Anesth Pain Med.  2006 Oct;1(2):92-95.

Life Support Systems in Terms of Energy

• Lim CH
• Lee HW
• Sun K
• Son HS
• Lee JJ
• Lim HJ
• Yoon SM
• Chang SH

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.

Keyword

centrifugal pump; energy equivalent pressure; pulsatility

MeSH Terms

Aorta
Arterial Pressure
Blood Pressure
Carotid Arteries
Carotid Artery, Internal
Catheters
Extracorporeal Circulation
Heart Arrest
Heart Atria
Hemodynamics
Humans
Life Support Systems*
Models, Animal
Perfusion
Research Personnel
Swine