Dasi Lakshmi P, Pekkan Kerem, de Zelicourt Diane, Sundareswaran Kartik S, Krishnankutty Resmi, Delnido Pedro J, Yoganathan Ajit P
Wallace H. Coulter School of Biomedical Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology and Emory University, Room 2119, U. A. Whitaker Building, 313 Ferst Drive, Atlanta, GA 30332-0535, USA.
Ann Biomed Eng. 2009 Apr;37(4):661-73. doi: 10.1007/s10439-009-9650-0. Epub 2009 Feb 18.
We present a fundamental theoretical framework for analysis of energy dissipation in any component of the circulatory system and formulate the full energy budget for both venous and arterial circulations. New indices allowing disease-specific subject-to-subject comparisons and disease-to-disease hemodynamic evaluation (quantifying the hemodynamic severity of one vascular disease type to the other) are presented based on this formalism.
Dimensional analysis of energy dissipation rate with respect to the human circulation shows that the rate of energy dissipation is inversely proportional to the square of the patient body surface area and directly proportional to the cube of cardiac output. This result verified the established formulae for energy loss in aortic stenosis that was solely derived through empirical clinical experience. Three new indices are introduced to evaluate more complex disease states: (1) circulation energy dissipation index (CEDI), (2) aortic valve energy dissipation index (AV-EDI), and (3) total cavopulmonary connection energy dissipation index (TCPC-EDI). CEDI is based on the full energy budget of the circulation and is the proper measure of the work performed by the ventricle relative to the net energy spent in overcoming frictional forces. It is shown to be 4.01+/-0.16 for healthy individuals and above 7.0 for patients with severe aortic stenosis. Application of CEDI index on single-ventricle venous physiology reveals that the surgically created Fontan circulation, which is indeed palliative, progressively degrades in hemodynamic efficiency with growth (p<0.001), with the net dissipation in a typical Fontan patient (Body surface area=1.0 m(2)) being equivalent to that of an average case of severe aortic stenosis. AV-EDI is shown to be the proper index to gauge the hemodynamic severity of stenosed aortic valves as it accurately reflects energy loss. It is about 0.28+/-0.12 for healthy human valves. Moderate aortic stenosis has an AV-EDI one order of magnitude higher while clinically severe aortic stenosis cases always had magnitudes above 3.0. TCPC-EDI represents the efficiency of the TCPC connection and is shown to be negatively correlated to the size of a typical "bottle-neck" region (pulmonary artery) in the surgical TCPC pathway (p<0.05).
Energy dissipation in the human circulation has been analyzed theoretically to derive the proper scaling (indexing) factor. CEDI, AV-EDI, and TCPC-EDI are proper measures of the dissipative characteristics of the circulatory system, aortic valve, and the Fontan connection, respectively.
我们提出了一个用于分析循环系统任何组成部分能量耗散的基本理论框架,并制定了静脉和动脉循环的完整能量预算。基于这种形式主义,提出了新的指标,允许进行疾病特异性的个体间比较以及疾病间的血流动力学评估(量化一种血管疾病类型相对于另一种的血流动力学严重程度)。
对人体循环的能量耗散率进行量纲分析表明,能量耗散率与患者体表面积的平方成反比,与心输出量的立方成正比。这一结果验证了仅通过经验临床经验得出的主动脉瓣狭窄能量损失的既定公式。引入了三个新指标来评估更复杂的疾病状态:(1)循环能量耗散指数(CEDI),(2)主动脉瓣能量耗散指数(AV - EDI),以及(3)全腔肺连接能量耗散指数(TCPC - EDI)。CEDI基于循环的完整能量预算,是衡量心室所做的功相对于克服摩擦力所消耗的净能量的合适指标。健康个体的CEDI为4.01±0.16,重度主动脉瓣狭窄患者的CEDI高于7.0。将CEDI指数应用于单心室静脉生理学研究表明,外科创建的Fontan循环虽然确实是姑息性的,但随着生长其血流动力学效率会逐渐下降(p<0.001),典型Fontan患者(体表面积 = 1.0 m²)的净耗散与重度主动脉瓣狭窄的平均病例相当。AV - EDI被证明是衡量狭窄主动脉瓣血流动力学严重程度的合适指标,因为它能准确反映能量损失。健康人瓣膜的AV - EDI约为0.28±0.12。中度主动脉瓣狭窄的AV - EDI高一个数量级,而临床重度主动脉瓣狭窄病例的AV - EDI总是高于3.0。TCPC - EDI代表TCPC连接的效率,并且被证明与外科TCPC路径中典型的“瓶颈”区域(肺动脉)大小呈负相关(p<0.05)。
从理论上分析了人体循环中的能量耗散,以得出合适的缩放(索引)因子。CEDI、AV - EDI和TCPC - EDI分别是循环系统、主动脉瓣和Fontan连接的耗散特性的合适度量指标。