Giridharan Guruprasad A, Koenig Steven C, Soucy Kevin G, Choi Young, Pirbodaghi Tohid, Bartoli Carlo R, Monreal Gretel, Sobieski Michael A, Schumer Erin, Cheng Allen, Slaughter Mark S
From the *Department of Bioengineering, Cardiovascular Innovation Institute, University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky 40292; †Department of Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery, Cardiovascular Innovation Institute, University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky 40202; ‡Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Hönggerberg, Zürich, Switzerland; and §Division of Cardiovascular Surgery, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104.
ASAIO J. 2015 May-Jun;61(3):292-300. doi: 10.1097/MAT.0000000000000201.
Axial (AX) and centrifugal (CFG) rotary blood pumps have gained clinical acceptance for the treatment of advanced heart failure. Differences between AX and CFG designs and mechanism of blood flow delivery may offer clinical advantages. In this study, pump characteristics, and acute physiologic responses during support with AX (HeartMate II) and CFG (HVAD) left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) were investigated in mock loop and chronic ischemic heart failure bovine models. In the mock loop model, pump performance was characterized over a range of pump speeds (HeartMate II: 7,000-11,000 rpm, HVAD: 2,000-3,600 rpm) and fluid viscosities (2.7 cP, 3.2 cP, 3.7 cP). In the ischemic heart failure bovine model, hemodynamics, echocardiography, and end-organ perfusion were investigated. CFG LVAD had a flatter HQ curve, required less power, and had a more linear flow estimation relation than AX LVAD. The flow estimation error for the AX LVAD (±0.9 L/min at 2.7 cP, ±0.7 L/min at 3.2 cP, ±0.8 L/min at 3.7 cP) was higher than the CFG LVAD (±0.5 L/min at 2.7 cP, ±0.2 L/min at 3.2 cP, ±0.5 L/min at 3.7 cP). No differences in acute hemodynamics, echocardiography, or end-organ perfusion between AX and CFG LVAD over a wide range of support were statistically discernible. These findings suggest no pronounced acute differences in LV volume unloading between AX and CFG LVAD.
轴流(AX)和离心(CFG)旋转式血泵已在临床上被用于治疗晚期心力衰竭。AX和CFG设计以及血流输送机制之间的差异可能具有临床优势。在本研究中,在模拟循环和慢性缺血性心力衰竭牛模型中,研究了使用AX(HeartMate II)和CFG(HVAD)左心室辅助装置(LVAD)进行支持时的泵特性和急性生理反应。在模拟循环模型中,在一系列泵速(HeartMate II:7000 - 11000转/分钟,HVAD:2000 - 3600转/分钟)和流体粘度(2.7厘泊、3.2厘泊、3.7厘泊)下对泵性能进行了表征。在缺血性心力衰竭牛模型中,研究了血流动力学、超声心动图和终末器官灌注情况。与AX LVAD相比,CFG LVAD的HQ曲线更平缓,所需功率更低,且流量估计关系更线性。AX LVAD的流量估计误差(2.7厘泊时为±0.9升/分钟,3.2厘泊时为±0.7升/分钟,3.7厘泊时为±0.8升/分钟)高于CFG LVAD(2.7厘泊时为±0.5升/分钟,3.2厘泊时为±0.2升/分钟,3.7厘泊时为±0.5升/分钟)。在广泛的支持范围内,AX和CFG LVAD之间在急性血流动力学、超声心动图或终末器官灌注方面没有统计学上可辨别的差异。这些发现表明AX和CFG LVAD之间在左心室容积卸载方面没有明显的急性差异。