Search

Background: During cardiac surgery the use of a minimal extracorporeal circulation (MiECC) system may reduce the adverse effects for the patient. This is probably caused by reduced inflammation and hemodilution. For the use of a MiECC circuit, a venous bubble trap (VBT) is warranted for safety reasons. The aim of this study was to assess if an arterial filter with a small prime volume has the same (or better) air removal capacities as a VBT in a MiECC circuit and subsequentially may be used as an alternative., Methods: In an in vitro study, air removal properties were compared between the arterial filter and three VBT's on the market, VBT160 (Getinge), VBT 8 (LivaNova and VARD (Medtronic). In a MiECC circuit, the filter devices were placed in a venous position and challenged with massive and micro air. Gaseous microemboli (GME) were measured with a bubble counter proximal and distal of the VBT device., Results: More than 99.9 % of the air was removed after a bolus air challenge by all VBT's. Both the VARD and the AF100 showed better GME removal properties (not significant for the AF100) compared to the other devices. All filters showed GME generation after a challenge with massive air. Compared to the other filters, only the VARD showed no passing of larger bubbles when a volume of 50 mL of air was present in the filter., Conclusions: The AF100 seems to be a safe and low prime alternative for use in a MiECC system as a venous air trap. A word of caution, placement of the AF100 arterial filter in the venous line is off label use., Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Background: Oxygenators, as used in cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) circuits, are components with good air removal properties. However, under some conditions the semipermeable characteristics of hollow fibers allow air to accidentally enter the blood side of the CPB circuit. This may occur when a fluid in motion is stopped suddenly by which the rapid change in momentum may cause a relative negative pressure drop, the so-called hammer effect. The hammer effect is not yet described in literature related to CPB. The aim of this in vitro study was to reproduce the hammer effect., Methods: The in vitro setup consisted of a CPB circuit with a fully occluded roller pump and one of four test oxygenators. The hammer test was performed by a sudden pump stop. The pressure wave was measured and after the test the residual air present in the oxygenator was forced into the arterial line and measured with a bubble detector., Results: We showed that a sudden pump stop could lead to the hammer effect, represented as a relative negative pressure drop in the arterial line. This hammer effect resulted in air release through the semipermeable fibers as we showed in two of the four tested brands of oxygenators., Conclusions: We conclude that the hammer effect may occur before connection of the CPB system to the patient, and this may result in air release into the arterial blood side of the oxygenator. The hammer effect can be caused by clamping of the tubing in combination with a centrifugal pump, or by suddenly stopping the roller pump. With this study we would like to raise awareness of the hammer effect., Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

The landmark 2016 Minimal Invasive Extracorporeal Technologies International Society (MiECTiS) position paper promoted the creation of a common language between cardiac surgeons, anesthesiologists and perfusionists which led to the development of a stable framework that paved the way for the advancement of minimal invasive perfusion and related technologies. The current expert consensus document offers an update in areas for which new evidence has emerged. In the light of published literature, modular minimal invasive extracorporeal circulation (MiECC) has been established as a safe and effective perfusion technique that increases biocompatibility and ultimately ensures perfusion safety in all adult cardiac surgical procedures, including re-operations, aortic arch and emergency surgery. Moreover, it was recognized that incorporation of MiECC strategies advances minimal invasive cardiac surgery (MICS) by combining reduced surgical trauma with minimal physiologic derangements. Minimal Invasive Extracorporeal Technologies International Society considers MiECC as a physiologically-based multidisciplinary strategy for performing cardiac surgery that is associated with significant evidence-based clinical benefit that has accrued over the years. Widespread adoption of this technology is thus strongly advocated to obtain additional healthcare benefit while advancing patient care., Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interestsThe author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Kyriakos Anastasiadis: Consulting agreement with Medtronic. Polychronis Antonitsis: Consulting agreement with Medtronic. Aschraf El-Essawi: Consulting agreement with Medtronic, speaker for Terumo and Edwards. Andreas Liebold: Consulting agreement with Edwards Lifesciences, educational grants from Getinge, LivaNova and Abbott. Bob Kiaii: Consulting agreement with Medtronic, Abbott, and Johnson and Johnson. Adrian Bauer: Advisory board of LivaNova, speaker for Köhler Chemie, advertisement and studies for Medtronic. Wim van Boven: Consulting agreement with Medtronic Helena Argiriadou: Consulting agreement with Medtronic. Hansjoerg Jenni: Consulting agreement with Medtronic. Marco Di Eusanio: Consulting agreement with Medtronic, Corcym and Edwards. Christophe Baufreton: Consulting agreement with Medtronic, Liva-Nova, Nordic Pharma and Cytosorbents. Ignazio Condello: Consulting agreement with Eurosets and Livanova. Marco Ranucci: Advisory Board Member for Medtronic and Livanova. All other authors declared no conflict of interest.