HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Personal Folders Download to citation manager Permission Requests Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Taylor, R. L. Articles by Grover, F. L. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Taylor, R. L. Articles by Grover, F. L.

The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, Vol 42, 22-26, Copyright © 1986 by The Society of Thoracic Surgeons

ARTICLES

Comparison of the cardiovascular effects of intravenous and intraaortic protamine in the conscious and anesthetized dog

RL Taylor, WC Little, GL Freeman, DM Avery, SE Norris, JK Trinkle and FL Grover

Controversy exists as to whether intraaortic (IA) administration of protamine sulfate has less adverse effects than the intravenous (IV) route. The effect of protamine on contractility is not well established. Therefore, 9 dogs underwent chronic instrumentation to monitor aortic pressure (AP), left ventricular (LV) pressure, central venous pressure, cardiac index (CI), heart rate, stroke volume index (SVI), systemic vascular resistance index, and LV volume. The end- systolic LV pressure-volume relationship was used as a load-independent measure of contractility. Each dog was administered IV and IA protamine on separate occasions after pretreatment with heparin. Studies were performed with and without anesthesia. In the awake studies, analysis of variance showed greater decreases in mean AP (p less than .03), CI (p less than .05), and SVI (p less than .02) with IA protamine infusion. In the anesthetized animals, there were no significant differences between IA and IV administration of protamine. Protamine did not decrease contractility in any group. We conclude that IA administration of protamine offers no advantage over IV administration in the dog. Protamine does not decrease contractility when given by either route.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. Oe, T. Asou, S. Morita, H. Yasui, and K. Tokunaga PROTAMINE-INDUCED HYPOTENSION IN HEART OPERATIONS: APPLICATION OF THE CONCEPT OF VENTRICULAR-ARTERIAL COUPLING J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., August 1, 1996; 112(2): 462 - 471. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				R. B. Hird, T. W. Wakefield, R. Mukherjee, B. U. Jones, F. A. Crawford, P. C. Andrews, J. C. Stanley, and F. G. Spinale Direct Effects of Protamine Sulfate on Myocyte Contractile Processes : Cellular and Molecular Mechanisms Circulation, November 1, 1995; 92(9): 433 - 446. [Abstract] [Full Text]