Comparison of outcomes of the use of Del Nido and St. Thomas cardioplegia in adult and paediatric cardiac surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: In recent years, the use of del Nido cardioplegia, initially intended for paediatric cardiac surgery, has been extended to adult cardiac surgery in many institutions. Our aim was thus to compare the outcomes of the use of del Nido cardioplegia with that of conventional cardioplegia and discuss its role in both adult and paediatric cardiac surgery.

Method: A systematic literature search was conducted in August 2019 on Medline (via PubMed), Embase and Cochrane electronic databases according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Any retrospective studies and randomised controlled trials that reported findings comparing the outcomes of the use of del Nido cardioplegia with that of St. Thomas cardioplegia were included.

Results: We observed shorter aortic cross-clamp time (mean difference: -15.18, confidence interval: -27.21 to -3.15, p = 0.01) and cardiopulmonary bypass time (mean difference: -13.52, confidence interval: -20.64 to -6.39, p = 0.0002) associated with the use of del Nido cardioplegia in adult cardiac surgery as compared to St. Thomas cardioplegia. Defibrillation rates were significantly lower in patients who had been given del Nido cardioplegia, in both adult (relative risk: 0.28, confidence interval: 0.12 to 0.64, p = 0.003) and paediatric patients (relative risk: 0.25, confidence interval: 0.08 to 0.79, p = 0.02).

Conclusion: Del Nido cardioplegia may be a viable alternative to the use of St. Thomas cardioplegia in both adult and paediatric patients, providing similar postoperative outcomes while also affording the additional advantage of shorter aortic cross-clamp time and cardiopulmonary bypass time (in adult cardiac surgery) and decreased rates of defibrillation (in both adult and paediatric cardiac surgery).