This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by De Somer, F Articles by Van Nooten, G Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by De Somer, F Articles by Van Nooten, G Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Can an oxygenator design potentially contribute to air embolism in cardiopulmonary bypass? A novel method for the determination of the air removal capabilities of neonatal membrane oxygenators

Institute of Biomedical Technology, University of Gent

P Dierickx

Institute of Biomedical Technology, University of Gent

D Dujardin

Department of Cardiac Surgery, Division of Perfusion, University Hospital Gent

P Verdonck

Institute Biomedical Technology, University of Gent, Gent

G Van Nooten

Institute Biomedical Technology, University of Gent, Gent

At present, air handling of a membrane oxygenator is generally studied by using an ultrasonic sound bubble counter. However, this is not a quantitative method and it does not give any information on where air was entrapped in the oxygenator and if it eventually was removed through the membrane for gas exchange. The study presented here gives a novel technique for the determination of the air-handling characteristics of a membrane oxygenator. The study aimed at defining not only the amount of air released by the oxygenator, but also the amount of air trapped within the oxygenator and/or removed through the gas exchange membrane. Two neonatal membrane oxygenators without the use of an arterial filter were investigated: the Polystan Microsafe and the Dideco Lilliput. Although the air trap function of both oxygenators when challenged with a bolus of air was similar, the Microsafe obtained this effect mainly by capturing the air in the heat exchanger compartment while the Lilliput did remove a large amount of air through the membrane. In conclusion, the difference in trap function was most striking during continuous infusion of air. Immediate contact with a microporous membrane, avoidance of high velocities within the oxygenator, pressure drop, transit time and construction of the fibre mat all contribute to the air-handling characteristics of a membrane oxygenator.

Perfusion, Vol. 13, No. 3, 157-163 (1998)
DOI: 10.1177/026765919801300302


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

This article has been cited by other articles:

				R. A Rodriguez and D. Belway Comparison of two different extracorporeal circuits on cerebral embolization during cardiopulmonary bypass in children Perfusion, September 1, 2006; 21(5): 247 - 253. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. Kurusz and B. D Butler Bubbles and bypass: an update Perfusion, January 1, 2004; 19(1_suppl): S49 - S55. [Abstract] [PDF]

				A. LaPietra, E. A. Grossi, B. B. Pua, R. A. Esposito, A. C. Galloway, C. C. Derivaux, L. R. Glassman, A. T. Culliford, G. H. Ribakove, and S. B. Colvin Assisted venous drainage presents the risk of undetected air microembolism J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., November 1, 2000; 120(5): 856 - 863. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J Horisberger, D Jegger, Y Boone, I Seigneul, N Pierrel, M Hurni, A F Corno, and L K von Segesser Impact of a remote pump head on neonatal priming volumes Perfusion, September 1, 1999; 14(5): 351 - 356. [Abstract] [PDF]