Hiroura M

Jegger D

 Venous cannula orifice obstruction is an underestimated problem during augmented cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB), which can potentially be reduced with redesigned, virtually wall-less cannula designs versus traditional percutaneous control venous cannulas. A bench model, allowing for simulation of the vena cava with various affluent orifices, venous collapse and a worst case scenario with regard to cannula position, was developed. Flow (Q) was measured sequentially for right atrial + hepatic + renal + iliac drainage scenarios, using a centrifugal pump and an experimental bench set-up (afterload 60 mmHg). At 1500, 2000 and 2500 RPM and atrial position, the Q values were 3.4, 6.03 and 8.01 versus 0.77*, 0.43* and 0.58* l/min: p&lt;0.05* for wall-less and the Biomedicus® cannula, respectively. The corresponding pressure values were -15.18, -31.62 and -74.53 versus -46.0*, -119.94* and -228.13* mmHg. At the hepatic position, the Q values were 3.34, 6.67 and 9.26 versus 2.3*, 0.42* and 0.18* l/min; and the pressure values were -10.32, -20.25 and -42.83 versus -23.35*, -119.09* and -239.38* mmHg. At the renal position, the Q values were 3.43, 6.56 and 8.64 versus 2.48*, 0.41* and 0.22* l/min and the pressure values were -9.64, -20.98 and -63.41 versus -20.87 -127.68* and -239* mmHg, respectively.  At the iliac position, the Q values were 3.43, 6.01 and 9.25 versus 1.62*, 0.55* and 0.58* l/min; the pressure values were -9.36, -33.57 and -44.18 versus -30.6*, -120.27* and -228* mmHg, respectivly. Our experimental evaluation demonstrates that the redesigned, virtually wall-less cannulas, allowing for direct venous drainage at practically all intra-venous orifices, outperform the commercially available control cannula, with superior flow at reduced suction levels for all scenarios tested. </jats:p

S Abdel-Sayed

How to prevent venous cannula orifice obstruction during extracorporeal circulation

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Crossref