| Literature DB >> 30604307 |
Erica C Hord1,2, Christina M Bolch2, Egemen Tuzun3, William E Cohn4, Boris Leschinsky2, John C Criscione5.
Abstract
While the number of patients supported with temporary cardiac assist is growing, the existing devices are limited by a multitude of complications, mostly related to contact with the blood. The CorInnova epicardial compressive heart assist device was tested in six sheep using an acute heart failure model. High esmolol dose, targeting a 50% reduction in CO from healthy baseline, resulted in a failure state with mean CO 1.9 L/min. Heart assist with the device during failure state resulted in an average absolute increase in CO of 1.0 L/min, along with a decline in ventricular work to 67.5% of the total LV SW. Combined with repeated success of minimally invasive device implant, the resulting increases in cardiac hemodynamics achieved while still unloading the heart demonstrate the potential of the CorInnova device for temporary heart assist.Entities:
Keywords: Acute failure; Cardiac devices; Cardiac unloading; CorInnova; Direct cardiac compression; Heart assist; Temporary support
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30604307 PMCID: PMC6497617 DOI: 10.1007/s12265-018-9854-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Cardiovasc Transl Res ISSN: 1937-5387 Impact factor: 4.132
Fig. 1Illustrations of the CorInnova heart assist device. The device is deployed inside the pericardial sac (a); the device consists of an inner (epicardial) fluid-filled polyurethane film buffering component and an outer polyurethane film active assist component (b); a Nitinol frame provides self-expanding capabilities (c)
Fig. 2Fluoroscopic imaging of minimally invasive deployment of the CorInnova heart assist device; initial advancement from the deployment tube, inside the apex of the pericardium (a), progressive stages of deployment (b, c), and the device in place around the heart, inside the pericardium (d)
Changes in mean hemodynamics with assist. Summary of mean hemodynamic changes with device assist during esmolol failure averaged over four acute ovine studies, compared to the failure state and baseline; each sample was 20 s of cardiac cycles; *p < 0.05
| HR | CO | LV SV | SBP | DBP | MAP | LVP | CVP | LV EDP | LV SW | Mean systolic assist pressure | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BPM | L/min | mL | mmHg | mmHg | mmHg | mmHg | mmHg | mmHg | mmHg*mL | mmHg | |
| Baseline |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Mean failure state |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Mean with assist |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Absolute change with assist |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fig. 3Fluoroscopic images of the device during diastole (deflated) (a) and during systolic assist (inflated) (b); imaging contrast media was used as the fluid in the passive bladder for visual aid (darkest regions)
Fig. 4Representative hemodynamic waveforms sampled from the in vivo data; the dotted black line shows the unassisted waveform, and the colored lines indicate the hemodynamic waveforms during assist; aortic flow (a), aortic pressure (b), left ventricular pressure (c), and effective assist pressure (d)
Fig. 5Illustration of the decline in the work done by the heart relative to the total LV SW during device assist