Original Articles

An In-Vitro Study Comparing the GME Handling of Two Contemporary Oxygenators

Address correspondence to: Carl J. Gisnarian, MS, CCP, LP, Staff Perfusionist, Department of Perfusion, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA 02114. E-mail: Carl.Gisnarian@gmail.com

Received: 26 January 2017
Accepted: 16 July 2017

Abstract

Gaseous microemboli (GME) are a potential complication of cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). Though it is difficult to prove that GME is the only major cause of neurological deficits, it may increase the chance of post-operative cognitive dysfunction if not removed. The objectives of this research were to compare LivaNova-Sorin Inspire (Inspire) oxygenator with a Medtronic arterial filter to the Medtronic Fusion (Fusion) oxygenator with and without a Medtronic arterial filter based on each system’s ability to handle GME. The Inspire and Fusion systems were evaluated in vitro. GME handling was observed by introducing air in the sampling manifold connected to the venous return at a 60 mL bolus or 1 liter per minute (LPM). The emboli detection and classification (EDAC) system measured GME preand post-oxygenator/arterial filter. The Inspire with a filter was able to remove a statistically significant greater amount of total emboli per second during the 60 mL bolus and 1 LPM tests than the Fusion with and without an arterial filter. The Inspire with an arterial filter was more efficient in removing GME during a 60 mL bolus and 1 LPM than the Fusion and Fusion with an arterial filter. However, the Fusion with an arterial filtered performed better than the Fusion system without the arterial filter.