Del Nido cardioplegia in coronary surgery: a propensity-matched analysis

Abstract OBJECTIVES Del Nido cardioplegia (DNC) has been shown to be safe in adults with normal coronary arteries who are undergoing valve surgery. This study compared the effects of DNC versus traditional blood-based cardioplegia on postoperative complications in patients who underwent coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). METHODS A retrospective analysis was performed on 863 patients who underwent CABG with DNC (n = 420) or control cardioplegia (CC) (n = 443) between 2014 and 2017. The full cohort of DNC and CC recipients, as well as propensity score-matched pairs, was compared regarding preoperative risk variables and outcomes. RESULTS The DNC and CC groups showed no significant differences in mean cardiopulmonary bypass time (53.09 vs 52.10 min, P = 0.206) or aortic cross-clamp time (32.82 vs 33.28 min, P = 0.967). The groups also showed no difference in operative mortality (2.1% vs 2.5%, P = 0.734); however, DNC use resulted in lower rates of overall infections (1.7% vs 4.3%, P = 0.024), total sternal infections (0.9% vs 3.2%, P = 0.023), postoperative atrial fibrillation (23.8% vs 30.7%, P = 0.023) and postoperative ventricular tachycardia (0.5% vs 3.4%, P = 0.002). A propensity-matching analysis (n = 335 pairs) showed similar statistically significant decreases with DNC. CONCLUSIONS In this large cohort of CABG patients, DNC was shown as a safe alternative to CC and was associated with lower postoperative dysrhythmia and infection rates. These findings show that DNC is safe and effective in patients whose operative interventions may require only single-dosing cardioplegia; its use in longer cases should be further explored given its low complication rate.