Common and Uncommon Disasters during Cardiopulmonary Bypass

doi:10.1017/9781009008143.020

Chapter 20 - Common and Uncommon Disasters during Cardiopulmonary Bypass

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 October 2022

Gregory M Janelle ,

Jane Ottens and

Michael Franklin

Edited by

Florian Falter ,

Albert C. Perrino, Jr and

Robert A. Baker

Show author details

Florian Falter: Affiliation:
Royal Papworth Hospital, Cambridge
Albert C. Perrino, Jr: Affiliation:
Yale University Medical Center, Connecticut
Robert A. Baker: Affiliation:
Flinders Medical Centre, Adelaide

Book contents

Get access

Summary

Cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) is highly technical and complex and accident and error can occur due to malfunction of equipment and/or human factors.Since its first successful clinical use in 1953, incremental improvements in the heart lung machine have resulted in a decline of perfusion related accidents. Safety practices have been demonstrated to reduce the incidence of error and equipment fault and need to be constantly reviewed and their implementation should be regularly rehearsed by all members of the intraoperative team and not only by the perfusion team. Institutional protocols, compliance with instructions for use of equipment and step-by-step processes to deal with error and unforeseen events will minimize their impact.

Keywords

Incident Reporting Safety Culture Oxygenator Failure Equipment Failure Air Entrainment Electrical Failure Heparin Resistance Malignant Hyperthermia Aortic Dissection Hepatic Vein Cannulation

Type: Chapter
Information: Cardiopulmonary Bypass , pp. 194 - 204

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009008143.020 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2022

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Suggested Further Reading

Reason, J. Human error: models and management. BMJ. 2000; 320 (7237):768–770.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Wilcox, TW, Baker, RA. Incident reporting in perfusion: current perceptions on PIRS-2. J Extracorp Tech 2020; 52:7–12.CrossRef Google Scholar

Darling, E, Searles, B. Oxygenator change-out times: the value of a written protocol and practice simulation exercises. Perfusion 2010 May; 25(3):141–143; discussion 144–145.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Uysal, S, Lin, HM, Trinh, M et al. Optimizing cerebral oxygenation in cardiac surgery: a randomized controlled trial examining neurocognitive and perioperative outcomes. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2020; 159(3):943–953.e3CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Ferraris, VA, Brown, JR, Despotis, GJ et al. Special report: STS workforce on evidence based surgery. 2011 update to the Society of Thoracic Surgeons and the Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists blood conservation clinical practice guidelines * The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Blood Conservat. ATS. 2011;91(3):944–982.Google Scholar

Shore-lesserson, L, Baker, RA et al. The Society of Thoracic Surgeons, The Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists and The American Society of ExtraCorporeal Technology: Clinical practice guidelines – anticoagulation during cardiopulmonary bypass. Ann Thorac Surg. 2018;105(2):650–662.Google Scholar

Gulabani, M, Gurha, P, Ahmad, S et al. Intra-operative post-induction hyperthermia, possibly malignant hyperthermia: anesthetic implications, challenges and management. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2014;30(4):555–557.Google Scholar

Still, RJ, Hilgenberg, AD, Akins, CW et al. Intraoperative aortic dissection. Ann Thorac Surg. 1992;53(3):374–379.Google Scholar

Assaad, S, Geirsson, A, Rousou, L et al. The dual modality use of epiaortic ultrasound and transesophageal echocardiography in the diagnosis of intraoperative iatrogenic type-a aortic dissection. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2013 Apr;27(2):326–328.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed