Key result
ECC A and ECC C removed significantly more suspended gaseous microemboli and allowed fewer to pass during air challenges compared with ECC B and ECC D (p < 0.001).
Why the study?
Do different extracorporeal circuit designs differ in their ability to separate and remove gaseous microemboli in an in vitro model?
Do different extracorporeal circuit designs differ in their ability to separate and remove gaseous microemboli in an in vitro model?
p-value: p=<0.001
There are significant differences in the air-handling ability of various extracorporeal circuit designs, which may impact the risk of arterial air embolization during cardiopulmonary bypass.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Differences in ECC air-handling may affect embolization risk during bypass; leaves open clinical outcome impact.
Dickinson et al. (2006) studied Cardiopulmonary bypass (in vitro model). ECC A and ECC C vs. ECC B and ECC D was evaluated on Gaseous microemboli (GME) passage during venous air challenges (p=<0.001). ECC A and ECC C removed significantly more suspended gaseous microemboli and allowed fewer to pass during air challenges compared with ECC B and ECC D (p < 0.001).
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: