Superior Safety and Surgical Efficiency by Automated Vacuum-Assisted Venous Drainage Over Conventional, Survey-Based Evaluation.

0 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Youssef El Dsouki, Ignazio Condello
{"title":"Superior Safety and Surgical Efficiency by Automated Vacuum-Assisted Venous Drainage Over Conventional, Survey-Based Evaluation.","authors":"Youssef El Dsouki, Ignazio Condello","doi":"10.1093/icvts/ivaf165","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The evolution of cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) techniques has been significantly enhanced by the integration of vacuum-assisted venous drainage (VAVD). Vacuum-assisted venous drainage improves venous return in minimally invasive, paediatric, and complex cardiac surgeries by reducing priming volumes and minimizing hemodilution. However, excessive negative pressure can lead to risks, such as air embolism, hemolysis, and circuit collapse. This study aimed to compare automated and manual (conventional) VAVD systems regarding key safety and performance parameters: (1) pressure stability under varying venous return conditions, (2) incidence of air embolism and vacuum-related complications, (3) alarm response times, and (4) hemolysis. A survey was conducted across 23 cardiac surgery centres, although 3 centres did not specify the type of VAVD device used and were excluded from data analysis. The final analysis included 20 centres: 10 using automated systems and 10 using conventional systems. Data were collected using a standardized checklist assessing real-time vacuum control, safety alarms, and complication rates. Results demonstrated that automated VAVD systems provided more consistent pressure stability (98%), reduced hemolysis rates (<3%), improved alarm response times (<2 seconds), and fewer air embolism events compared to manual systems.</p>","PeriodicalId":73406,"journal":{"name":"Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12308277/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/icvts/ivaf165","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The evolution of cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) techniques has been significantly enhanced by the integration of vacuum-assisted venous drainage (VAVD). Vacuum-assisted venous drainage improves venous return in minimally invasive, paediatric, and complex cardiac surgeries by reducing priming volumes and minimizing hemodilution. However, excessive negative pressure can lead to risks, such as air embolism, hemolysis, and circuit collapse. This study aimed to compare automated and manual (conventional) VAVD systems regarding key safety and performance parameters: (1) pressure stability under varying venous return conditions, (2) incidence of air embolism and vacuum-related complications, (3) alarm response times, and (4) hemolysis. A survey was conducted across 23 cardiac surgery centres, although 3 centres did not specify the type of VAVD device used and were excluded from data analysis. The final analysis included 20 centres: 10 using automated systems and 10 using conventional systems. Data were collected using a standardized checklist assessing real-time vacuum control, safety alarms, and complication rates. Results demonstrated that automated VAVD systems provided more consistent pressure stability (98%), reduced hemolysis rates (<3%), improved alarm response times (<2 seconds), and fewer air embolism events compared to manual systems.

与传统的基于调查的评估相比,自动真空辅助静脉引流具有更高的安全性和手术效率。
体外循环(CPB)技术的发展随着真空辅助静脉引流(VAVD)技术的发展而得到了极大的促进。VAVD通过减少启动体积和最小化血液稀释来改善微创、儿科和复杂心脏手术中的静脉回流。然而,过度的负压会导致空气栓塞、溶血和电路崩溃等风险。本研究旨在比较自动和手动(传统)VAVD系统的关键安全性和性能参数:(1)不同静脉回流条件下的压力稳定性,(2)空气栓塞和真空相关并发症的发生率,(3)报警响应时间,(4)溶血。一项调查在23个心脏手术中心进行,尽管有3个中心没有指定使用VAVD设备的类型,因此被排除在数据分析之外。最终的分析包括20个中心:10个使用自动化系统,10个使用传统系统。使用标准化检查表收集数据,评估实时真空控制、安全警报和并发症发生率。结果表明,自动VAVD系统提供了更一致的压力稳定性(98%),降低了溶血率(
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信