['Identity of the optimal heart preservation solution remains unknown. Because oxidative stress contributes to contractile failure in the ischaemic/reperfused myocardium and the main characteristic of Celsior is its antioxidant effect, it is important to elucidate the relationship between the inhibitory effect on oxidative stress and cardiac mechano-energetics. We therefore evaluated the efficacy of Celsior from both aspects by comparison with the University of Wisconsin solution (UWS).', 'We used 18 excised cross-circulated canine hearts. Excised hearts were preserved with UWS (n = 6) or Celsior (n = 6) for 3 h at 4 °C; the remaining six served as controls. Hearts were then cross-circulated and rewarmed. The end-systolic pressure-volume ratio (LV Emax) and the ventricular pressure-volume area, which is a measure of total mechanical energy, were assessed after reperfusion. Biopsies were taken from the endocardium after excising the heart, before reperfusion, after reperfusion and 4 h after reperfusion to assess the inhibitory effect of each agent on oxidative stress. Endo-myocardial biopsy samples were studied immunohistochemically for expression of 4-hydroxy-2-nonenal (HNE)-modified protein, which is a major lipid peroxidation product.', 'Emax in the UWS group was significantly smaller than in the control group, whereas the Emax in the Celsior group was preserved. Oxygen cost of Emax in the UWS group was significantly higher than in the Celsior group. Myocardial HNE-modified protein levels increased gradually, both under preservation and after reperfusion in the UWS group. Myocardial HNE-modified protein levels in the Celsior group were lower, mainly before and 4 h after reperfusion compared with the UWS group.'] Does celsior preserve cardiac mechano-energetics better than University of Wisconsin solution by preventing oxidative stress?