Original Article

Clinical Evaluation of Three Ultrafiltration Devices

Parkview Memorial Hospital, Fort Wayne, IN

^* Direct communications to: Sue Bastian, 3839 Wind Drift Dr. West, Indianapolis, IN 46254

Abstract

(J. Extra-Corpor. Technol. 19[3] p. 281-286 Fall 1987, 9 ref.) Three currently available ultrafiltration devices were evaluated with regard to rate of ultrafiltration, hemolysis and ease of use within the clinical setting. The Amicon Diafilter 30 Hemofilter, Minntech Corp. Hemocor Hemoconcentrator and Sarns Hemoconcentrator were tested in a total of 27 myocardial revascularization cases. While maintaining a constant flow through the ultrafiltration device, temperature, ultrafiltrate flow, hematocrit, plasma hemoglobin and transmembrane pressure were measured at the beginning and end of ultrafiltration and at ten minute intervals during ultrafiltration. The Amicon Diafilter exhibited an average ultrafiltration rate of .27 +/- .09 ml/min/mmHg while the Hemocor and Sarns Hemoconcentrators yielded rates of .33 +/- .10 and .55 +/- .09, respectively. The Sarns and Hemocor units showed a 39% and 26% increase respectively in plasma hemoglobin above the corresponding percent increase in hematocrit, indicating some degree of hemolysis. The Amicon unit showed a 43% and 92% increase in plasma hemoglobin in 2 separate trials. There was no measurable blood or protein in the ultrafiltrate of any of the units tested except for the Amicon, which showed trace to 1 + amounts of nonhemolyzed blood in 3 of 7 trials. The Sarns unit primed the most expediently, followed by the Hemocor and Amicon, respectively.