Mansouri Mahdi, Gregory Shaun D, Salamonsen Robert F, Lovell Nigel H, Stevens Michael C, Pauls Jo P, Akmeliawati Rini, Lim Einly
Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Innovative Cardiovascular Engineering and Technology Laboratory, Critical Care Research Group, the Prince Charles Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
PLoS One. 2017 Feb 17;12(2):e0172393. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0172393. eCollection 2017.
Due to a shortage of donor hearts, rotary left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are used to provide mechanical circulatory support. To address the preload insensitivity of the constant speed controller (CSC) used in conventional LVADs, we developed a preload-based Starling-like controller (SLC). The SLC emulates the Starling law of the heart to maintain mean pump flow ([Formula: see text]) with respect to mean left ventricular end diastolic pressure (PLVEDm) as the feedback signal. The SLC and CSC were compared using a mock circulation loop to assess their capacity to increase cardiac output during mild exercise while avoiding ventricular suction (marked by a negative PLVEDm) and maintaining circulatory stability during blood loss and severe reductions in left ventricular contractility (LVC). The root mean squared hemodynamic deviation (RMSHD) metric was used to assess the clinical acceptability of each controller based on pre-defined hemodynamic limits. We also compared the in-silico results from our previously published paper with our in-vitro outcomes. In the exercise simulation, the SLC increased [Formula: see text] by 37%, compared to only 17% with the CSC. During blood loss, the SLC maintained a better safety margin against left ventricular suction with PLVEDm of 2.7 mmHg compared to -0.1 mmHg for CSC. A transition to reduced LVC resulted in decreased mean arterial pressure (MAP) and [Formula: see text] with CSC, whilst the SLC maintained MAP and [Formula: see text]. The results were associated with a much lower RMSHD value with SLC (70.3%) compared to CSC (225.5%), demonstrating improved capacity of the SLC to compensate for the varying cardiac demand during profound circulatory changes. In-vitro and in-silico results demonstrated similar trends to the simulated changes in patient state however the magnitude of hemodynamic changes were different, thus justifying the progression to in-vitro evaluation.
由于供体心脏短缺,旋转式左心室辅助装置(LVAD)被用于提供机械循环支持。为了解决传统LVAD中使用的恒速控制器(CSC)对前负荷不敏感的问题,我们开发了一种基于前负荷的类斯塔林控制器(SLC)。SLC模拟心脏的斯塔林定律,以平均左心室舒张末期压力(PLVEDm)作为反馈信号来维持平均泵流量([公式:见原文])。使用模拟循环回路对SLC和CSC进行比较,以评估它们在轻度运动期间增加心输出量的能力,同时避免心室抽吸(以负的PLVEDm表示),并在失血和左心室收缩力(LVC)严重降低期间维持循环稳定性。基于预定义的血流动力学极限,使用均方根血流动力学偏差(RMSHD)指标来评估每个控制器的临床可接受性。我们还将我们之前发表论文中的计算机模拟结果与体外实验结果进行了比较。在运动模拟中,SLC使[公式:见原文]增加了37%,而CSC仅增加了17%。在失血期间,SLC对左心室抽吸保持了更好的安全 margin,PLVEDm为2.7 mmHg,而CSC为 -0.1 mmHg。向降低的LVC转变导致CSC时平均动脉压(MAP)和[公式:见原文]降低,而SLC维持了MAP和[公式:见原文]。结果表明,与CSC(225.5%)相比,SLC的RMSHD值要低得多(70.3%),这表明SLC在深度循环变化期间补偿不同心脏需求的能力有所提高。体外和计算机模拟结果显示出与患者状态模拟变化相似的趋势,然而血流动力学变化的幅度不同,因此证明了进行体外评估的合理性。