Experimental validation of a mean systemic pressure analog against zero-flow measurements in porcine VA-ECMO.

Werner-Moller, Per; Heinisch, Paul Philipp; Hana, Anisa; Bachmann, Kaspar F; Sondergaard, Soren; Jakob, Stephan M; Takala, Jukka; Berger, David (2022). Experimental validation of a mean systemic pressure analog against zero-flow measurements in porcine VA-ECMO. Journal of applied physiology, 132(3), pp. 726-736. American Physiological Society 10.1152/japplphysiol.00804.2021

Text 2022_-_Berger_-_Moller_J_Appl_Phyiol_2022_PMID_35085032.pdf - Published Version Restricted to registered users only Available under License Publisher holds Copyright. Download (2MB)

The mean systemic pressure analog (Pmsa), calculated from running hemodynamic data, estimates mean systemic filling pressure (MSFP). This post hoc study used data from a porcine veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) model [n = 9; Sus scrofa domesticus; ES breed (Schweizer Edelschwein)] with eight experimental conditions; Euvolemia [a volume state where ECMO flow produced normal mixed venous saturation (SVO2) without vascular collapse]; three levels of increasing norepinephrine infusion (Vasoconstriction 1-3); status after stopping norepinephrine (Post Vasoconstriction); and three steps of volume expansion (10 mL/kg crystalloid bolus) (Volume Expansion 1-3). In each condition, Pmsa and a "reduced-pump-speed-Pmsa" (Pmsared) were calculated from baseline and briefly reduced pump speeds, respectively. We calculated agreement for absolute values (per condition) and changes (between consecutive conditions) of Pmsa and Pmsared, against MSFP at zero ECMO flow. Euvolemia venous return driving pressure was 5.1 ± 2.0 mmHg. Bland-Altman analysis for Pmsa vs. MSFP (all conditions; 72 data pairs) showed bias (confidence interval) 0.5 (0.1-0.9) mmHg; limits of agreement (LoA) -2.7 to 3.8 mmHg. Bias for ΔPmsa vs. ΔMSFP (63 data pairs): 0.2 (-0.2 to 0.6) mmHg, LoA -3.2 to 3.6 mmHg. Bias for Pmsared vs. MSFP (72 data pairs): 0.0 (-0.3 to -0.3) mmHg; LoA -2.3 to 2.4 mmHg. Bias for ΔPmsared vs. ΔMSFP (63 data pairs) was 0.2 (-0.1 to 0.4) mmHg; LoA -1.8 to 2.1 mmHg. In conclusion, during veno-arterial ECMO, under clinically relevant levels of vasoconstriction and volume expansion, Pmsa accurately estimated absolute and changing values of MSFP, with low between-method precision. The within-method precision of Pmsa was excellent, with a least significant change of 0.15 mmHg.NEW & NOTEWORTHY This is the first study ever to validate the mean systemic pressure analog (Pmsa) against the reference mean systemic filling pressure (MSFP) determined at full arterio-venous pressure equilibrium. Using a porcine ECMO model with clinically relevant levels of vasoconstriction and volume expansion, we showed that Pmsa accurately estimated absolute and changing values of MSFP, with a poor between-method precision. The within-method precision of Pmsa was excellent.

Interest & Impact

Downloads

3 since deposited on 17 Mar 2022
0 in the past 12 months

Citations

5 Citations in Web of Science ®
6 Citations in Scopus

Search

in Google Scholar™

Services

Actions (login required)

Edit item

Actions (login required)

Edit item