4.4 Article

Physiological Characterization of the SynCardia Total Artificial Heart in a Mock Circulation System

Journal

ASAIO JOURNAL
Volume 61, Issue 3, Pages 274-281

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MAT.0000000000000192

Keywords

total artificial heart; elastance; pressure-volume relation; Donovan mock circulation; mechanical circulatory support; heart failure

Funding

  1. Cardiovascular Biomedical Engineering Training Grant, National Institutes of Health [T32HL007955]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The SynCardia total artificial heart (TAH) has emerged as an effective, life-saving biventricular replacement system for a wide variety of patients with end-stage heart failure. Although the clinical performance of the TAH is established, modern physiological characterization, in terms of elastance behavior and pressure-volume (PV) characterization has not been defined. Herein, we examine the TAH in terms of elastance using a nonejecting left ventricle, and then characterize the PV relation of the TAH by varying preload and afterload parameters using a Donovan Mock Circulatory System. We demonstrate that the TAH does not operate with time-varying elastance, differing from the human heart. Furthermore, we show that the TAH has a PV relation behavior that also differs from that of the human heart. The TAH does exhibit Starling-like behavior, with output increasing via preload-dependent mechanisms, without reliance on an alteration of inotropic state within the operating window of the TAH. Within our testing range, the TAH is insensitive to variations in afterload; however, this insensitivity has a limit, the limit being the maximum driving pressure of the pneumatic driver. Understanding the physiology of the TAH affords insight into the functional parameters that govern artificial heart behavior providing perspective on differences compared with the human heart.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available