Open Access
J Extra Corpor Technol
Volume 40, Number 4, December 2008
Page(s) 249 - 256
Published online 15 December 2008
  1. Corno AF. Systemic venous drainage: Can we help Newton? Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2007;31:1044–51. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  2. Berryessa R, Wiencek R, Jacobson J, et al. Vacuum-assisted venous return in pediatric cardiopulmonary bypass. Perfusion. 2000;15:63–7. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Merkle F, Boettcher W, Schulz F, et al. Perfusion technique for nonhaemic cardiopulmonary bypass prime in neonates and infants under 6 kg body weight. Perfusion. 2004;19:229–37. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Colangelo N, Torracca L, Lapenna E, et al. Vacuum-assisted venous drainage in extrathoracic cardiopulmonary bypass management during minimally invasive cardiac surgery. Perfusion. 2006;21:361–5. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Tamari Y, Lee-Sensiba K, Beck J, et al. A new top-loading venous bag provides vacuum-assisted venous drainage. Perfusion. 2002;17:383–90. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Toomasian JM, McCarthy JP. Total extracorporeal cardiopulmonary support with kinetic assisted venous drainage: experience in 50 patients. Perfusion. 1998;13:137–43. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Hill SL, Holt DW. Can vacuum assisted venous drainage be achieved using a roller pump in an emergency? A pilot study using neonatal circuitry. J Extra Corpor Technol. 2007;39:254–6. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Murai N, Cho M, Okada S, et al. Venous drainage method for cardiopulmonary bypass in single-access minimally invasive cardiac surgery: Siphon and vacuum-assisted drainage. J Artif Organs. 2005;8:91–4. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Gulielmos V, Wunderlich J, Dangel M, et al. Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery—clinical experiences with a PortAccess system. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 1998;14(Suppl 1):S148–53. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  10. Pappalardo F, Corno C, Franco A, et al. Reduction of hemodilution in small adults undergoing open heart surgery: A prospective, randomized trial. Perfusion. 2007;22:317–22. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Bevilacqua S, Matteucci S, Ferrarini M, et al. Biochemical evaluation of vacuum-assisted venous drainage: A randomized, prospective study. Perfusion. 2002;17:57–61. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Nakanishi K, Shichijo T, Shinkawa Y, et al. Usefulness of vacuumassisted cardiopulmonary bypass circuit for pediatric open-heart surgery in reducing homologous blood transfusion. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2001;20:233–8. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Hayashi Y, Kagisaki K, Yamaguchi T, et al. Clinical application of vacuum-assisted cardiopulmonary bypass with pressure relief valve. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2001;20:621–6. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Munster K, Andersen U, Mikkelsen J, et al. Vacuum assisted venous drainage (VAVD). Perfusion. 1999;14:419–23. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. LaPietra A, Grossi EA, Pua BB, et al. Assisted venous drainage presents the risk of undetected air microembolism. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2000;120:856–63. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  16. Mulholland JW, Massey W, Shelton JC. Investigation and quantification of the blood trauma caused by the combined dynamic forces experienced during cardiopulmonary bypass. Perfusion. 2000;15:485–94. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Willcox TW, Mitchell SJ, Gorman DF. Venous air in the bypass circuit: a source of arterial line emboli exacerbated by vacuumassisted drainage. Ann Thorac Surg. 1999;68:1285–9. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  18. Wang S, Baer L, Kunselman AR, Myers JL, Ündar A. Delivery of gaseous microemboli with vacuum-assisted venous drainage during pulsatile and non-pulsatile perfusion in a simulated infant CPB model. ASAIO J. 2008;54:416–22. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Jegger D, Tevaearai HT, Mueller XM, et al. Limitations using the vacuum-assist venous drainage technique during cardiopulmonary bypass procedures. J Extra Corpor Technol. 2003;35:207–11. [Google Scholar]
  20. Jahangiri M, Rayner A, Keogh B, et al. Cerebrovascular accident after vacuum-assisted venous drainage in a fontan patient: A cautionary tale. Ann Thorac Surg. 2001;72:1727–8. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  21. Willcox TW. Vacuum-assisted venous drainage: To air or not to air, that is the question. Has the bubble burst? J Extra Corpor Technol. 2002;34:24–8. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. De Somer F. Impact of oxygenator characteristics on its capability to remove gaseous microemboli. J Extra Corpor Technol. 2007;39:271–3. [Google Scholar]
  23. Fiorucci A, Gerometta PS, DeVecchi M, et al. Intro assessment of the vacuum-assisted venous drainage (VAVD) system: Risks and benefits. Perfusion. 2004;19:113–7. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Davila RM, Rawlas T, Mack MJ. Venoarterial air embolus: A complication of vacuum-assisted venous drainage. Ann Thorac Surg. 2001;71:1369–71. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  25. Mueller XM, Tevaearal HT, Horisberger J, et al. Vacuum assisted venous drainage does not increase trauma to blood cells. ASAIO J. 2001;47:651–4. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Shin H, Yozu R, Maehara T, et al. Vacuum assisted cardiopulmonary bypass in minimally invasive cardiac surgery: Its feasibility and effects on hemolysis. Artif Organs. 2000;24:450–3. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Jones TJ, Deal DD, Vernon JC, et al. Does vacuum-assisted venous drainage increase gaseous microemboli during cardiopulmonary bypass? Ann Thorac Surg. 2002;74:2132–7. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  28. Carrier M, Cyr A, Voisine P, et al. Vacuum-assisted venous drainage does not increase the neurological risk. Heart Surg Forum. 2002;5:285–8. [Google Scholar]
  29. Abu-Omar Y, Balacumaraswami L, Pigott DW, et al. Solid and gaseous cerebral microembolization during off-pump, on-pump, and open cardiac surgery procedures. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2004;127:1959–65. [Google Scholar]
  30. Rodriguez RA, Rubens F, Belway D, Nathan HJ. Residual air in the venous cannula increases cerebral embolization at the onset of cardiopulmonary bypass. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2006;29:175–80. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  31. Taylor RL, Borger MA, Weisel RD, et al. Cerebral microemboli during cardiopulmonary bypass: Increased emboli during perfusionist interventions. Ann Thorac Surg. 1999;68:89–93. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  32. Rodriguez RA, Williams KA, Babaev A, Rubens F, Nathan HJ. Effect of perfusionist technique on cerebral embolization during cardiopulmonary bypass. Perfusion. 2005;20:3–10. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Butler BD, Kurusz M. Gaseous microemboli: A review. Perfusion. 1990;5:81–99. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  34. Kurusz M, Butler B. Bubbles and bypass: An update. Perfusion. 2004;19:S49–55. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Stump DA. Embolic factors associated with cardiac surgery. Semin Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2005;9:151–2. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Geissler HJ, Allen SJ, Mehlhorn U, et al. Cooling gradients and formation of gaseous microemboli with cardiopulmonary bypass: An echocardiographic study. Ann Thorac Surg. 1997;64:100–4. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  37. Donald DE, Fellows JL. Physical factors relating to gas embolism in blood. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1961;42:110–8. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  38. Ündar A, Ji B, Kunselman AR, Myers JL. Detection and classification of gaseous microemboli during pulsatile and nonpulsatile perfusion in a simulated neonatal CPB model. ASAIO J. 2007;53:725–9. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Schreiner RS, Rider AR, Myers JW, et al. Microemboli detection and classification by innovative ultrasound technology during simulated neonatal CPB at different flow rates, perfusion modes, and perfusate temperatures. ASAIO J. 2008;54:316–24. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Blauth CI. Macroemboli and microemboli during cardiopulmonary bypass. Ann Thorac Surg. 1995;59:1300–3. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  41. Kurusz M, Butler BD. Bubbles and bypass: An update. Perfusion. 2004;19:S49–55. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Austen WG, Howry DH. Ultrasound as a method to detect bubbles or particulate matter in the arterial line during cardiopulmonary bypass. J Surg Res. 1965;6:283–4. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  43. Clayton RH, Pearson DT, Murray A. Clinical comparison of two devices for detection of microemboli during cardiopulmonary bypass. Clin Phys Physiol Meas. 1990;11:327–32. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Stump DA, Vernon JC, Deal DD. Outcomes 2004 Abstracts: A comparison of the Hatteland CMD-10 versus the embolus detection and classification system. Heart Surg Forum. 2004;7:E617–8. [Google Scholar]
  45. Andropoulos DA, Stayer SA, Diaz LK, Ramamoorthy C. Neurological monitoring for congenital heart surgery. Int Anesth Res Soc. 2004;99:1365–75. [Google Scholar]
  46. Ringelstein EB, Droste DW, Babikian VL, et al. Consensus on microembolus detection by TCD. International Consensus Group on Microembolus Detection. Stroke. 1998;29:725–9. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. Lynch JE, Pouch A, Sanders R, et al. Gaseous microemboli sizing in extracorporeal circuits using ultrasound backscatter. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2007;33:1661–75. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  48. Riley JB. Arterial line filters ranked for gaseous micro-emboli separation performance: An in vitro study. J Extra Corpor Technol. 2008;40:21–6. [Google Scholar]
  49. Brand S, Klaua R, Dietrich G, Schultz M. Ultrasonic detection and quantitative analysis of microscopic bubbles and particles in solution: Enhanced by attenuation compensation. IEEE Ultrasonics Symp 2006;10:1840–3. [Google Scholar]
  50. GAMPT. User manual of Bubble Counter Clinical BCC 200, Zappendorf, Germany: GAMPT; 2006. [Google Scholar]
  51. HATTELAND Instrumentering website. Accessed April 1, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  52. Nishida H, Tohyama N, Tomizawa Y, et al. Development of compact closed-circuit “on-the-table” type cardiopulmonary bypass. ASAIO J. 2001;47:123. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  53. Atsuhiro M, Ryohei Y, Toru M, et al. Efficiency of an air filter at the drainage site in a closed circuit with a centrifugal blood pump: An in vitro study. ASAIO J. 2001;47:692–5. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.