Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Perfusion
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Beckley, P. D
Right arrow Articles by Novak, J. A
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Beckley, P. D
Right arrow Articles by Novak, J. A
Right arrowPubmed/NCBI databases
*Compound via MeSH
*Substance via MeSH
Hazardous Substances DB
*CARBON DIOXIDE
*OXYGEN
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Comparison of the performance characteristics of three generations of membrane oxygenators: Univox®, Univox® GoldTM and SpiralGoldTM

Philip D Beckley

Circulation Technology Division, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio

Susan M Morris

Circulation Technology Division, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio

James J Smith

Circulation Technology Division, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio

Jerri L McNamara

Circulation Technology Division, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio

Julie A Novak

Circulation Technology Division, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio

With continuous enhancement in oxygenator design, the question is raised as to how these changes actually impact the performance of the oxygenator. The recent addition of two new oxygenators by the Bentley Division of Baxter Healthcare Corporation provided us with a unique opportunity to compare the performance of each device and isolate the impact of each design change on performance. While the basic design and flow patterns have remained the same, application of the Duraflo® II treatment has produced the Univox® GoldTM and a change in the fibre-winding technique has produced the SpiralGoldTM. This study compared the effects of heparin coating (Univox® to Univox® GoldTM) and fibre-winding (Univox® GoldTM to SpiralGoldTM) on gas and heat transfer and resistance to blood flow (pressure drop). Six oxygenators of each model were evaluated utilizing an in vitro single pass circuit, which first conditioned bovine blood to the Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation (AAMI) venous standards. Blood flows of 4.0, 5.0, 6.0 and 7.0 I/min, FiO2 values of 1.0, 0.8 and 0.6, and gas-to-blood flow ratios of 0.5, 1.0 and 1.5 were chosen as test variables. Data generated included oxygen transfer, carbon dioxide transfer, arterial pO2, resistance to blood flow, and coefficient of heat exchange. The results indicate that the Duraflo II treatment does not have a significant effect on gas and heat transfer or resistance to blood flow. The fibre-winding technique employed with the new SpiralGoldTM, however, has improved significantly gas exchange and arterial PO2 when compared with the previous Univox® models. Resistance to blood flow and coefficient of heat exchange were not affected significantly by the winding technique.

Perfusion, Vol. 11, No. 1, 61-70 (1996)
DOI: 10.1177/026765919601100109


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
PerfusionHome page
E. Khoshbin, A. E. Dux, H. Killer, A. W Sosnowski, R. K Firmin, and G. J Peek
A comparison of radiographic signs of pulmonary inflammation during ECMO between silicon and poly-methyl pentene oxygenators
Perfusion, January 1, 2007; 22(1): 15 - 21.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
PerfusionHome page
E. Khoshbin, C. Westrope, S. Pooboni, D. Machin, H. Killer, G. J Peek, A. W Sosnowski, and R. K Firmin
Performance of polymethyl pentene oxygenators for neonatal extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: a comparison with silicone membrane oxygenators
Perfusion, May 1, 2005; 20(3): 129 - 134.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
PerfusionHome page
X. M Mueller, H. T Tevaearai, M. Augstburger, J. Horisberger, and L K von Segesser
Experimental evaluation of the Dideco D903 Avant 1.7 hollow-fibre membrane oxygenator
Perfusion, September 1, 1998; 13(5): 353 - 359.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
PerfusionHome page
A. H Stammers, L. W Fristoe, A. Alonso, Z. Song, and T. Galbraith
Clinical evaluation of a new generation membrane oxygenator: a prospective randomized study
Perfusion, May 1, 1998; 13(3): 165 - 175.
[Abstract] [PDF]