In Vitro Hemocompatibility Evaluation of Ventricular Assist Devices in Pediatric Flow Conditions: A Benchmark Study.

Development of pediatric ventricular assist devices (VADs) has significantly lagged behind that of adult devices. This frustrating reality is reflected by the fact that the Berlin Heart EXCOR VAD is currently the only approved pediatric-specific device in the USA. An alternative option is an off-label use of adult continuous-flow VADs, such as HeartMate II (HMII), which inevitably causes patient-device size mismatch in small children. We sought to conduct in vitro hemocompatibility testing in a pediatric flow condition, with a specific aim to provide benchmark values for future pediatric device development. Given the aforementioned fact that both pulsatile and continuous-flow devices are being used in the pediatric population, we opted to test both types of devices in the present study. The EXCOR and HMII blood pumps were tested using bovine blood under constant hemodynamic conditions (flow rate, Q = 2.5 ± 0.25L/min; differential pressure across the pump, ΔP = 68 ± 5mm Hg). Hemolysis was measured by Harboe assay. There was a steady increase in plasma free hemoglobin during in vitro testing, with a statistically significant difference between 5 and 360 min for both EXCOR (P < 0.0001) and HMII (P < 0.001). However, the degree of an increase in plasma free hemoglobin was more significant with HMII (P < 0.001). Normalized index of hemolysis for EXCOR and HMII were 0.003 ± 0.0026g/100 L and 0.085 ± 0.0119g/100 L, respectively. There was also a steady increase in platelet activation detected by CAPP2A antibody using flow cytometry, with a statistically significant difference between 5 and 360 min for both devices (P < 0.05). The degree of an increase in platelet activation was similar between the two devices (P = 0.218). High molecular weight von Willebrand factor (HMW vWF) multimer degradation measured by immunoblotting was evident for both devices, however, it was more pronounced with the EXCOR. EXCOR blood samples from all three time points (120, 240, and 360 min) were significantly different from the baseline (5 min), whereas only 360 min samples had a significant difference from the baseline with the HMII. In conclusion, we have observed similarities and differences in hemocompatibility profiles between the EXCOR and HMII, both of which are commonly used in the pediatric population. We anticipate the benchmark values in the present study will facilitate future pediatric VAD development.

Performance on a strategy set shifting task during adolescence in a genetic model of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder: methylphenidate vs. atomoxetine treatments.

Research examining medication effects on set shifting in teens with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is lacking. An animal model of ADHD may be useful for exploring this gap. The spontaneously hypertensive rat (SHR) is a commonly used animal model of ADHD. SHR and two comparator strains, Wistar-Kyoto (WKY) and Wistar (WIS), were evaluated during adolescence in a strategy set shifting task under conditions of a 0s or 15s delay to reinforcer delivery. The task had three phases: initial discrimination, set shift and reversal learning. Under 0s delays, SHR performed as well as or better than WKY and WIS. Treatment with 0.3mg/kg/day atomoxetine had little effect, other than to modestly increase trials to criterion during set shifting in all strains. Under 15s delays, SHR had longer lever press reaction times, longer latencies to criterion and more trial omissions than WKY during set shifting and reversal learning. These deficits were not reduced systematically by 1.5mg/kg/day methylphenidate or 0.3mg/kg/day atomoxetine. Regarding learning in SHR, methylphenidate improved initial discrimination, whereas atomoxetine improved set shifting but disrupted initial discrimination. During reversal learning, both drugs were ineffective in SHR, and atomoxetine made reaction time and trial omissions greater in WKY. Overall, WIS performance differed from SHR or WKY, depending on phase. Collectively, a genetic model of ADHD in adolescent rats revealed that neither methylphenidate nor atomoxetine mitigated all deficits in SHR during the set shifting task. Thus, methylphenidate or atomoxetine monotherapy may not mitigate all set shift task-related deficits in teens with ADHD.