Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://earsiv.odu.edu.tr:8080/xmlui/handle/11489/4809
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorBorulu, Ferhat-
dc.contributor.authorArslan, Umit-
dc.contributor.authorCalik, Eyuepserhat-
dc.contributor.authorErkut, Bilgehan-
dc.date.accessioned2024-03-20T13:47:40Z-
dc.date.available2024-03-20T13:47:40Z-
dc.date.issued2023-
dc.identifier.citationBorulu, F., Arslan, Ü., Çalik, E., Erkut, B. (2023). Comparison of flowmeter (transit time flow measurement) values for graft flow in three different surgical methods for isolated coronary artery bypass surgery. Cardiovasc. J. Afr., 34(4), 242-247. https://doi.org/10.5830/CVJA-2023-029en_US
dc.identifier.issn1995-1892-
dc.identifier.issn1680-0745-
dc.identifier.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.5830/CVJA-2023-029-
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/full-record/WOS:001026335300001-
dc.identifier.urihttp://earsiv.odu.edu.tr:8080/xmlui/handle/11489/4809-
dc.descriptionWoS Categories: Cardiac & Cardiovascular Systemsen_US
dc.descriptionWeb of Science Index: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED)en_US
dc.descriptionResearch Areas: Cardiovascular System & Cardiologyen_US
dc.description.abstractBackground: Graft patency is the most important factor in coronary artery bypass surgery. This study aimed to compare the relationship between three different surgical methods and transit time flow measurement (TTFM), which is used to detect technical problems in anastomoses performed during coronary artery bypass graft operations and to correct them if necessary.Methods: A total of 110 patients undergoing isolated coronary artery bypass surgery were analysed. Of these patients, 48 were operated on by inducing cardiopulmonary arrest (group 1), 33 were operated on without inducing cardiac arrest (group 2) during cardiopulmonary bypass surgery, and 29 underwent surgery on the off-pump beating heart (group 3). TTFMs were performed on all the patients' grafts. Additional surgical intervention requirements, the need for intra-operative and postoperative inotropic support, and all postoperative follow-up data were compared.Results: In total, 110 patients were measured for 301 grafts. Due to insufficient measurements performed on these patients, additional surgical intervention was performed on five grafts in group 1, five grafts in group 2, and seven grafts in group 3. These interventions enabled a normal flow rate to be achieved. The number of grafts that required revision was highest in group 3. There was no difference between the groups in terms of demographic data, EuroSCORE II, preoperative ejection fraction, postoperative complications and mortality rate.Conclusion: TTFM is important for detecting technical problems in grafts. We believe that all surgical methods can be applied more safely by controlling graft flow.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherCLINICS CARDIVE PUBL PTY LTD-DURBANVILLEen_US
dc.relation.isversionof10.5830/CVJA-2023-029en_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.subjecttransit time flow meter, coronary artery bypass surgeryen_US
dc.subjectON-PUMP, HEARTen_US
dc.titleComparison of flowmeter (transit time flow measurement) values for graft flow in three different surgical methods for isolated coronary artery bypass surgeryen_US
dc.typearticleen_US
dc.relation.journalCARDIOVASCULAR JOURNAL OF AFRICAen_US
dc.contributor.departmentOrdu Üniversitesien_US
dc.contributor.authorID0000-0001-9731-9998en_US
dc.identifier.volume34en_US
dc.identifier.issue4en_US
dc.identifier.startpage242en_US
dc.identifier.endpage247en_US
Appears in Collections:Cerrahi Tıp Bilimleri

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.