|
KMID : 1155520060010020092
|
|
Anesthesia and Pain Medicine
2006 Volume.1 No. 2 p.92 ~ p.95
|
|
|
Evaluation of Pulsatility of Extracorporeal Life Support Systems in Terms of Energy
|
|
Lim Choon-Hak
Lee Hye-Won
Lim Hae-Ja
Yoon Suk-Min
Jang Sung-Ho
Sun Kyung
Son Ho-Sung
Lee Jung-Joo
|
|
|
Abstract
|
|
|
Background: The pro’s and con’s of pulsatile versus nonpulsatile perfusion during acute and chronic mechanical circulatory support is a longstanding controversial issue, some investigators have suggested that the simplest explanation for this controversy is a failure to quantitate adequately the pulsatile components of flow in studies. The aim of this study was to examine the pulsatility generated by centrifugal pump (CP) and a pulsatile extracorporeal life support (twin pulse life support, T-PLS) in terms of energy equivalent pressure (EEP) and surplus hemodynamic energy (SHE).
Methods: In each of the 5 cardiac arrested pigs, the outflow cannula of the CP or T-PLS was inserted into the ascending aorta, and the inflow cannula of the CP or T-PLS was placed in the right atrium. Extracorporeal circulation was maintained for 30 minutes using a pump flow of 75 ml/kg/min by CP or T-PLS, respectively. Pressure and flow were measured in the right internal carotid artery.
Results: No statistical difference was observed between CP and T-PLS in terms of mean carotid artery pressure. However, pulse pressure, the percent change from mean arterial pressure to EEP, and SHE in T-PLS were higher than CP (pulse pressure: 36.1 ? 3.6 mmHg vs 9.1 ? 1.3 mmHg, P ＜ 0.05, the percent change from mean arterial pressure to EEP: 19.8 ? 6.2% vs 0.2 ? 0.3%, P ＜ 0.05).
Conclusions: In a cardiac arrested animal model, CP revealed nonpulsatility and pulsatility generated by T-PLS was effective in terms of EEP and SHE.(Anesth Pain Med 2006; 1: 92∼95)
|
|
|
KEYWORD
|
|
|
centrifugal pump, energy equivalent pressure, pulsatility.
|
|
|
FullTexts / Linksout information
|
|
|
|
|
|
Listed journal information
|
|
  
|
|