Effects of pulsatile assistance and nonpulsatile flow on subendocardial perfusion during cardiopulmonary bypass

David L. Steed, David M. Follette, Robert Foglia, James V. Maloney, Gerald D. Buckberg

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

27 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

We compared the effects of pulsatile and nonpulsatile perfusion in 12 dogs on extracorporeal circulation. In beating empty and fibrillating hearts at 37°C and 28°C, coronary blood flow was measured by flowmeter and microspheres at diastolic pressures ranging between 50 and 130 mm Hg. At fixed systemic flow rates (range, 600 to 2,400 ml/min), pulsatile perfusion produced a transient (3 to 4 second) augmentation of diastolic pressure and then resulted in the following: (1) decreased peripheral vascular resistance (p < 0.05); (2) unchanged peak diastolic pressure (compared with nonpulsatile perfusion); (3) decreased mean aortic pressure (6 to 37%) (p < 0.05); (4) decreased coronary blood flow (10 to 45%) (p < 0.05); and (5) decreased subendocardial blood flow (from 512 to 438 ml/100 gm/min) (p < 0.05). Pulsatile perfusion in beating hearts (37° of 28°C) did not reduce subendocardial vascular resistance, but did improve subendocardial perfusion by 27% and 36% in fibrillating hearts at 37° and 28°C, respectively. We conclude that with the exception of ventricular fibrillation, pulsatile assistance offers no advantage over nonpulsatile perfusion and has the potential disadvantage of requiring higher pump flow rates to achieve any desired level of coronary and subendocardial flow.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)133-141
Number of pages9
JournalUnknown Journal
Volume26
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - 1978

Fingerprint

Pulsatile Flow
Cardiopulmonary Bypass
Vascular Resistance
Perfusion
Blood Pressure
Flowmeters
Extracorporeal Circulation
Ventricular Fibrillation
Microspheres
Arterial Pressure
Dogs

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

Effects of pulsatile assistance and nonpulsatile flow on subendocardial perfusion during cardiopulmonary bypass. / Steed, David L.; Follette, David M.; Foglia, Robert; Maloney, James V.; Buckberg, Gerald D.

In: Unknown Journal, Vol. 26, No. 2, 1978, p. 133-141.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Steed, David L. ; Follette, David M. ; Foglia, Robert ; Maloney, James V. ; Buckberg, Gerald D. / Effects of pulsatile assistance and nonpulsatile flow on subendocardial perfusion during cardiopulmonary bypass. In: Unknown Journal. 1978 ; Vol. 26, No. 2. pp. 133-141.
@article{928c30d6be554844b68696b0653f5177,
title = "Effects of pulsatile assistance and nonpulsatile flow on subendocardial perfusion during cardiopulmonary bypass",
abstract = "We compared the effects of pulsatile and nonpulsatile perfusion in 12 dogs on extracorporeal circulation. In beating empty and fibrillating hearts at 37°C and 28°C, coronary blood flow was measured by flowmeter and microspheres at diastolic pressures ranging between 50 and 130 mm Hg. At fixed systemic flow rates (range, 600 to 2,400 ml/min), pulsatile perfusion produced a transient (3 to 4 second) augmentation of diastolic pressure and then resulted in the following: (1) decreased peripheral vascular resistance (p < 0.05); (2) unchanged peak diastolic pressure (compared with nonpulsatile perfusion); (3) decreased mean aortic pressure (6 to 37{\%}) (p < 0.05); (4) decreased coronary blood flow (10 to 45{\%}) (p < 0.05); and (5) decreased subendocardial blood flow (from 512 to 438 ml/100 gm/min) (p < 0.05). Pulsatile perfusion in beating hearts (37° of 28°C) did not reduce subendocardial vascular resistance, but did improve subendocardial perfusion by 27{\%} and 36{\%} in fibrillating hearts at 37° and 28°C, respectively. We conclude that with the exception of ventricular fibrillation, pulsatile assistance offers no advantage over nonpulsatile perfusion and has the potential disadvantage of requiring higher pump flow rates to achieve any desired level of coronary and subendocardial flow.",
author = "Steed, {David L.} and Follette, {David M.} and Robert Foglia and Maloney, {James V.} and Buckberg, {Gerald D.}",
year = "1978",
doi = "10.1016/0024-3205(78)90049-8",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "26",
pages = "133--141",
journal = "Seminars in Fetal and Neonatal Medicine",
issn = "1744-165X",
publisher = "W.B. Saunders Ltd",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Effects of pulsatile assistance and nonpulsatile flow on subendocardial perfusion during cardiopulmonary bypass

AU - Steed, David L.

AU - Follette, David M.

AU - Foglia, Robert

AU - Maloney, James V.

AU - Buckberg, Gerald D.

PY - 1978

Y1 - 1978

N2 - We compared the effects of pulsatile and nonpulsatile perfusion in 12 dogs on extracorporeal circulation. In beating empty and fibrillating hearts at 37°C and 28°C, coronary blood flow was measured by flowmeter and microspheres at diastolic pressures ranging between 50 and 130 mm Hg. At fixed systemic flow rates (range, 600 to 2,400 ml/min), pulsatile perfusion produced a transient (3 to 4 second) augmentation of diastolic pressure and then resulted in the following: (1) decreased peripheral vascular resistance (p < 0.05); (2) unchanged peak diastolic pressure (compared with nonpulsatile perfusion); (3) decreased mean aortic pressure (6 to 37%) (p < 0.05); (4) decreased coronary blood flow (10 to 45%) (p < 0.05); and (5) decreased subendocardial blood flow (from 512 to 438 ml/100 gm/min) (p < 0.05). Pulsatile perfusion in beating hearts (37° of 28°C) did not reduce subendocardial vascular resistance, but did improve subendocardial perfusion by 27% and 36% in fibrillating hearts at 37° and 28°C, respectively. We conclude that with the exception of ventricular fibrillation, pulsatile assistance offers no advantage over nonpulsatile perfusion and has the potential disadvantage of requiring higher pump flow rates to achieve any desired level of coronary and subendocardial flow.

AB - We compared the effects of pulsatile and nonpulsatile perfusion in 12 dogs on extracorporeal circulation. In beating empty and fibrillating hearts at 37°C and 28°C, coronary blood flow was measured by flowmeter and microspheres at diastolic pressures ranging between 50 and 130 mm Hg. At fixed systemic flow rates (range, 600 to 2,400 ml/min), pulsatile perfusion produced a transient (3 to 4 second) augmentation of diastolic pressure and then resulted in the following: (1) decreased peripheral vascular resistance (p < 0.05); (2) unchanged peak diastolic pressure (compared with nonpulsatile perfusion); (3) decreased mean aortic pressure (6 to 37%) (p < 0.05); (4) decreased coronary blood flow (10 to 45%) (p < 0.05); and (5) decreased subendocardial blood flow (from 512 to 438 ml/100 gm/min) (p < 0.05). Pulsatile perfusion in beating hearts (37° of 28°C) did not reduce subendocardial vascular resistance, but did improve subendocardial perfusion by 27% and 36% in fibrillating hearts at 37° and 28°C, respectively. We conclude that with the exception of ventricular fibrillation, pulsatile assistance offers no advantage over nonpulsatile perfusion and has the potential disadvantage of requiring higher pump flow rates to achieve any desired level of coronary and subendocardial flow.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85030371065&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85030371065&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/0024-3205(78)90049-8

DO - 10.1016/0024-3205(78)90049-8

M3 - Article

C2 - 666423

AN - SCOPUS:0018176526

VL - 26

SP - 133

EP - 141

JO - Seminars in Fetal and Neonatal Medicine

JF - Seminars in Fetal and Neonatal Medicine

SN - 1744-165X

IS - 2

ER -