Celsior preserved cardiac mechanoenergetics better than popular solutions in canine hearts

Yu Oshima, Satoshi Mohri, Juichiro Shimizu, Gentaro Iribe, Takeshi Imaoka, Waso Fujinaka, Takahiko Kiyooka, Kozo Ishino, Shunji Sano, Fumihiko Kajiya, Hiroyuki Suga

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background. Better protective effects of Celsior on cardiac function than the other conventional solutions have been reported in acute experiments and in clinical trials for at-risk patients. However, no study has yet precisely elucidated how these preservation solutions affect cardiac mechanoenergetics. Therefore, we evaluated the effects of St. Thomas' Hospital solution No. 2, University of Wisconsin solution, and Celsior on left ventricular contractility (Emax: end-systolic pressure-volume ratio) and oxygen consumption. Methods. We used 32 canine excised cross-circulated hearts. Twenty-three hearts served as donor hearts after hypothermic ischemia with one of the three solutions, and the remaining 9 served as controls. After arrest with each solution, the hearts were preserved for 4 hours at 4°C. Then, we measured left ventricular pressure, volume, and oxygen consumption to obtain E max and the relation between ventricular pressure-volume area (a measure of total mechanical energy) and oxygen consumption. We also evaluated the oxygen cost of Emax by changing Emax with calcium administration. Results. Celsior did not significantly affect Emax (6.3 ± 2.4 in control versus 5.3 ± 1.3 mm Hg·mL -1·100 g with Celsior) nor the oxygen cost of Emax (1.2 ± 0.6 versus 1.6 ± 0.5 mL O2·mL·mm Hg-1·beat-1·100 g-2, respectively). In contrast, St. Thomas' Hospital and University of Wisconsin solutions significantly decreased Emax (4.5 ± 1.1 and 3.5 ± 0.9 mm Hg·mL-1·100 g, respectively) and increased the oxygen cost of Emax (2.5 ± 0.8 and 2.4 ± 0.9 mL O2·mL·mm Hg-1·beat -1·100 g-2, respectively) compared with control and Celsior-preserved hearts. The slope and intercept of the oxygen consumption versus pressure-volume area relation showed no significant difference among the four groups. Conclusions. Celsior showed better protective effects on cardiac mechanoenergetics than St. Thomas' Hospital and University of Wisconsin solutions in the acute phase of heart transplantation.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)658-664
Number of pages7
JournalAnnals of Thoracic Surgery
Volume81
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Feb 2006
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Canidae
Oxygen Consumption
Ventricular Pressure
Oxygen
Costs and Cost Analysis
Heart Transplantation
Celsior
Ischemia
Tissue Donors
Clinical Trials
Blood Pressure
Calcium
Pressure

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
  • Surgery

Cite this

Oshima, Y., Mohri, S., Shimizu, J., Iribe, G., Imaoka, T., Fujinaka, W., ... Suga, H. (2006). Celsior preserved cardiac mechanoenergetics better than popular solutions in canine hearts. Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 81(2), 658-664. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2005.07.067

Celsior preserved cardiac mechanoenergetics better than popular solutions in canine hearts. / Oshima, Yu; Mohri, Satoshi; Shimizu, Juichiro; Iribe, Gentaro; Imaoka, Takeshi; Fujinaka, Waso; Kiyooka, Takahiko; Ishino, Kozo; Sano, Shunji; Kajiya, Fumihiko; Suga, Hiroyuki.

In: Annals of Thoracic Surgery, Vol. 81, No. 2, 02.2006, p. 658-664.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Oshima, Y, Mohri, S, Shimizu, J, Iribe, G, Imaoka, T, Fujinaka, W, Kiyooka, T, Ishino, K, Sano, S, Kajiya, F & Suga, H 2006, 'Celsior preserved cardiac mechanoenergetics better than popular solutions in canine hearts', Annals of Thoracic Surgery, vol. 81, no. 2, pp. 658-664. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2005.07.067
Oshima, Yu ; Mohri, Satoshi ; Shimizu, Juichiro ; Iribe, Gentaro ; Imaoka, Takeshi ; Fujinaka, Waso ; Kiyooka, Takahiko ; Ishino, Kozo ; Sano, Shunji ; Kajiya, Fumihiko ; Suga, Hiroyuki. / Celsior preserved cardiac mechanoenergetics better than popular solutions in canine hearts. In: Annals of Thoracic Surgery. 2006 ; Vol. 81, No. 2. pp. 658-664.
@article{1cf3369197f74b148dfbf20bf3933659,
title = "Celsior preserved cardiac mechanoenergetics better than popular solutions in canine hearts",
abstract = "Background. Better protective effects of Celsior on cardiac function than the other conventional solutions have been reported in acute experiments and in clinical trials for at-risk patients. However, no study has yet precisely elucidated how these preservation solutions affect cardiac mechanoenergetics. Therefore, we evaluated the effects of St. Thomas' Hospital solution No. 2, University of Wisconsin solution, and Celsior on left ventricular contractility (Emax: end-systolic pressure-volume ratio) and oxygen consumption. Methods. We used 32 canine excised cross-circulated hearts. Twenty-three hearts served as donor hearts after hypothermic ischemia with one of the three solutions, and the remaining 9 served as controls. After arrest with each solution, the hearts were preserved for 4 hours at 4°C. Then, we measured left ventricular pressure, volume, and oxygen consumption to obtain E max and the relation between ventricular pressure-volume area (a measure of total mechanical energy) and oxygen consumption. We also evaluated the oxygen cost of Emax by changing Emax with calcium administration. Results. Celsior did not significantly affect Emax (6.3 ± 2.4 in control versus 5.3 ± 1.3 mm Hg·mL -1·100 g with Celsior) nor the oxygen cost of Emax (1.2 ± 0.6 versus 1.6 ± 0.5 mL O2·mL·mm Hg-1·beat-1·100 g-2, respectively). In contrast, St. Thomas' Hospital and University of Wisconsin solutions significantly decreased Emax (4.5 ± 1.1 and 3.5 ± 0.9 mm Hg·mL-1·100 g, respectively) and increased the oxygen cost of Emax (2.5 ± 0.8 and 2.4 ± 0.9 mL O2·mL·mm Hg-1·beat -1·100 g-2, respectively) compared with control and Celsior-preserved hearts. The slope and intercept of the oxygen consumption versus pressure-volume area relation showed no significant difference among the four groups. Conclusions. Celsior showed better protective effects on cardiac mechanoenergetics than St. Thomas' Hospital and University of Wisconsin solutions in the acute phase of heart transplantation.",
author = "Yu Oshima and Satoshi Mohri and Juichiro Shimizu and Gentaro Iribe and Takeshi Imaoka and Waso Fujinaka and Takahiko Kiyooka and Kozo Ishino and Shunji Sano and Fumihiko Kajiya and Hiroyuki Suga",
year = "2006",
month = "2",
doi = "10.1016/j.athoracsur.2005.07.067",
language = "English",
volume = "81",
pages = "658--664",
journal = "Annals of Thoracic Surgery",
issn = "0003-4975",
publisher = "Elsevier USA",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Celsior preserved cardiac mechanoenergetics better than popular solutions in canine hearts

AU - Oshima, Yu

AU - Mohri, Satoshi

AU - Shimizu, Juichiro

AU - Iribe, Gentaro

AU - Imaoka, Takeshi

AU - Fujinaka, Waso

AU - Kiyooka, Takahiko

AU - Ishino, Kozo

AU - Sano, Shunji

AU - Kajiya, Fumihiko

AU - Suga, Hiroyuki

PY - 2006/2

Y1 - 2006/2

N2 - Background. Better protective effects of Celsior on cardiac function than the other conventional solutions have been reported in acute experiments and in clinical trials for at-risk patients. However, no study has yet precisely elucidated how these preservation solutions affect cardiac mechanoenergetics. Therefore, we evaluated the effects of St. Thomas' Hospital solution No. 2, University of Wisconsin solution, and Celsior on left ventricular contractility (Emax: end-systolic pressure-volume ratio) and oxygen consumption. Methods. We used 32 canine excised cross-circulated hearts. Twenty-three hearts served as donor hearts after hypothermic ischemia with one of the three solutions, and the remaining 9 served as controls. After arrest with each solution, the hearts were preserved for 4 hours at 4°C. Then, we measured left ventricular pressure, volume, and oxygen consumption to obtain E max and the relation between ventricular pressure-volume area (a measure of total mechanical energy) and oxygen consumption. We also evaluated the oxygen cost of Emax by changing Emax with calcium administration. Results. Celsior did not significantly affect Emax (6.3 ± 2.4 in control versus 5.3 ± 1.3 mm Hg·mL -1·100 g with Celsior) nor the oxygen cost of Emax (1.2 ± 0.6 versus 1.6 ± 0.5 mL O2·mL·mm Hg-1·beat-1·100 g-2, respectively). In contrast, St. Thomas' Hospital and University of Wisconsin solutions significantly decreased Emax (4.5 ± 1.1 and 3.5 ± 0.9 mm Hg·mL-1·100 g, respectively) and increased the oxygen cost of Emax (2.5 ± 0.8 and 2.4 ± 0.9 mL O2·mL·mm Hg-1·beat -1·100 g-2, respectively) compared with control and Celsior-preserved hearts. The slope and intercept of the oxygen consumption versus pressure-volume area relation showed no significant difference among the four groups. Conclusions. Celsior showed better protective effects on cardiac mechanoenergetics than St. Thomas' Hospital and University of Wisconsin solutions in the acute phase of heart transplantation.

AB - Background. Better protective effects of Celsior on cardiac function than the other conventional solutions have been reported in acute experiments and in clinical trials for at-risk patients. However, no study has yet precisely elucidated how these preservation solutions affect cardiac mechanoenergetics. Therefore, we evaluated the effects of St. Thomas' Hospital solution No. 2, University of Wisconsin solution, and Celsior on left ventricular contractility (Emax: end-systolic pressure-volume ratio) and oxygen consumption. Methods. We used 32 canine excised cross-circulated hearts. Twenty-three hearts served as donor hearts after hypothermic ischemia with one of the three solutions, and the remaining 9 served as controls. After arrest with each solution, the hearts were preserved for 4 hours at 4°C. Then, we measured left ventricular pressure, volume, and oxygen consumption to obtain E max and the relation between ventricular pressure-volume area (a measure of total mechanical energy) and oxygen consumption. We also evaluated the oxygen cost of Emax by changing Emax with calcium administration. Results. Celsior did not significantly affect Emax (6.3 ± 2.4 in control versus 5.3 ± 1.3 mm Hg·mL -1·100 g with Celsior) nor the oxygen cost of Emax (1.2 ± 0.6 versus 1.6 ± 0.5 mL O2·mL·mm Hg-1·beat-1·100 g-2, respectively). In contrast, St. Thomas' Hospital and University of Wisconsin solutions significantly decreased Emax (4.5 ± 1.1 and 3.5 ± 0.9 mm Hg·mL-1·100 g, respectively) and increased the oxygen cost of Emax (2.5 ± 0.8 and 2.4 ± 0.9 mL O2·mL·mm Hg-1·beat -1·100 g-2, respectively) compared with control and Celsior-preserved hearts. The slope and intercept of the oxygen consumption versus pressure-volume area relation showed no significant difference among the four groups. Conclusions. Celsior showed better protective effects on cardiac mechanoenergetics than St. Thomas' Hospital and University of Wisconsin solutions in the acute phase of heart transplantation.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=31044432654&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=31044432654&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2005.07.067

DO - 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2005.07.067

M3 - Article

C2 - 16427870

AN - SCOPUS:31044432654

VL - 81

SP - 658

EP - 664

JO - Annals of Thoracic Surgery

JF - Annals of Thoracic Surgery

SN - 0003-4975

IS - 2

ER -