OBJECTIVETo analysis comparatively the primary clinic outcomes between minimal extracorporeal circulation (MECC) and conventional extracorporeal circulation (cECC).

METHODSForty cases accepted coronary artery bypass grafting from August to October at 2006 were divided into MECC group and cECC group at random, 20 cases for each group. Record and analysis of the general information, clinic data perioperatively, and complications postoperatively for each group were performed.

RESULTSThere were no deference between groups in gender, anamnesis and preoperative cardiac function, while age (P < 0.05), standard EuroSCORE and logistic EuroSCORE were much more higher in MECC group than in cECC group (P < 0.01). Similarly, there were no deference in operative time, bypass time, ischemic time and graft number between two groups. Contrasted with cECC group, the values of cTNI were lower in MECC group at 2 h, 6 h and 12 h post-ECC (P < 0.01), oxygen index were higher post-operatively and there was a statistic deference at 12 h post-ECC (P < 0.05). The valves of ALT and TBIL in cECC group were higher abnormally at early post-ECC, and significant higher than in MECC group at 2 h, 6 h post-ECC of ALT (P < 0.05), and at termination, 2 h post-ECC of TBIL (P < 0.05). The values of activated partial thromboplastin time were almost at physiological status in MECC group, but were significantly prolonged in cECC group at early post-ECC, and were statistically longer than in MECC group at 2 h, 6 h, 12 h post-ECC (P < 0.05). The concentration of free hemoglobin in cECC group were higher than in MECC group peri-operative, and there was a statistic deference at 2 h post-ECC (P < 0.05). There were no deference between the two group in Cr, PLT and WBC.

CONCLUSIONSCompared with cECC, MECC carries more biocompatibility, more safe and credible. MECC system can alleviate the organ injury postoperatively and decrease the incidence of complications, especially in high-risk patients.