgery: a prospective randomized controlled trial

Mario V Kalpokas

Department of Anaesthesia, St. Vincent’s Hospital, Melbourne, Australia

Ian K Nixon

Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, St. Vincent’s Hospital, Melbourne, Australia

Roman Kluger

Department of Anaesthesia, St. Vincent’s Hospital, Melbourne, Australia

David S Beilby

Department of Anaesthesia, St. Vincent’s Hospital, Melbourne, Australia

Brendan S Silbert

Department of Anaesthesia, St. Vincent’s Hospital, Melbourne, Australia, silberbs{at}svhm.org.au

Removal of intracardiac air during valvular surgery should be accomplished in the most effective manner. We conducted a prospective randomized controlled trial to compare mechanical de-airing and carbon dioxide (CO2) field flooding in 18 patients undergoing elective valvular surgery. Transoesophageal echocardiography was used to record intracardiac bubbles, and this was assessed postoperatively by two independent echocardio-graphers blinded to treatment group. Both assessors graded the bubble count higher in the mechanical de-airing group compared with the CO2 flooding group, and there was good agreement between assessors. CO2 field flooding is more effective than mechanical de-airing in removing intracardiac bubbles following valvular surgery.

Perfusion, Vol. 18, No. 5, 291-294 (2003)
DOI: 10.1191/0267659103pf671oa
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 PerfusionHome page
M. L Schmitz, S. C Faulkner, C. E Johnson, J. L Tucker, M. Imamura, S B. Greenberg, and J. J Drummond-Webb
Cardiopulmonary bypass for adults with congenital heart disease: pitfalls for perfusionists
Perfusion, January 1, 2006; 21(1): 45 - 63.
[Abstract] [PDF]