Observational studyArtificial organs2026
Comparative Analysis of Pressure Drop (Δp): Hemodynamic Performance of Three Commercial Oxygenators During Cardiopulmonary Bypass.
Observational study in Artificial organs, 2026. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backroundThe membrane oxygenator is a critical component of extracorporeal circulation (ECC), whose performance directly depends on its structural architecture. Differences in fiber geometry and winding patterns lead to variable hemodynamic pressure conditions. The resulting pressure drop Delta p (Δp) across the oxygenator module is a decisive indicator for system load and the risk of blood trauma. The aim of this study is the comparative analysis of the Δp of three commercial oxygenators: Medtronic Affinity Fusion, Eurosets A.L. ONE Plus, and LivaNova Inspire 8F, calculated from the difference between inlet and outlet pressure.
methodsThis prospective observational study included 60 patients divided into three groups of 20 patients each, based on the type of oxygenator used in their perfusion circuit.
resultsThe results of the study show that the Δp value was significantly higher for the Inspire 8F compared to the Affinity Fusion and A.L. ONE Plus oxygenators. Between measurement points T2 and T11, the highest Δp was 116 ± 56 mmHg for the Medtronic group, 123 ± 26 mmHg for the Eurosets group, and 168 ± 33 mmHg for the Inspire 8F group. No significant differences in Δp were observed between the Affinity Fusion and the A.L. ONE Plus at any measurement point.
conclusionThe results of the study show that the Inspire has the highest Δp of all the oxygenators examined in this study. In addition to potential influencing factors, the value is also dependent on the internal structure and the surface properties of the oxygenators. However, the present study does not help to clarify the effects of the pressure before and after the oxygenator or the Δp itself on hemolysis and subsequent clinical parameters associated with the use of different commercially available oxygenators.
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.