2018
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0196321
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Electrocardiogram-synchronized pulsatile extracorporeal life support preserves left ventricular function and coronary flow in a porcine model of cardiogenic shock

Abstract: IntroductionVeno-arterial extracorporeal life support (ECLS) is increasingly being used to treat rapidly progressing or severe cardiogenic shock. However, it has been repeatedly shown that increased afterload associated with ECLS significantly diminishes left ventricular (LV) performance. The objective of the present study was to compare LV function and coronary flow during standard continuous-flow ECLS support and electrocardiogram (ECG)-synchronized pulsatile ECLS flow in a porcine model of cardiogenic shock… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

3
50
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 32 publications
(53 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
(35 reference statements)
3
50
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Systolic ejection trended to maximum at middle levels and to minimum at the highest levels of VA ECMO support. Such a trend was not observed in acute cardiogenic shock model induced by regional myocardial hypoxemia where ejection continued to decline [8] but was observed in another model of global myocardial hypoxia supported by stepwise VA ECMO [49]. Interestingly, in the latter work, this trend was observed regardless of pulsatile or non-pulsatile ECMO flows.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 73%
“…Systolic ejection trended to maximum at middle levels and to minimum at the highest levels of VA ECMO support. Such a trend was not observed in acute cardiogenic shock model induced by regional myocardial hypoxemia where ejection continued to decline [8] but was observed in another model of global myocardial hypoxia supported by stepwise VA ECMO [49]. Interestingly, in the latter work, this trend was observed regardless of pulsatile or non-pulsatile ECMO flows.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 73%
“…In a cardiogenic shock model, synchronized pulsatile flow was correlated with significant reduction of left ventricular end‐systolic volume, with an increased left ventricular stroke volume, and higher ejection fraction at flow rates of 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, and 4 L/min compared with non‐pulsatile flow . In a separate study using the same pump, coronary artery blood flow was significantly increased with pulsatile perfusion during ventricular fibrillation in vivo .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 83%
“…Dr. Ostadal and his colleagues have investigated the parameters of left ventricular (LV) function during conventional continuous flow ECLS support and ECG‐synchronized pulsatile flow ECLS in cardiogenic shock . In their model, 10 female swine (body weight 45 kg) underwent ECLS implantation under general anesthesia and artificial ventilation.…”
Section: Pulsatile Versus Nonpulsatile Flow During Eclsmentioning
confidence: 99%