Flow Modulation Algorithms for Continuous Flow Left Ventricular Assist Devices to Increase Vascular Pulsatility: A Computer Simulation Study

  • Mickey Ising
  • Sean Warren
  • Michael A. Sobieski
  • Mark S. Slaughter
  • Steven C. Koenig
  • Guruprasad A. Giridharan
Article

Abstract

Continuous flow (CF) left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) support diminishes vascular pressure pulsatility. Despite its recent clinical success CF LVAD support has been associated with a higher incidence of gastrointestinal bleeding, aortic valve dysfunction and hemorrhagic strokes. To overcome this limitation, we are developing algorithms to provide vascular pulsatility using a CF LVAD. The effects of timing and synchronizing the CF LVAD flow modulation to the native myocardium, modulation amplitude, and modulation widths were studied on the native ventricle and vasculature using a computer simulation model of the circulatory system simulating heart failure. A total of over 150 combinations of varying pulse widths, beat frequencies, time shifts, and amplitudes to modulate CF LVAD flow were tested. All control algorithms maintained a mean CF LVAD flow of 5.0 ± 0.1 L/min (full support) or 2.5 ± 0.1 L/min (partial support). These algorithms resulted in an increased arterial pressure pulsatility of up to 59 mmHg, reduced left ventricular external work (LVEW) by 10–75%, and increased myocardial perfusion by up to 44% from baseline heart failure condition. Importantly, reduction in LVEW and increase in pulsatility may be adjusted to user-defined values while maintaining the same average CF LVAD flow rate. These methods of CF LVAD flow modulation may enable tailored unloading of the native ventricle to provide rest and rehabilitation (maximal unloading to rest followed by gradual reloading to wean), which may promote sustainable myocardial recovery. Further, these LVAD flow modulation patterns may reduce the incidence of adverse events associated with the CF LVAD therapy by increasing vascular pulsatility.

Keywords

Ventricular assist device Vascular pulsatility Continuous flow Pulsatile flow Cardiovascular modeling 

Notes

Acknowledgment

The research was funded by a National Scientist Development Grant from the American Heart Association (0730319N) and by the University of Louisville Clinical and Translational Science Pilot Grant Program award.

References

  1. 1.
    Akimoto, T., et al. Relationship of blood pressure and pump flow in an implantable centrifugal blood pump during hypertension. ASAIO J. 46(5):596–599, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bearnson, G. B., et al. Pulsatile operation of a centrifugal ventricular assist device with magnetic bearings. ASAIO J. 42(5):M620–M624, 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Birks, E. J., et al. Left ventricular assist device and drug therapy for the reversal of heart failure. N. Engl. J. Med. 355(18):1873–1884, 2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bruckner, B. A., et al. Regression of fibrosis and hypertrophy in failing myocardium following mechanical circulatory support. J. Heart Lung Transplant. 20(4):457–464, 2001.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cox, L. G., et al. A mathematical model to evaluate control strategies for mechanical circulatory support. Artif. Organs 33(8):593–603, 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Crow, S., et al. Gastrointestinal bleeding rates in recipients of nonpulsatile and pulsatile left ventricular assist devices. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 137(1):208–215, 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dipla, K., et al. Myocyte recovery after mechanical circulatory support in humans with end-stage heart failure. Circulation 97(23):2316–2322, 1998.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Farrar, D. J., et al. Long-term follow-up of Thoratec ventricular assist device bridge-to-recovery patients successfully removed from support after recovery of ventricular function. J. Heart Lung Transplant. 21(5):516–521, 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Frazier, O. H., et al. Initial clinical experience with the HeartMate II axial-flow left ventricular assist device. Tex. Heart Inst. J. 34(3):275–281, 2007.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fukamachi, K., et al. An innovative, sensorless, pulsatile, continuous-flow total artificial heart: device design and initial in vitro study. J. Heart Lung Transplant. 29(1):13–20, 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Giridharan, G. A., and M. Skliar. Control strategy for maintaining physiological perfusion with rotary blood pumps. Artif. Organs 27(7):639–648, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Giridharan, G. A., et al. Modeling and control of a brushless DC axial flow ventricular assist device. ASAIO J. 48(3):272–289, 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Giridharan, G. A., et al. Left ventricular and myocardial perfusion responses to volume unloading and afterload reduction in a computer simulation. ASAIO J. 50(5):512–518, 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Giridharan, G. A., et al. A computer model of the pediatric circulatory system for testing pediatric assist devices. ASAIO J. 53(1):74–81, 2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Heerdt, P. M., et al. Chronic unloading by left ventricular assist device reverses contractile dysfunction and alters gene expression in end-stage heart failure. Circulation 102(22):2713–2719, 2000.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Imachi, K., et al. The second and third model of the flow transformed pulsatile total artificial heart. ASAIO J. 38(3):M717–M721, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Khalil, H. A., et al. Induced pulsation of a continuous-flow total artificial heart in a mock circulatory system. J. Heart Lung Transplant. 29(5):568–573, 2010.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Koenig, S. C., et al. Human, bovine and porcine systematic vascular input impedances are not equivalent: implications for device testing and xenotransplantation in heart failure. J. Heart Lung Transplant. 27(12):1340–1347, 2008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Letsou, G. V., et al. Improved left ventricular unloading and circulatory support with synchronized pulsatile left ventricular assistance compared with continuous-flow left ventricular assistance in an acute porcine left ventricular failure model. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 140(5):1181–1188, 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Levin, H. R., et al. Reversal of chronic ventricular dilation in patients with end-stage cardiomyopathy by prolonged mechanical unloading. Circulation 91(11):2717–2720, 1995.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mudd, J. O., et al. Fusion of aortic valve commissures in patients supported by a continuous axial flow left ventricular assist device. J. Heart Lung Transplant. 27(12):1269–1274, 2008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ogletree-Hughes, M. L., et al. Mechanical unloading restores beta-adrenergic responsiveness and reverses receptor downregulation in the failing human heart. Circulation 104(8):881–886, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Pantalos, G. M., et al. Characterization of an adult mock circulation for testing cardiac support devices. ASAIO J. 50(1):37–46, 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Qian, K. X. Pulsatile impeller heart: a viable alternative to a problematic diaphragm heart. Med. Eng. Phys. 18(1):57–66, 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rose, E. A., et al. Long-term use of a left ventricular assist device for end-stage heart failure. N. Engl. J. Med. 345(20):1435–1443, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Shi, Y., P. V. Lawford, and D. R. Hose. Numerical modeling of hemodynamics with pulsatile impeller pump support. Ann. Biomed. Eng. 38(8):2621–2634, 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Shiose, A., et al. Speed modulation of the continuous-flow total artificial heart to simulate a physiologic arterial pressure waveform. ASAIO J. 56(5):403–409, 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Slaughter, M. S., et al. Advanced heart failure treated with continuous-flow left ventricular assist device. N. Engl. J. Med. 361(23):2241–2251, 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Takashi, N., et al. Prolonged nonpulsatile left heart bypass with reduced systemic pulse pressure causes morphological changes in the aortic wall. Artif. Organs 22(5):405–410, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Thohan, V., et al. Cellular and hemodynamics responses of failing myocardium to continuous flow mechanical circulatory support using the DeBakey-Noon left ventricular assist device: a comparative analysis with pulsatile-type devices. J. Heart Lung Transplant. 24(5):566–575, 2005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Torre-Amione, G., et al. Decreased expression of tumor necrosis factor-alpha in failing human myocardium after mechanical circulatory support: a potential mechanism for cardiac recovery. Circulation 100(11):1189–1193, 1999.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Travis, A. R., et al. Vascular pulsatility in patients with a pulsatile- or continuous-flow ventricular assist device. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 133(2):517–524, 2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Vandenberghe, S., et al. Unloading effect of a rotary blood pump assessed by mathematical modeling. Artif. Organs 27(12):1094–1101, 2003.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Vandenberghe, S., et al. Hemodynamic modes of ventricular assist with a rotary blood pump: continuous, pulsatile, and failure. ASAIO J. 51(6):711–718, 2005.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Voigt, O., R. J. Benkowski, and G. F. Morello. Suction detection for the MicroMed DeBakey left ventricular assist device. ASAIO J. 51(4):321–328, 2005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Yuhki, A., et al. Detection of suction and regurgitation of the implantable centrifugal pump based on the motor current waveform analysis and its application to optimization of pump flow. Artif. Organs 23(6):532–537, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Zafeiridis, A., et al. Regression of cellular hypertrophy after left ventricular assist device support. Circulation 98(7):656–662, 1998.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Biomedical Engineering Society 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mickey Ising
    • 1
  • Sean Warren
    • 1
  • Michael A. Sobieski
    • 2
  • Mark S. Slaughter
    • 1
    • 2
  • Steven C. Koenig
    • 1
    • 2
  • Guruprasad A. Giridharan
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of BioengineeringCardiovascular Innovation Institute, University of LouisvilleLouisvilleUSA
  2. 2.Department of SurgeryUniversity of LouisvilleLouisvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations