Abstract

BackgroundBecause of its low rate of clinical complications, miniaturized extracorporeal perfusion systems (MEPS) are frequently used in heart centers worldwide. However, many recent studies refer to the higher probability of gaseous microemboli formation by MEPS, caused by subzero pressure values. This is the main reason why various de-airing devices were developed for today’s perfusion systems. In the present study, we investigated the potential benefits of a simple one-way-valve connected to a volume replacement reservoir (OVR) for volume and pressure compensation.MethodsIn an experimental study on 26 pigs, we compared MEPS (n = 13) with MEPS plus OVR (n = 13). Except OVR, perfusion equipment was identical in both groups. Primary endpoints were pressure values in the venous line and the right atrium as well as the number and volume of air bubbles. Secondary endpoints were biochemical parameters of systemic inflammatory response, ischemia, hemodilution and hemolysis.ResultsOne animal was lost in the MEPS + OVR group. In the MEPS + OVR group no pressure values below −150 mmHg in the venous line and no values under -100 mmHg in right atrium were noticed. On the contrary, nearly 20 % of venous pressure values in the MEPS group were below −150 and approximately 10 % of right atrial pressure values were below -100 mmHg. Compared with the MEPS group, the bubble counter device showed lower numbers of arterial air bubbles in the MEPS + OVR group (mean ± SD: 13444 ± 5709 vs. 1 ± 2, respectively; p < 0.001). In addition, bubble volume was significantly lower in the MEPS + OVR group than in the MEPS group (mean ± SD: 1522 ± 654 μl vs. 4 ± 6 μl, respectively; p < 0.001). The proinflammatory cytokine interleukin-6 and biochemical indices of cardiac ischemia (creatine kinase, and troponin I) were comparable between both groups.ConclusionsThe use of a miniaturized perfusion system with a volume replacement reservoir is able to counteract excessive negative venous line pressures and to reduce the number and volume of arterial air bubbles. This approach may lead to a lower rate of neurological complications.

Highlights

  • Because of its low rate of clinical complications, miniaturized extracorporeal perfusion systems (MEPS) are frequently used in heart centers worldwide

  • We showed that omitting the venous reservoir is associated with excessive negative venous line pressures and a significant increase in the number and volume of arterial air bubbles compared with conventional cardiopulmonary bypass (CCPB), unless specific de-airing safety procedures are introduced

  • The present study aimed to investigate the effects of MEPS with or without One-way-valve volume replacement (OVR) on pressure values in the venous line and right atrium

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Because of its low rate of clinical complications, miniaturized extracorporeal perfusion systems (MEPS) are frequently used in heart centers worldwide. Many recent studies refer to the higher probability of gaseous microemboli formation by MEPS, caused by subzero pressure values. This is the main reason why various de-airing devices were developed for today’s perfusion systems. When the venous line reservoir is removed in minimized systems, the perfusionist cannot counteract an insufficient venous return by adding reservoir blood, a technique commonly used with CCPB. To avoid this problem, we have developed a new one-way-valve at the venous line connected to a volume replacement reservoir (OVR) [6]. The overall goal of this work was to increase the safety of minimized perfusion systems by reducing the risk of gaseous embolism without adding significant costs

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call