Literature DB >> 14763487

Hemodynamic and pressure-volume responses to continuous and pulsatile ventricular assist in an adult mock circulation.

Steven C Koenig1, George M Pantalos, Kevin J Gillars, Dan L Ewert, Kenneth N Litwak, Steven W Etoch.   

Abstract

This study investigated the hemodynamic and left ventricular (LV) pressure-volume loop responses to continuous versus pulsatile assist techniques at 50% and 100% bypass flow rates during simulated ventricular pathophysiologic states (normal, failing, recovery) with Starling response behavior in an adult mock circulation. The rationale for this approach was the desire to conduct a preliminary investigation in a well controlled environment that cannot be as easily produced in an animal model or clinical setting. Continuous and pulsatile flow ventricular assist devices (VADs) were connected to ventricular apical and aortic root return cannulae. The mock circulation was instrumented with a pressure-volume conductance catheter for simultaneous measurement of aortic root pressure and LV pressure and volume; a left atrial pressure catheter; a distal aortic pressure catheter; and aortic root, aortic distal, VAD output, and coronary flow probes. Filling pressures (mean left atrial and LV end diastolic) were reduced with each assist technique; continuous assist reduced filling pressures by 50% more than pulsatile. This reduction, however, was at the expense of a higher mean distal aortic pressure and lower diastolic to systolic coronary artery flow ratio. At full bypass flow (100%) for both assist devices, there was a pronounced effect on hemodynamic parameters, whereas the lesser bypass flow (50%) had only a slight influence. Hemodynamic responses to continuous and pulsatile assist during simulated heart failure differed from normal and recovery states. These findings suggest the potential for differences in endocardial perfusion between assist techniques that may warrant further investigation in an in vivo model, the need for controlling the amount of bypass flow, and the importance in considering the choice of in vivo model.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 14763487     DOI: 10.1097/01.mat.0000104816.50277.eb

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  ASAIO J        ISSN: 1058-2916            Impact factor:   2.872


  9 in total

1.  Alteration of LV end-diastolic volume by controlling the power of the continuous-flow LVAD, so it is synchronized with cardiac beat: development of a native heart load control system (NHLCS).

Authors:  Akihide Umeki; Takashi Nishimura; Masahiko Ando; Yoshiaki Takewa; Kenji Yamazaki; Shunei Kyo; Minoru Ono; Tomonori Tsukiya; Toshihide Mizuno; Yoshiyuki Taenaka; Eisuke Tatsumi
Journal:  J Artif Organs       Date:  2011-11-12       Impact factor: 1.731

2.  A new pulse duplicator with a passive fill ventricle for analysis of cardiac dynamics.

Authors:  Yoshimasa Yokoyama; Osamu Kawaguchi; Tadahiko Shinshi; Ulrich Steinseifer; Setsuo Takatani
Journal:  J Artif Organs       Date:  2010-09-28       Impact factor: 1.731

3.  A Physical Heart Failure Simulation System Utilizing the Total Artificial Heart and Modified Donovan Mock Circulation.

Authors:  Jessica R Crosby; Katrina J DeCook; Phat L Tran; Edward Betterton; Richard G Smith; Douglas F Larson; Zain I Khalpey; Daniel Burkhoff; Marvin J Slepian
Journal:  Artif Organs       Date:  2016-12-09       Impact factor: 3.094

4.  Novel control system to prevent right ventricular failure induced by rotary blood pump.

Authors:  Mamoru Arakawa; Takashi Nishimura; Yoshiaki Takewa; Akihide Umeki; Masahiko Ando; Yuichiro Kishimoto; Yutaka Fujii; Shunei Kyo; Hideo Adachi; Eisuke Tatsumi
Journal:  J Artif Organs       Date:  2014-02-07       Impact factor: 1.731

5.  Comparison of continuous-flow and pulsatile-flow left ventricular assist devices: is there an advantage to pulsatility?

Authors:  Allen Cheng; Christine A Williamitis; Mark S Slaughter
Journal:  Ann Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2014-11

6.  Simulated Performance of the Cleveland Clinic Continuous-Flow Total Artificial Heart Using the Virtual Mock Loop.

Authors:  Takuma Miyamoto; David J Horvath; Dennis W Horvath; Jamshid H Karimov; Nicole Byram; Barry D Kuban; Kiyotaka Fukamachi
Journal:  ASAIO J       Date:  2019-08       Impact factor: 2.872

7.  Simulating Radial Pressure Waveforms with a Mock Circulatory Flow Loop to Characterize Hemodynamic Monitoring Systems.

Authors:  Anna Packy; Gavin A D'Souza; Masoud Farahmand; Luke Herbertson; Christopher G Scully
Journal:  Cardiovasc Eng Technol       Date:  2021-09-01       Impact factor: 2.305

Review 8.  Why pulsatility still matters: a review of current knowledge.

Authors:  Davor Barić
Journal:  Croat Med J       Date:  2014-12       Impact factor: 1.351

Review 9.  Mechanical Circulatory Support for Advanced Heart Failure: Are We about to Witness a New "Gold Standard"?

Authors:  Massimo Capoccia
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Dev Dis       Date:  2016-12-12
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.