4.4 Article

Early experience with a polymethyl pentene oxygenator for adult extracorporeal life support

期刊

ASAIO JOURNAL
卷 48, 期 5, 页码 480-482

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/00002480-200209000-00007

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Silicone oxygenators are the standard devices used for Extracorporeal Life Support (ECLS), but they have some limitations. Microporous polypropylene hollow fiber oxygenators overcome many of these problems but, unfortunately, develop plasma leak. Polymethyl-pentene (PMP) is a novel oxygenator material. We report our initial experience with the Medos Hilite 7000LT, a PMP hollow fiber oxygenator, in six adult respiratory ECLS patients with these characteristics: age, mean 32.2 (+/-13) years; weight, mean 81.2 (+/-17) kg; PaO2/FlO(2), mean 62.8 [+/-33] mm Hg; Murray Score, mean 3.4 [+/-0.31] and sepsis related organ failure assessment score, mean 9.6 [+/-2.3]. One patient was cannulated within 10 hours of multiple trauma and 1 hour after thoracolaparotomy; another patient was cannulated 12 hours after a thoracotomy. All six patients survived. Heparin was infused (7.8-32.5 u/kg/hr) to maintain activated clotting time at 162 to 238 seconds; international normalized ratio was 0.9 to 3.4. Two of the six patients required transfusions of fresh frozen plasma, receiving one and five units, respectively. Fibrinogen was 1.4 to 6 g/dl; no cryoprecipitate was needed. Platelet counts were between 65 and 306, and very little platelet transfusion (mean 2.33; +/-3.03 units per patient) was required to maintain these levels. Two patients did not require any platelet transfusion. Maximum blood flow was 5.3 L/min, sweep was 3 to 10 L/min, and resistance was 11 to 43 Paul Wood Units. There were no oxygenator failures. Mean duration of ECLS was 151.7 hours (+/-75.6). Our initial experience with PMP oxygenators in adults was satisfactory, and platelet consumption and resistance to blood flow seem to be greatly reduced with PMP.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据