ArticlePerfusion2024
In vitro evaluation of the performance of an oxygenator depending on the non-standard gas content of the inlet blood with special regard on CO2 elimination.
Article in Perfusion, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe performance of an oxygenator, as found in literature, is evaluated according to protocols that define standard values of the gas content in the inlet blood. However, when dealing with simulations of lung insufficiency, a more extensive evaluation is needed. This work aims to investigate and assess the gas exchange performance of an oxygenator for different input values of gas content in blood.
methodsThree commercially available oxygenators with different membrane surfaces were investigated in a mock loop for three blood flow rates (0.5l/min, 1l/min, and 5l/min) and two gas-to-blood ratios (1:1, and 15:1). The initial CO2 and O2 partial pressures (pCO2 and pO2) in blood were set to ≥ 100 mmHg and ≤10 mmHg, respectively. For each ratio, the efficiency, defined as the ratio between the difference of pressure inlet and outlet and the inlet pCO2 (pCO2(i)), was calculated.
resultsThe CO2 elimination in an oxygenator was higher for higher pCO2(i). While for a pCO2(i) of 100 mmHg, an oxygenator eliminated 80 mmHg, the same oxygenator at the same conditions eliminated 5 mmHg CO2 when pCO2(i) was 10 mmHg. The efficiency of the oxygenator decreased from 76,9% to 49,5%. For simulation reasons, the relation between the pCO2(i) and outlet (pCO2(o)) for each oxygenator at different blood and gas flows, was described as an exponential formula.
conclusionThe performance of an oxygenator in terms of CO2 elimination depends not only on the blood and gas flow, but also on the initial pCO2 value. This dependence is crucial for simulation studies in the future.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.