stsa Banner
  1. SAFETY AND EFFICACY OF THE HEPARIN REMOVAL DEVICE AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO PROTAMINE: A PROSPECTIVE, RANDOMIZED, PRECLINICAL TRIAL

 

Joseph B. Zwischenberger*, Wieke Tao, Donald J. Deyo, Roger A. Vertrees, Scott K. Alpard, Robert L. Brunston, Gerald Shulman

University of Texas Medical Branch

Galveston, Texas, USA

BACKGROUND AND METHODS

To evaluate safety and efficacy of a heparin removal device (HRD) in a swine model of 60-min, 28degrees Celsius cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB), 12 animals (60-100 kg) received HRD and six animals matched for weight received protamine as control. Plasma free hemoglobin (FHb), activated C3 (C3a), heparin concentration, ACT, APTT, anti-thrombin III, fibrinogen, heparinase thromboelastogram, and platelet count were measured. Tissue histology was evaluated 72 hours postoperatively.

RESULTS

All animals survived the three-day experiment without complications. The HRD run time for a targeted 90% heparin removal was 25-28 min. Heparin concentration immediately following CPB was 4.77± 0.17 U/mL (ACT 776± 83 sec) in the HRD group and 3.94± 0.63 U/mL (694± 132 sec) in the protamine group, respectively (P=NS). Immediately after the HRD run, heparin concentration decreased to 0.45± 0.06 U/mL (ACT 180± 12 sec) in the HRD group and 0.13± 0.02 U/mL (ACT 101± 5 sec) in the protamine group, respectively (P=0.01 between groups). One hour after HRD run or protamine administration, there was no significant difference between groups. Other coagulation variables, FHb, and percent C3a were not significantly different between groups, nor were there significant histologic findings specific to the HRD or protamine.

CONCLUSION

We conclude that HRD is safe and achieves predictable reversal of systemic heparinization following CPB.

 


STSA 46th Meeting Hyperlinks
Program  Video Session  PGC  1st Session  2nd Session  Th Forum  CV Forum  3rd Session




CTSNet STSA Search Feedback