Of the patients, 72 had a normal weight
(body mass index [BMI] <30 kg/m
2) and 28 had
obesity (BMI ≥30 kg/m
2). The mean EF value was
52.6±8.5%. The mean operation time of the patients
was 283.0±75.6 min, the mean aortic clamp time
was 78.1±52.2 min, and the mean CPB time was
118.0±60.7 min. The mean predicted FEV
1 (%) and
FVC (%) values were 90.1±19.4% and 83.1±19.9%,
respectively (Table
1).
Table 1: Demographic and baseline characteristics of patients
The mean preoperative laboratory test values and
chronic disease status of the patients are shown in Table 2 and Table 3, respectively. None of the patients
received blood products and inotropic support in the
preoperative period.
Table 2: The mean preoperative laboratory test results
Table 3: Preoperative chronic disease status of patients
Six patients died during the 12-month follow-up
period after the operation, 94 of them were still alive.
Among deceased patients, the predicted FEV1 (%)
value was 88.3±26.5%. Among survivors, this value
was 90.3±19.0%, indicating no statistically difference
(p=0.816). The median predicted FVC values were
74.80 (IQR: 70.88-93.66) for non-survivors and 84.10
(IQR: 71.00-93.60) for survivors (p=0.701). Although
there was no statistically significant difference,
predicted FVC values of survivors were higher.
Duration of ventilation: The relationship between
PFT parameters and duration of IMV was evaluated.
Accordingly, the median predicted FVC (%) value of
the patients with prolonged IMV duration was 64.00
(IQR: 58.20-90.90), while the median predicted FVC
(%) value of the patients with normal IMV duration
was 85.00 (IQR: 74.30-93.95) (p=0.040) (Figure 1a).
The mean predicted FEV1 (%) value of the patients
with prolonged IMV duration was 82.1±22.5, while
the mean predicted FEV1 (%) value of the patients
with normal IMV duration was 92.5±17.8 (p=0.023)
(Figure 1b).
Figure 1: (a) Relationship between IMV and predicted FVC (%). (b) Relationship between IMV and predicted FEV1 (%).
IMV: Invasive mechanical ventilation; FVC: Forced vital capacity; FEV1: Forced expiratory volume in 1 sec.
• The median predicted FVC (%) value of
patients with prolonged IMV duration is 64.00
(IQR: 58.20-90.90), the median predicted
FVC (%) value of patients with normal IMV duration is 85.00 (IQR: 74.30-93.95)
(p=0.040) (Figure 1a).
• The mean predicted FEV1 (%) value of patients
with prolonged IMV duration is 82.1±22.5, the
mean predicted FEV1 (%) value of patients with
normal IMV duration is 92.5±17.8 (p=0.023)
(Figure 1b).
The patients with low predicted FEV1% and
predicted FVC% values had have statistically
significantly longer IMV.
• When the predicted FEV1 (%) was divided
into two groups as ≥80 and <80%, the duration
of IMV was found as follows: in patients
with predicted FEV1 (%) ≥80%, the IMV
duration was normal in 57 patients, while it was prolonged in 11 patients. In patients
with predicted FEV1 (%) <80%, the IMV
duration was normal in 20 patients, while it was
prolonged in 12 patients (p=0.035) (Figure 2a).
In patients with predicted FEV1 (%) ≥80%, the
IMV duration was normal in 57 patients, while
it was prolonged in 11 patients.
• In patients with predicted FEV1 (%) <80%,
the IMV duration was normal in 20 patients,
while it was prolonged in 12 patients (p=0.035)
(Figure 2a).
• ICU stay: The relationship between PFT
parameters and duration of ICU was examined.
Accordingly, the median predicted FVC (%)
value of the patients with prolonged ICU
duration was 72.65 (IQR: 58.42-93.30), while
the median predicted FVC (%) value of the
patients with normal IMV duration was 81.10
(IQR: 74.90-94.13) (p=0.036) (Figure 3a).
The mean predicted FEV1 (%) value of the
patients with prolonged ICU duration was
82.3±22.0, while the mean predicted FEV1
(%) value of the patients with normal ICU
duration was 93.2±17.5 (p=0.024) (Figure 3b).
The median predicted FVC (%) value of
patients with prolonged ICU duration is 72.65
(IQR: 58.42-93.30), the median predicted
FVC (%) value of patients with normal
IMV duration is 81.10 (IQR: 74.90-94.13)
(p=0.036) (Figure 3a).
Figure 2: Relationship between ventilator, ICU and hospital
stay in patients with predicted FEV1 (%) ≥80 and <80%.
FEV1: Forced expiratory volume in 1 sec.
Figure 3: (a) Relationship between ICU stay and predicted FVC (%). (b) Relationship between ICU stay and predicted FEV1 (%).
ICU: Intensive care unit; FVC: Forced vital capacity; FEV1: Forced expiratory volume in 1 sec.
• The mean predicted FEV1 (%) value of
patients with prolonged ICU duration is
82.3±22.0, the mean predicted FEV1 (%)
value of patients with normal ICU duration is
93.2±17.5 (p=0.024) (Figure 3b).
The patients with low predicted FEV1% and
predicted FVC% values had statistically significantly
longer ICU stay.
• When the predicted FEV1 (%) was divided
into two groups as ≥80 and <80%, the duration
of ICU stay was found as follows: in patients
with predicted FEV1 (%) ≥80%, the IMV
duration was normal in 54 patients, while
it was prolonged in 14 patients. In patients
with predicted FEV1 (%) <80%, the IMV
duration was normal in 18 patients, while
it was prolonged in 14 patients (p=0.030)
(Figure 2b). In patients with predicted FEV1
(%) ≥80%, the IMV duration was normal in 54 patients, while it was prolonged in
14 patients.
• In patients with predicted FEV1 (%) <80%,
the IMV duration was normal in 18 patients,
while it was prolonged in 14 patients (p=0.030)
(Figure 2b).
Hospital stay
The relationship between PFT parameters and
duration of hospitalization was examined. Accordingly,
the median predicted FVC (%) value of the patients
with prolonged duration of hospitalization was 81.65
(IQR: 59.33-88.85), while the median predicted
FVC (%) value of the patients with normal duration
of hospitalization was 86.50 (IQR: 73.36-96.45)
(p=0.009) (Figure 4a). The median predicted FEV1
(%) value of the patients with prolonged duration of hospitalization was 85.95 (IQR: 70.15-85.95), while
the median predicted FEV1 (%) value of the patients
with normal duration of hospitalization was 92.15
(IQR: 79.60-92.15) (p=0.044) (Figure 4b).
Figure 4: (a) Relationship between hospital stay and predicted FVC (%). (b) Relationship between hospital stay and predicted
FEV1 (%).
FVC: Forced vital capacity; FEV1: Forced expiratory volume in 1 sec.
• The median predicted FVC (%) value of patients
with prolonged duration of hospitalization
is 81.65 (IQR: 59.33-88.85), the median
predicted FVC (%) value of patients with
normal duration of hospitalization is 86.50
(IQR: 73.36-96.45) (p=0.009) (Figure 4a).
• The median predicted FEV1 (%) value
of patients with prolonged duration of
hospitalization is 85.95 (IQR: 70.15-85.95),
the median predicted FEV1 (%) value
of patients with normal duration of
hospitalization is 92.15 (IQR: 79.60-92.15)
(p=0.044) (Figure 4b).
The patients with low predicted FEV1% and
predicted FVC% values had statistically significantly
longer hospitalization stay.
• When the predicted FEV1 (%) was divided
into two groups as ≥80 and <80%, the duration
of IMV was found as follows: in patients with
predicted FEV1 (%) ≥80%, the hospitalization
stay duration was normal in 50 patients, while
it was prolonged in 18 patients. In patients with
predicted FEV1 (%) <80%, the hospitalization
stay duration was normal in 18 patients, while
it was prolonged in 14 patients (p=0.134)
(Figure 2c). In patients with predicted FEV1
(%) ≥80%, the hospitalization stay duration was
normal in 50 patients, while it was prolonged
in 18 patients.
• In patients with predicted FEV1 (%) <80%,
the hospitalization stay duration was normal
in 18 patients, while it was prolonged in
14 patients (p=0.134) (Figure 2c).