Clinical and Chemical Outcomes Following Cardiac Surgery: The Post-Operative Effects of MUF
NCT ID: NCT01864395
Last Updated: 2013-05-29
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
UNKNOWN
NA
90 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2013-07-31
2014-10-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
The Role of Modified Ultrafiltration Following Open Heart Surgery
NCT06085066
Ultrafiltration on Coagulation Function in Cardiac Surgery
NCT04031144
Plasma Utilization Following Cardiac Surgery
NCT01187394
Continuous Hemofiltration During Cardiopulmonary Bypass and Its Effect on Lactatemia
NCT03412968
Laboratory Outcome Predictors in Coronary Surgery
NCT01178866
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
While this technique produces a product with a high haemoglobin (Hb), the main disadvantage of this process is the loss of plasma protein and clotting factors (Samolyk et al, 2005).
The Modified Ultrafitration (MUF) is a standard of care technique that was originally used on pediatric patients undergoing cardiac surgery with CPB. Following CPB while the aorta is still cannulated, MUF uses an inline hemofilter to concentrate the patients total blood volume thereby increasing Hb, plasma proteins, systemic blood pressure, and cardiac index while decreasing cytokines and post-operative bleeding (Kiziltepe et al. 2001).
According to a task-force on evidence based surgery (the Society of Thoracic Surgeons and the Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesia) the use of modified ultrafiltration (online-MUF) is indicated for blood conservation and reduction of post-operative blood loss in adult cardiac operations using cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) (Ferraris et al 2011). Moreover, Luciani et al. 2001, showed significantly lower levels of GI, neurologic and cardiac complications in patients who underwent on-line MUF following cardiac surgery as compared to those who did not. They also demonstrated a significantly lower mortality at 30 days follow-up in patients receiving online MUF as compared to control. Boodhwani et al. (2006) demonstrated that the use of online MUF was associated with a 0.72 unit reduction in blood transfused and a reduction of post-operative loss. The disadvantages to this technique are the time required (10-15 min), delays protamine administration, and the requirement of anaesthesia cooperation for pressure management. According to the Proceedings of the American Society of Extracorporeal Technology International Conf. March 9, 2013, online MUF works best and is recommended for smaller patients 75 kg or less because the effect of concentration of the blood volume is greater in smaller patients as compared to larger patients. In house data collected by our Department of Clinical Perfusion at the Royal University Hospital has demonstrated that 70% of the smaller patients undergoing cardiac surgery (mainly women) receive allogeneic transfusion peri- and post-operatively.
Off-line MUFF, another standard of care technique, is used after separation from CPB and decannulation. This technique uses a hemofilter to concentrate the residual CPB volume to produce a product which is more analogous to whole blood as compared to that processed by the CF method. Recently, our research group has shown that after 12-hours post-operatively patients' biochemical (total protein and albumin) and clinical parameters (vasoactive inotrope score and fluid balance) were significantly improved when patients' residual CPB volume underwent multiple-pass hemofiltration as compared to the CF (McNair et al. (2013), Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anaesthesia, In Press). Recently, it has been demonstrated that following cardiac surgery, the post-operative use of vasoactive inotropes is decreased when the residual CPB volume is processed by the offline MUF method as compared to the CF method (Coli et al 2012; McNair et al. (2013), Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anaesthesia, In Press). The disadvantages of on-line MUFF are the possible entrainment of air into the arterial line and prolonged time for protamine administration. The disadvantages of off-line MUFF are inadequate clearance of heparin by the hemofilter and prolonged processing time.
There is a need for the proposed study because it will help to determine whether there is any difference in patient outcomes between the use of on-line MUF and off-line MUF. Our study will also demonstrate which method is better at enhancing clinical (volume of allogeneic transfusion, chest tube loss, fluid balance length of stay and ventilation time) and biochemical (Hb, total protein, albumin and markers of inflammation) outcomes during the 12-hour post-operative period.
The data gathered from this study may save smaller patients from exposure to allogeneic transfusions during the 12-hour postoperative period. This study will also determine which method our institution will use to better serve our patients, allowing them to have a safer, shorter, transfusion-free recovery during the post-operative period.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
DOUBLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Control (CF)
Centrifugation Method (CF): currently used to separate whole blood into red blood cells (RBCs) and plasma components. The RBCs are washed with normal saline and re-infused into the patient, while the plasma portion is discarded.
Centrifugation Method
Currently used to separate whole blood into red blood cells (RBCs) and plasma components. The RBCs are washed with normal saline and re-infused into the patient, while the plasma portion is discarded.
Online MUF
Online MUF: hemofilter is used online while the heart-lung machine is connected to the patient.
Online MUF
Hemofilter is used online while the heart-lung machine is connected to the patient.
Offline MUF
Offline MUF: hemofilter is used offline when the heart-lung machine is not connected to the patient.
Offline MUF
Hemofilter is used offline when the heart-lung machine is not connected to the patient.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Centrifugation Method
Currently used to separate whole blood into red blood cells (RBCs) and plasma components. The RBCs are washed with normal saline and re-infused into the patient, while the plasma portion is discarded.
Online MUF
Hemofilter is used online while the heart-lung machine is connected to the patient.
Offline MUF
Hemofilter is used offline when the heart-lung machine is not connected to the patient.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* patient weighs 75 kg or smaller
* 40-80 years of age
* elective or urgent cardiac surgery
Exclusion Criteria
* severe anemia
* severe kidney dysfunction
* ejection fraction of less than 30%
40 Years
80 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
University of Saskatchewan
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Erick D McNair, PhD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Clinical Assistant Professor, Department of Surgery, Cardiovascular Surgery
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Royal University Hospital
Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Central Contacts
Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.
Facility Contacts
Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
13-143
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.