Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 30, 2026
Establishment of a Novel Ex Vivo Lung Perfusion System for Rat Lungs After Circulatory Death
Published on: October 18, 2024
Are minimized perfusion circuits the better heart lung machines? Final results of a prospective randomized
A El-Essawi1, T Hajek, J Skorpil
1Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Klinikum Braunschweig, Braunschweig, Germany. aelessawi@aol.com
Introduction:
Minimized perfusion circuits (MPCs), although aiming at minimizing the adverse effects of cardiopulmonary bypass, have not yet gained popularity. This can be attributed to concerns regarding their safety, as well as lack of sufficient evidence of their benefit.
Methods:
Described is a randomized, multicentre study comparing the MPC - ROCsafeRX to standard cardiopulmonary bypass in patients undergoing elective coronary artery bypass grafting and/ or aortic valve replacement.
Results:
Five hundred patients were included in the study (252 randomized to the ROCsafeRX group and 248 to standard cardiopulmonary bypass). Both groups were well matched for demographic characteristics and type of surgery. No operative mortality and no device-related complications were encountered. Transfusion requirement (333 ± 603 vs. 587 ± 1010 ml; p=0.001), incidence of atrial fibrillation (16.3% vs. 24.2%; p=0.03) and the incidence of major adverse events (9.1% vs. 16.5%; p=0.02) were all in favour of the MPC group.
Conclusion:
These results confirm both the safety and efficacy of the ROCsafeRX MPC for a large variety of cardiac patients. Minimized perfusion circuits should, therefore, play a greater role in daily practice so that as many patients as possible can benefit from their advantages.
Insights
Minimized perfusion circuits (MPCs) like ROCsafeRX are safe and effective for cardiac surgery. This study found MPCs reduced transfusions and adverse events compared to standard cardiopulmonary bypass.
Area of Science:
- Cardiovascular Surgery
- Medical Devices
Background:
- Minimized perfusion circuits (MPCs) aim to reduce cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) side effects but lack widespread adoption due to safety concerns and limited evidence.
- Lack of robust data hinders the clinical integration of MPCs.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the safety and efficacy of the ROCsafeRX MPC compared to standard CPB.
- To assess the impact of MPCs on patient outcomes in cardiac surgery.
Main Methods:
- A randomized, multicentre study involving 500 patients undergoing elective coronary artery bypass grafting and/or aortic valve replacement.
- Comparison between the ROCsafeRX MPC group (252 patients) and the standard CPB group (248 patients).
Main Results:
- No operative mortality or device-related complications were observed in either group.
- The ROCsafeRX MPC group showed significantly lower transfusion requirements (p=0.001), reduced incidence of atrial fibrillation (p=0.03), and fewer major adverse events (p=0.02).
Conclusions:
- The ROCsafeRX MPC demonstrated safety and efficacy in a diverse cardiac patient population.
- MPCs should be more widely adopted in clinical practice to leverage their benefits for patients.
