| Literature DB >> 35318688 |
Taiyo Kuroda1, Takuma Miyamoto1, Chihiro Miyagi1, Anthony R Polakowski1, Christine R Flick1, Barry D Kuban1, George B Voros2, Kimberly Such2, Kiyotaka Fukamachi1,3, Jamshid H Karimov1,3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The evaluation of pulsatile flow created by the new Cleveland Clinic continuous-flow total artificial heart (CFTAH100), which has a re-designed right impeller and motor, had not been tested in vivo. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of pulsatility with the CFTAH100 during the application of pump speed modulation protocols in a chronic animal model.Entities:
Keywords: heart failure; mechanical circulatory support; pulsatile flow; pulsatility index; total artificial heart
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35318688 PMCID: PMC9543567 DOI: 10.1111/aor.14237
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Artif Organs ISSN: 0160-564X Impact factor: 2.663
FIGURE 1(A) Three‐dimensional exploded view. Yellow arrows show the stacked motor with two magnet rings in the rotor. Orange arrows show the two steel laminations in the stator. These are separated by a non‐magnetic spacer (in white). (B) Cleveland Clinic continuous‐flow total artificial heart implanted in the chest
FIGURE 2(A) The left pump head curve of the CFTAH100. (B) The right pump head curve of the CFTAH100. (C) The left/right balance among different conditions. (D) The rotor position among different conditions. Atrial ΔP, atrial delta pressure; left ΔP, left delta pressure; PVR, pulmonary vascular resistance; right ΔP, right delta pressure; SVR, systemic vascular resistance
FIGURE 3(A) Depiction of a generated sinusoidal wave. (B) Actual waveforms of pump speed, pump flow, aortic pressure (AoP), and pulmonary artery pressure (PAP) with percent modulation (%S) of 0%, 15%, and 30%
FIGURE 4(A) Pump flow with different percent modulation (%S). (B) top: Flow pulsatility versus %S. bottom: Correlation between flow pulsatility and %S analyzed with Spearman's rank correlation coefficient. *p < 0.01 compared with 0% of %S
FIGURE 5Left: Pulsatility index versus percent modulation (%S). Right: Correlation between flow pulsatility and %S analyzed with Spearman's rank correlation coefficient. *p < 0.01 compared with 0% of %S
FIGURE 6Aortic pressure (AoP) and aortic pulse pressure in different percent modulations (%S). *p < 0.01 compared with 0% of %S
FIGURE 7Pulmonary artery pressure (PAP) and pulmonary artery pulse pressure in different percent modulations (%S). *p < 0.01 compared with 0% of %S