Abstract
Introduction:
We have been developing a closed-circuit cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) system (“Dihead CPB”) for application during coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and valve surgery. To strive for minimal hemolysis during Dihead CPB, we compared the hemolysis caused by three different suction systems and performed a clinical study with the newly applied suction system.
Materials & Methods:
We evaluated the hemolysis caused by roller-pump suction, the SmartSuction® Harmony® and wall suction systems with respect to suction speed and compared the systems by means of in vitro studies. A clinical study was also performed on 15 volunteers to assess hemolysis and the adequacy of the newly applied suction system with Dihead CPB.
Results:
Pressure inside the suction cannula was −22.5 ± 0.1 mmHg at a maximum flow of 1.5 L/min for roller-pump suction and −43.4 ± 0.1 mmHg at −150 mmHg of the set vacuum pressure of wall suction. With the SmartSuction, the pressure inside the cannula varied from −76.3 ± 1.0 to −130.3 ± 1.5 mmHg, depending on suctioning conditions. Suction speed (to suction 50 ml of blood) was fastest with the SmartSuction (69.7 ± 3.58 s) whereas, with roller suction, it was 117.3 ± 8.47 s and with wall suction 96.9 ± 7.10 s. The SmartSuction had the highest hemolysis rate (2.00 ± 0.33%) vs. 0.61 ± 0.10% for roller suction and 0.41 ± 0.11% for wall suction (p<0.001). The clinical study with wall suction showed no significant increase in plasma free hemoglobin during or after CPB compared with before surgery.
Conclusions:
Wall suction had less hemolysis than roller suction or the SmartSuction in the in vitro study and the clinical study with wall suction showed efficient suction speed and acceptable hemolysis, suggesting that Dihead CPB with wall suction is feasible for CABG.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.