Inflammatory response after cardiopulmonary bypass: a randomized comparison between conventional hemofiltration and steroids

AIM: Recent reports have shown anti-inflammatory effects with conventional hemofiltration (CUF) in patients undergoing cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). The aim of this study was to evaluate the immunological and the hemodynamic response to CUF or metilprednisolone in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting. METHODS: Twenty-four consecutive patients were prospectively randomized to receive CUF (12 patients, Group A) or metilprednisolone (12 patients, Group B). Hemodynamic response was evaluated by Swan-Ganz catheter, immunological response was analyzed by IL-2, IL-4, IL-6, TNF-alpha, IFN-gamma, IL-10 before anesthetic induction (T0), at aortic-declamping (T1), at the end of surgery (T2), ITU admission (T3) and 24 hours (T4). Troponin I was measured at the same time-points. Hematological and coagulative controls were performed. RESULTS: Morbidity and mortality were comparable between the two groups. Group A demonstrated lower cardiac index at T1 (2.1 +/- 0.69 L/min m2 vs. 3.917 +/- 1.28, P = 0.034) without significantly higher indexed-systemic-vascular-resistances at the end of surgery (1 101 +/- 434.3 dyne s cm(-5) m(-2) vs. 797.7 +/- 316.67, P = 0.233). When proinflammatory and anti-inflammatory cytokines were considered, all improved during the postoperative time course, without differences between the 2 Groups (P = NS). Hematological and coagulative data were similar in the two groups, in terms of white blood cells, platelets, prothrombin time, and activated partial thromboplastin time (P = NS). CONCLUSIONS: Anti-inflammatory action of CUF was comparable to steroids, thus determining a similar proinflammatory response to CPB. However, hemodynamics was slightly impaired by CUF. Therefore, there is no reason to prefer CUF to steroids in patients undergoing elective CABG.