Display options
Share it on

J Thorac Dis. 2019 Jun;11:S1492-S1497. doi: 10.21037/jtd.2019.02.19.

MIECT: How did it start?.

Yves Fromes, Olivier M Bical

Affiliations

  1. Institute of Myology, Sorbonne University, Paris, France.
  2. Perfusion Unit, Groupe Hospitalier Paris St Joseph, Paris, France.
  3. Hôpital Privé de Parly II, Le Chesnay, France.
  4. Department of Cardiac Surgery, Groupe Hospitalier Paris St Joseph, Paris, France.

PMID: 31293799 PMCID: PMC6586584 DOI: 10.21037/jtd.2019.02.19

Abstract

Transiently assuming the functions of both heart and lungs as surgeons repair critical valves and vessel lesions can be achieved by mechanical circulatory support has its origins in cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). However, CPB technologies induce also some unintended adverse effects. During the 90s, a mayor trend pushed many physicians to reconsider the place of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and challenged the surgical reference treatment by less invasive catheter-based angioplasties. Nevertheless, best long-term patient outcomes were related to surgery. Therefore, a small number of multidisciplinary teams in Regensburg and Paris started to develop a minimally invasive CPB system. The basic concept relied on a closed-loop perfusion circuit with a non-occlusive pump. Moreover, the team in Paris pushed the concept further and developed a complete fully integrated CPB system allowed first closed-heart and later open-heart surgery with aortic cross-clamping and efficient cardioprotection. Those were the initial steps towards the future developments of minimally invasive extracorporeal circulation technologies. Initial clinical results were clearly positive in terms of overall morbimortality. Moreover, several preliminary results pointed out the biological benefits that decreased hemodilution, improved preservation of the immune reactions and more stable anticoagulation could bring to the field of ECT.

Keywords: Extracorporeal circulation; anticoagulation; cardiac surgery; inflammation; low-prime; minimally invasive

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

References

  1. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 1999 Sep;16 Suppl 1:S88-94 - PubMed
  2. Cardiovasc Surg. 2000 Apr;8(3):198-203 - PubMed
  3. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2000 Jul;18(1):31-7 - PubMed
  4. Cardiovasc Surg. 2001 Apr;9(2):188-93 - PubMed
  5. Heart Surg Forum. 1998;1(1):30-6 - PubMed
  6. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2002 Oct;22(4):527-33 - PubMed
  7. Semin Hematol. 1977 Oct;14(4):427-40 - PubMed
  8. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2006 May;29(5):699-702 - PubMed
  9. Anaesthesia. 2011 Jun;66(6):488-92 - PubMed
  10. Transfus Med Rev. 1989 Jan;3(1):63-8 - PubMed
  11. Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol. 2015 Jun;29(2):113-23 - PubMed
  12. Transfus Med Rev. 1987 Dec;1(3):201-4 - PubMed
  13. JAMA. 1985 Jan 25;253(4):551-3 - PubMed
  14. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 1996;10(6):417-21 - PubMed
  15. Ann Thorac Surg. 1996 Nov;62(5):1431-41 - PubMed
  16. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 1996;10(11):971-5; discussion 976 - PubMed
  17. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 1997 Feb;11(2):320-7 - PubMed
  18. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 1997 Apr;11(4):616-23; discussion 624-5 - PubMed
  19. Clin Chem. 1997 Sep;43(9):1684-96 - PubMed
  20. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 1997 Sep;12(3):516-8 - PubMed
  21. Anesthesiology. 1998 Feb;88(2):327-33 - PubMed
  22. Ann Thorac Surg. 1998 Dec;66(6):2051-5 - PubMed

Publication Types