Hemodynamic evaluation of a novel double lumen cannula for left ventricle assist device system.

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q4 ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL
Technology and Health Care Pub Date : 2025-03-01 Epub Date: 2024-11-06 DOI:10.1177/09287329241290947
Honglong Yu, Xuefeng Feng, Yao Xie, Qilian Xie, Hu Peng
{"title":"Hemodynamic evaluation of a novel double lumen cannula for left ventricle assist device system.","authors":"Honglong Yu, Xuefeng Feng, Yao Xie, Qilian Xie, Hu Peng","doi":"10.1177/09287329241290947","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>BackgroundThe left ventricular assist device (LVAD) has been proven to be an effective therapy for providing temporary circulatory support. However, the use of this device can cause myocardial injury due to multiple insertions of various catheters.ObjectiveTherefore, this study aimed to evaluate the hemodynamic performance of a newly developed double-lumen catheter (DLC) for LVAD.MethodsTwo different LVAD DLC prototypes (a semi-circular and a concentric catheter) were designed based on the structure of venous DLC. Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations were performed using the finite element method. The CFD results were confirmed through the testing of the 31 Fr prototype. The aorta is a large vessel with shear rates up to >300 s<sup>-1</sup> and we used a reasonable approximation to model blood as a Newtonian fluid.ResultsAt a flow rate of 5 L/min, the semi-circular prototype achieved an infusion pressure of 74.68 mmHg, while the concentric prototype achieved an infusion pressure of 46.11 mmHg. The CFD results matched the experimental results with a mean percentage error of less than 7%. The peak wall shear stress in the semi-circular prototype (717.5 Pa) was higher than the hemolysis threshold (400 Pa), which could cause blood damage, and it also had a higher hemolysis index compared to concentric prototype. Moreover, both prototypes exhibited areas of blood stagnation and recirculation, suggesting a possible risk of thrombosis.ConclusionBoth prototypes of the LVAD DLC demonstrated similar blood flow rates. The semi-circular prototype showed superior infusion pressure compared to the concentric prototype, but had poorer hemolysis performance. However, the potential risk of thrombosis for both still exists. Therefore, further <i>in vivo</i> experiments are necessary to verify the safety and effectiveness of the LVAD DLC.</p>","PeriodicalId":48978,"journal":{"name":"Technology and Health Care","volume":" ","pages":"814-830"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Technology and Health Care","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09287329241290947","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BackgroundThe left ventricular assist device (LVAD) has been proven to be an effective therapy for providing temporary circulatory support. However, the use of this device can cause myocardial injury due to multiple insertions of various catheters.ObjectiveTherefore, this study aimed to evaluate the hemodynamic performance of a newly developed double-lumen catheter (DLC) for LVAD.MethodsTwo different LVAD DLC prototypes (a semi-circular and a concentric catheter) were designed based on the structure of venous DLC. Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations were performed using the finite element method. The CFD results were confirmed through the testing of the 31 Fr prototype. The aorta is a large vessel with shear rates up to >300 s-1 and we used a reasonable approximation to model blood as a Newtonian fluid.ResultsAt a flow rate of 5 L/min, the semi-circular prototype achieved an infusion pressure of 74.68 mmHg, while the concentric prototype achieved an infusion pressure of 46.11 mmHg. The CFD results matched the experimental results with a mean percentage error of less than 7%. The peak wall shear stress in the semi-circular prototype (717.5 Pa) was higher than the hemolysis threshold (400 Pa), which could cause blood damage, and it also had a higher hemolysis index compared to concentric prototype. Moreover, both prototypes exhibited areas of blood stagnation and recirculation, suggesting a possible risk of thrombosis.ConclusionBoth prototypes of the LVAD DLC demonstrated similar blood flow rates. The semi-circular prototype showed superior infusion pressure compared to the concentric prototype, but had poorer hemolysis performance. However, the potential risk of thrombosis for both still exists. Therefore, further in vivo experiments are necessary to verify the safety and effectiveness of the LVAD DLC.

一种新型左心室辅助装置系统双腔插管的血流动力学评价。
背景:左心室辅助装置(LVAD)已被证明是一种提供临时循环支持的有效治疗方法。然而,由于多次插入各种导管,这种装置的使用可能导致心肌损伤。目的:本研究旨在评价新型双腔导管(DLC)用于LVAD的血流动力学性能。方法:根据静脉DLC的结构设计了两种不同的LVAD DLC原型(半圆形和同心导管)。采用有限元法进行了计算流体力学(CFD)仿真。通过31 Fr原型机的测试,验证了CFD计算结果。主动脉是一个大血管,剪切速率高达300s -1,我们使用了一个合理的近似来模拟血液作为牛顿流体。结果:在流量为5 L/min时,半圆形原型的注射压力为74.68 mmHg,同心原型的注射压力为46.11 mmHg。计算结果与实验结果吻合,平均百分比误差小于7%。半圆形原型的峰值壁剪应力(717.5 Pa)高于溶血阈值(400 Pa),可能造成血液损伤,且溶血指数也高于同心原型。此外,两种原型都显示出血液停滞和再循环的区域,这表明可能存在血栓形成的风险。结论:两种LVAD DLC原型具有相似的血流量。半圆形原型的输注压力优于同心原型,但溶血性能较差。然而,两者血栓形成的潜在风险仍然存在。因此,还需要进一步的体内实验来验证LVAD DLC的安全性和有效性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Technology and Health Care
Technology and Health Care HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
6.20%
发文量
282
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Technology and Health Care is intended to serve as a forum for the presentation of original articles and technical notes, observing rigorous scientific standards. Furthermore, upon invitation, reviews, tutorials, discussion papers and minisymposia are featured. The main focus of THC is related to the overlapping areas of engineering and medicine. The following types of contributions are considered: 1.Original articles: New concepts, procedures and devices associated with the use of technology in medical research and clinical practice are presented to a readership with a widespread background in engineering and/or medicine. In particular, the clinical benefit deriving from the application of engineering methods and devices in clinical medicine should be demonstrated. Typically, full length original contributions have a length of 4000 words, thereby taking duly into account figures and tables. 2.Technical Notes and Short Communications: Technical Notes relate to novel technical developments with relevance for clinical medicine. In Short Communications, clinical applications are shortly described. 3.Both Technical Notes and Short Communications typically have a length of 1500 words. Reviews and Tutorials (upon invitation only): Tutorial and educational articles for persons with a primarily medical background on principles of engineering with particular significance for biomedical applications and vice versa are presented. The Editorial Board is responsible for the selection of topics. 4.Minisymposia (upon invitation only): Under the leadership of a Special Editor, controversial or important issues relating to health care are highlighted and discussed by various authors. 5.Letters to the Editors: Discussions or short statements (not indexed).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信