| Literature DB >> 29708019 |
Frédéric Vanden Eynden1,2, Thierry Bové2, Marie-Luce Chirade1, Guido Van Nooten1,2, Patrick Segers3.
Abstract
Arterial compliance (C) is related to the elasticity, size, and geometrical distribution of arteries. Compliance is a determinant of the load that impedes ventricular ejection. Measuring compliance is difficult, particularly in the pulmonary circulation in which resistive and compliant vessels overlap. Comparing different methods for quantification of compliance to a method that involves a continuous flow might help to identify the optimal method. Pulmonary arterial compliance was computed in six pigs based on the stroke volume to pulse pressure ratio, diastolic decay exponential fitting, area method, and the pulse pressure method (PPM). Compliance measurements were compared to those obtained under continuous flow conditions through a right ventricular bypass (Heartware Inc., Miami Lakes, FL, USA). Compliance was computed for various flows using diastolic decay exponential fitting after an abrupt interruption of the pump. Under the continuous flow conditions, resistance (R) was a decreasing function of the flow, and the fitting to P = e-t/RC yielded a pulmonary time constant (RC) of 2.06 s ( ± 0.48). Compliance was an increasing function of flow. Steady flow inter-method comparisons of compliance under pulsatile flow conditions showed large discrepancies and values (7.23 ± 4.47 mL/mmHg) which were lower than those obtained under continuous flow conditions (10.19 ± 1 0.31 mL/mmHg). Best agreement with steady flow measurements is obtained with the diastolic decay method. Resistance and compliance are both flow-dependent and are inversely related in the pulmonary circulation. The dynamic nature of the pulsatile flow may induce a non-uniformly distributed compliance, with an influence on the methods of measurement.Entities:
Keywords: elasticity; heart-assist device; pulmonary circulation
Year: 2018 PMID: 29708019 PMCID: PMC5960867 DOI: 10.1177/2045894018776882
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Pulm Circ ISSN: 2045-8932 Impact factor: 3.017
Fig. 1.Experimental setting. (a) Pulsatile flow setting. (b) Recordings from top to bottom are as follows: right ventricular pressure, right ventricular volume, pulmonary pressure, pulmonary flow, left auricular pressure and systemic pressure. (c) Continuous flow setting. (d) One occlusion episode is shown from top to bottom: pump flow, systemic pressure, and pulmonary pressure.
Fig. 2.Modified area method to compute compliance. (a) The beginning of the diastolic phase is usually defined at the first dicrotic peak (black arrow) and the corresponding area is shaded in (b). We used the conductance catheter to identify the moment when there is no outflow from the ventricle (large gray arrow) and started the diastole at the corresponding pressure recording, which enlarged the diastolic area shaded in (c).
Fig. 3.Mono-exponential fitting of the pressure decay curve over the whole decay (a) is less satisfactory than a bi-exponential decay (b). However, considering the first 500 ms (c), the mono-exponential fitting yielded satisfactory results.
Fig. 4.The linear relationship between the mPAP and the SPAP.
Compliance measurement in pulsatile flow.
| Flow | P mean | Lap | R | Period | SV | C (SV/PP) | C (decay) | C (area) | C (ppm) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pig 1 | BL | 39.45 | 20.96 | 8.65 | 0.312 | 0.74 | 33.71 | 2.77 (0.02) | 2.97 (0.04) | 1.93 (0.02) | 1.66 |
| Pig 1 | DOBU | 41.02 | 20.55 | 7.90 | 0.308 | 0.72 | 34 .01 | 2.66(0.03) | 2.94 (0.03) | 1.99(0.02) | 1.70 |
| Pig 2 | BL | 35.91 | 21.88 | 2.95 | 0.527 | 0.67 | 23.10 | 1.32 (0.03) | 1.41 (0.02) | 1.72 (0.05) | 0.73 |
| Pig 2 | DOBU | 66.96 | 29.12 | 5.37 | 0.355 | 0.39 | 25.77 | 0.74 (0.03) | 0.73 (0.03) | 0.74 (0.08) | 0.35 |
| Pig 3 | BL | 17.47 | 17.95 | 7.05 | 0.623 | 0.89 | 27.08 | 2.23 (0.06) | 1.99 (0.07) | 1.41 (0.04) | 1.51 |
| Pig 3 | DOBU | 44.33 | 20.22 | 8.47 | 0.265 | 0.72 | 39.13 | 1.91 (0.09) | 2.55 (0.26) | 1.51 (0.06) | 1.39 |
| Pig 4 | BL | 27.32 | 10.38 | 3.56 | 0.249 | 0.62 | 16.95 | 1.88 (0.02) | 1.19 (0.03) | 1.88 (0.10) | 0.38 |
| Pig 4 | DOBU | 48.54 | 12.43 | 3.17 | 0.191 | 0.61 | 29.87 | 1.57 (0.03) | 1.95 (0.03) | 2.83 (0.15) | 0.59 |
| Pig 5 | BL | 47.14 | 13.53 | 4.49 | 0.192 | 0.66 | 41.24 | 4.38 (0.13) | 2.79 (0.20) | 3.47 (0.22) | 2.97 |
| Pig 5 | DOBU | 59.84 | 14.43 | 4.92 | 0.159 | 0.62 | 44.54 | 3.94 (0.06) | 3.28 (0.18) | 5.60 (0.36) | 1.97 |
| Pig 6 | BL | 24.68 | 13.78 | 6.23 | 0.306 | 0.71 | 23.26 | 2.22 (0.05) | 3.04 (0.09) | 1.58 (0.09) | 1.18 |
| Pig 6 | DOBU | 32.93 | 15.36 | 7.01 | 0.253 | 0.60 | 23.61 | 1.68 (0.02) | 3.50 (0.15) | 1.32 (0.09) | 1.09 |
Flow is expressed in mL/s.
Pairs of compliance values where a decrease are observed instead of the expected increase are highlighted in gray.
P mean, mean pressure in mmHg; Lap, left atrial pressure in mmHg; R, resistance in mmHg.ml−1.s; Period, heart cycle duration in seconds; SV, stroke volume in mL; C, compliance in mL.mmHg−1.
Fig. 5.(a) Pressure vs. pump flow rate; (b) resistance vs. flow; (c) compliance vs. flow; (d) RC vs. flow.
Compliance measurement in continuous flow.
| Flow | P mean | Lap | R | C | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pig 1 | 39.31 | 14.81 | 5.94 | 0.225 | 4.43 |
| Pig 2 | 36.66 | 15.62 | 2.75 | 0.369 | 8.27 |
| Pig 2 | 65.66 | 16.36 | 4.34 | 0.183 | 15.04 |
| Pig 3 | 17.47 | NA | NA | NA | NA |
| Pig 3 | 44.50 | 18.90 | 5.62 | 0.305 | 6.55 |
| Pig 4 | 27.32 | NA | NA | NA | NA |
| Pig 4 | 35.51 | 14.93 | 3.26 | 0.329 | 4.92 |
| Pig 4 | 48.23 | 13.08 | 5.03 | 0.168 | 10.68 |
| Pig 5 | 47.50 | 15.07 | 4.93 | 0.213 | 10.91 |
| Pig 5 | 59.66 | 15.12 | 6.79 | 0.140 | 16.34 |
| Pig 6 | 24.68 | NA | NA | NA | NA |
| Pig 6 | 34.27 | 22.51 | 6.33 | 0.469 | 3.53 |
Flow is expressed in mL/s.
P mean, mean pressure in mmHg, Lap, left atrial pressure in mmHg; R, resistance in mmHg.mL−1.s; C, compliance in mL.mmHg−1; NA, not applicable.
Fig. 6.Relationship between resistance and compliance in the pulsatile regime (a) and the continuous flow regime (b) using different methods of compliance assessment.