Life Support Systems in Terms of Energy
Anesthesia and Pain Medicine
;
: 92-95, 2006.
Article
in Korean
| WPRIM
| ID: wpr-57352
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND:
The pro's and con's of pulsatile versus nonpulsatile perfusion during acute and chronic mechanical circulatory support is a longstanding controversial issue, some investigators have suggested that the simplest explanation for this controversy is a failure to quantitate adequately the pulsatile components of flow in studies. The aim of this study was to examine the pulsatility generated by centrifugal pump (CP) and a pulsatile extracorporeal life support (twin pulse life support, T-PLS) in terms of energy equivalent pressure (EEP) and surplus hemodynamic energy (SHE).METHODS:
In each of the 5 cardiac arrested pigs, the outflow cannula of the CP or T-PLS was inserted into the ascending aorta, and the inflow cannula of the CP or T-PLS was placed in the right atrium. Extracorporeal circulation was maintained for 30 minutes using a pump flow of 75 ml/kg/min by CP or T-PLS, respectively. Pressure and flow were measured in the right internal carotid artery.RESULTS:
No statistical difference was observed between CP and T-PLS in terms of mean carotid artery pressure. However, pulse pressure, the percent change from mean arterial pressure to EEP, and SHE in T-PLS were higher than CP (pulse pressure 36.1 +/- 3.6 mmHg vs 9.1 +/- 1.3 mmHg, P < 0.05, the percent change from mean arterial pressure to EEP 19.8 +/- 6.2% vs 0.2 +/- 0.3%, P < 0.05).CONCLUSIONS:
In a cardiac arrested animal model, CP revealed nonpulsatility and pulsatility generated by T-PLS was effective in terms of EEP and SHE.
Full text:
Available
Index:
WPRIM (Western Pacific)
Main subject:
Aorta
/
Perfusion
/
Research Personnel
/
Swine
/
Blood Pressure
/
Carotid Arteries
/
Carotid Artery, Internal
/
Models, Animal
/
Extracorporeal Circulation
/
Catheters
Limits:
Humans
Language:
Korean
Journal:
Anesthesia and Pain Medicine
Year:
2006
Type:
Article
Similar
MEDLINE
...
LILACS
LIS