Inflammatory response to cardiopulmonary bypass using two different types of heparin-coated extracorporeal circuits

Previous reports have highlighted the disparity in biocompatibility of two differently engineered heparin coatings during the cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) procedure. The aim of this prospective study was to evaluate the impact of the difference in haemocompatibility provided by either the Duraflo II equipment or the Carmeda equipment in the terminal inflammatory response observed after coronary artery surgery. Thirty patients were randomly allocated to two groups to be operated on using either Duraflo II equipment (group I) or Carmeda equipment (group 2) for extracorporeal circulation (ECC). Initial inflammatory response was assessed by terminal complement complex activation (SC5b-9). The late inflammatory response observed in the postoperative period was assessed by measuring cytokine production (tumour factor necrosis (TNFα), interleukin IL-6, interleukin IL-8) and circulating concentrations of adhesion molecules (ELAM-1, ICAM-1). The release of SC5b-9 after CPB and after protamine administration was lower in group 2 than in group 1 (p = 0.0002 and p = 0.006, respectively). A significant production of cytokines was detected in both groups with peak values observed within the time range of 4-6 h after the start of CPB. However, no difference was observed between the groups except for the IL-8 level in group 2, which was lower 2 h after the start of CPB (p = 0.01). Plasma levels of adhesion molecules were similar in both groups within the investigation period. Although the Carmeda equipment was more effective in reducing complement activation, the late inflammatory response was similar using either the Duraflo II or Carmeda equipment for extracorporeal circulation as reflected by the changes of cytokine and circulating adhesion molecule levels.