Mongero L B, Beck J R, Orr T W, Kroslowitz R M, Lee-Sensiba K, Oz M C
Columbia-Presbyterian Medical Center, Milstein Hospital, New York, NY 10032, USA.
Perfusion. 1998 Sep;13(5):360-8. doi: 10.1177/026765919801300513.
Pump manufacturers recommend setting roller pump occlusion such that the level of a 100 cm column of crystalloid drops 2.5 cm/min (Sarns, 8000 Modular Perfusion System, operator's manual, roller pump software version 2.3L. May 1993; 2.1-2.14). Though this almost occlusive setting ensures accurate pump flow, it has been shown to cause more hemolysis than nonocclusive pumps (Noon GP, Kane LE, Feldman L et al. Reduction of blood trauma in roller pumps for long-term perfusion. World J Surg 1985; 9: 65-71). We conducted a clinical study (n = 19) to compare the standard occlusion method with the dynamic method and to determine the accuracy of flow for the nonocclusive pump. Standard occlusion was set by clamping the pump tubing distal to the arterial line filter and timing the drop in pump outlet pressure as indicated by a pressure transducer connected to the filter. The occlusion setting, expressed in mmHg/s, was recorded for each roller at two specific points along the raceway. The pump was then set nonocclusively with the dynamic method using the Better Header (BH) (Circulatory Technology, Oyster Bay, NY, USA). Readings of the change in pressure in the same two selected points on the raceway were taken. The latter was repeated after discontinuation of bypass. Flow was recorded throughout the procedure from both roller pump output display and a flow meter (Model #109 Transonic, Ithaca, NY, USA). The average drop in pump outlet pressure for the standard method was 1.3 +/- 4.0 (range 0-18 mmHg/s), and for the dynamic method was 38 +/- 28 (range 1.2-89 mmHg/s). Off bypass, the average reading was 44 +/- 38 (range 2.0-103 mmHg/s). Regression analysis indicates that patient flow, when corrected for retrograde flow by the dynamic method, equals 1.003 x revolutions per minute + 40 ml/min (r2 = 0.964). The average error between indicated pump flow, corrected for retrograde flow, was -1% (range from -6.7 to 6.6%). We conclude that the BH allows nonocclusive setting (30 times less than our standard method) without sacrificing pump flow accuracy.
泵制造商建议设置滚压泵的阻塞程度,以使100厘米高的晶体液柱高度以每分钟2.5厘米的速度下降(Sarns,8000模块化灌注系统,操作手册,滚压泵软件版本2.3L。1993年5月;2.1 - 2.14)。尽管这种几乎完全阻塞的设置可确保泵流量准确,但已证明它比非阻塞泵会导致更多的溶血(Noon GP,Kane LE,Feldman L等人。减少长期灌注用滚压泵中的血液损伤。《世界外科杂志》1985年;9:65 - 71)。我们进行了一项临床研究(n = 19),以比较标准阻塞方法和动态方法,并确定非阻塞泵的流量准确性。标准阻塞是通过夹闭动脉管路过滤器远端的泵管,并记录连接到过滤器的压力传感器所指示的泵出口压力下降时间来设置的。阻塞设置以mmHg/s表示,在滚道上的两个特定点记录每个滚轴的值。然后使用更好的表头(BH)(循环技术公司,美国纽约州牡蛎湾)通过动态方法将泵设置为非阻塞状态。记录滚道上相同两个选定点的压力变化读数。在体外循环停止后重复此操作。在整个过程中,从滚压泵输出显示屏和流量计(型号#109 Transonic,美国纽约州伊萨卡)记录流量。标准方法的泵出口压力平均下降为1.3 +/- 4.0(范围0 - 18 mmHg/s),动态方法为38 +/- 28(范围1.2 - 89 mmHg/s)。体外循环停止后,平均读数为44 +/- 38(范围2.0 - 103 mmHg/s)。回归分析表明,通过动态方法校正逆行流量后的患者流量等于1.003×每分钟转数 + 40毫升/分钟(r2 = 0.964)。校正逆行流量后的指示泵流量之间的平均误差为 - 1%(范围从 - 6.7%至6.6%)。我们得出结论,BH允许进行非阻塞设置(比我们的标准方法少30倍),而不会牺牲泵流量准确性。