| Literature DB >> 31709887 |
Yuri M Ganushchak1, Eva R Kurniawati1, Jos G Maessen1,2, Patrick W Weerwind1,2.
Abstract
Explosive penetration of veno-arterial extracorporeal life support in everyday practice has drawn awareness to complications of peripheral cannulation, resulting in recommendations to use smaller size cannulae. However, using smaller cannulae may limit the effectiveness of extracorporeal support and thereby the specific needs of the patient. Selection of proper size cannulae may therefore pose a dilemma, especially since pressure-flow characteristics at different hematocrits are lacking. This study evaluates the precision of cannula pressure drop prediction with increase of fluid viscosity from water flow-pressure charts by M-number, dynamic similarity law, and via fitted parabolic equation. Thirteen commercially available peripheral cannulae were used in this in vitro study. Pressure drop and flow were recorded using water and a water-glycerol solution as a surrogate for blood, at ambient temperature. Subsequently, pressure-flow curves were modeled with increased fluid viscosity (0.0031 N s m-2), and then compared by M-number, dynamic similarity law, and fitted parabolic equation. The agreement of predicted and measured values were significantly higher when the M-number (concordance correlation = 0.948), and the dynamic similarity law method (concordance correlation = 0.947) was used in comparison to the fitted parabolic equation (concordance correlation = 0.898, p < 0.01). The M-number and dynamic similarity based model allow for reliable prediction of peripheral cannula pressure drop with changes of fluid viscosity and could therefore aid in well-thought-out selection of cannulae for extracorporeal life support.Entities:
Keywords: M-number; extracorporeal life support; flow; peripheral cannulae; pressure drop
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31709887 PMCID: PMC7263036 DOI: 10.1177/0267659119885586
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Perfusion ISSN: 0267-6591 Impact factor: 1.972
Geometrical characteristics of cannulas.
| Cannula | Length[ | M-number[ | De (mm) | Q (L min−1) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Avg. | Std | Re = 2,300 [ | Re = 4,200 [ | |||
| Biomedicus 8Fr | 0.19 | 4.41 | 0.01 | 2.19 | 0.68 | 1.24 |
| Biomedicus 10Fr | 0.19 | 3.93 | 0.01 | 2.77 | 0.86 | 1.56 |
| Biomedicus 15Fr | 0.4 | 3.30 | 0.01 | 4.39 | 1.36 | 2.48 |
| Biomedicus 17Fr | 0.4 | 3.03 | 0.02 | 5.00 | 1.55 | 2.82 |
| Biomedicus 19Fr | 0.4 | 2.83 | 0.01 | 5.52 | 1.71 | 3.12 |
| EOPA 20Fr | 0.28 | 2.76 | 0.01 | 5.30 | 1.64 | 2.99 |
| EOPA 22Fr | 0.28 | 2.52 | 0.01 | 5.96 | 1.84 | 3.36 |
| EOPA 24Fr | 0.28 | 2.45 | 0.01 | 6.15 | 1.90 | 3.47 |
| Maquet 21Fr | 0.34 | 2.68 | 0.01 | 5.73 | 1.77 | 3.23 |
| Maquet 23Fr | 0.75 | 2.60 | 0.01 | 7.04 | 2.18 | 3.97 |
| Avalon 24Fr | 0.8 | 2.47 | 0.01 | 7.58 | 2.34 | 4.28 |
| Biomedicus 21Fr | 0.8 | 2.83 | 0.01 | 6.38 | 1.97 | 3.60 |
| Biomedicus 25Fr | 0.8 | 2.48 | 0.01 | 7.56 | 2.34 | 4.27 |
De: cannula effective diameter; f flow below is laminar (viscosity of 0.0031 N s m−2); ff flow above is developed turbulent (viscosity of 0.0031 N s m−2).
Distance from the tip of cannula to the pressure sensor.
M-number between 50 and 100 mmHg pressure drop.
Figure 1.Flow pressure relationship measurement set-up. 1: cannula; 2: pressure sensor; 3: centrifugal pump; 4: flow probe. The direction of flow depends on the type (arterial or venous) of tested cannula.
Figure 2.M-number of cannulae in the study against the pressure gradient due to water flow. M-number of all cannulae demonstrated slow incensement with rise of pressure gradient.
Figure 3.M-number of cannula against the pressure gradient. Mw: M-number computed from the flow-pressure data from water test; Mwg: M-number computed from the flow-pressure data from water-glycerol test (viscosity 0.0031184 Pa s), ICC = 0.977, p < 0.001; Biomedicus 19Fr femoral arterial cannula.
Concordance and intraclass correlation coefficients for agreement measured and predicted flow-pressure curves.
| Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CCC | ICC | CCC | ICC | CCC | ICC | |
| Biomedicus 8Fr | 0.911 | 0.983 | 0.962 | 0.993 | 0.722 | 0.948 |
| Biomedicus 10Fr | 0.982 | 0.997 | 0.994 | 0.983 | 0.879 | 0.999 |
| Biomedicus 15Fr | 0.683 | 0.914 | 0.562 | 0.923 | 0.787 | 0.907 |
| Biomedicus 17Fr | 0.997 | 0.999 | 0.983 | 0.991 | 0.934 | 0.997 |
| Biomedicus 19Fr | 0.990 | 0.996 | 0.994 | 0.997 | 0.939 | 0.989 |
| EOPA 20Fr | 0.983 | 0.995 | 0.990 | 0.995 | 0.938 | 0.988 |
| EOPA 22Fr | 0.967 | 0.993 | 0.985 | 0.993 | 0.934 | 0.987 |
| EOPA 24Fr | 0.991 | 0.997 | 0.951 | 0.994 | 0.981 | 0.940 |
| Maquet 21Fr | 0.975 | 0.991 | 0.983 | 0.995 | 0.912 | 0.982 |
| Maquet 23Fr | 0.980 | 0.997 | 0.981 | 0.995 | 0.951 | 0.993 |
| Avalon 24Fr | 0.940 | 0.990 | 0.965 | 0.995 | 0.878 | 0.982 |
| Biomedicus 21Fr | 0.978 | 0.995 | 0.992 | 0.996 | 0.924 | 0.986 |
| Biomedicus 25Fr | 0.945 | 0.992 | 0.971 | 0.998 | 0.900 | 0.986 |
| Average | 0.948 | 0.988 | 0.947 | 0.988 | 0.898 | 0.976 |
CCC: concordance correlation; ICC: intraclass correlation.
Model 1: M-number based model; Model 2: dynamic similarity model; Model 3: parabolic equation model.
p < 0.01 in comparison to Model 1 and Model 2.
Figure 4.Example of pressure drop predictive models in comparison to the measured pressure. Biomedicus 19Fr femoral arterial cannula; water-glycerol solution viscosity 0.0031184 Pa s.