Direct comparison of percutaneous circulatory support systems in specific hemodynamic conditions in a porcine model.
Аннотация
BACKGROUND
Several percutaneous circulatory support systems have been recently introduced into clinical practice for the treatment of cardiogenic shock or refractory nontolerated ventricular tachycardia, in support of high-risk catheter interventions and, occasionally, cardiopulmonary resuscitation. To date, however, a direct comparison of the available systems has not been performed.
METHODS AND
RESULTS
Adult female pigs (weight 50-60 kg) were used throughout the experiment. Under deep anesthesia and mechanical ventilation, 3 percutaneous circulatory support systems were compared: (1) right atrium-aorta, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (n=4); (2) left atrium-aorta, TandemHeart system (n=4); (3) left ventricle-aorta, Impella 2.5 system (n=4), and (4) left ventricle-aorta with norepinephrine at 0.1 µg/kg per minute (n=4). Hemodynamic efficacy (mean arterial pressure) was measured at 3 specific conditions: ventricular pacing at 200 and 300 beats per minute, and ventricular fibrillation. Although no or only nonsignificant differences were found among the systems at ventricular pacing of 200 and 300 beats per minute, under ventricular fibrillation, the right atrium-aorta system was significantly the most efficacious, followed by the left atrium-aorta system and the left ventricle-aorta system (P<0.001). However, the left ventricle-aorta system with norepinephrine still maintained mean arterial pressure comparable with the left atrium-aorta system.
CONCLUSIONS
Differences were seen in the hemodynamic efficacy of available percutaneous circulatory support systems, particularly under the most severe hemodynamic condition, ventricular fibrillation.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.