| Autor: |
Olmos-Zuñiga JR; Experimental Lung Transplant Unit of the Department of Experimental Surgery, Instituto Nacional de Enfermedades Respiratorias Ismael Cosio Villegas; raolzu@yahoo.com., Silva-Martínez M; Experimental Lung Transplant Unit of the Department of Experimental Surgery, Instituto Nacional de Enfermedades Respiratorias Ismael Cosio Villegas., Hernández-Jiménez C; Department of Experimental Surgery, Instituto Nacional de Enfermedades Respiratorias Ismael Cosio Villegas; claudia_herjim@yahoo.com., Jasso-Victoria R; Department of Experimental Surgery, Instituto Nacional de Enfermedades Respiratorias Ismael Cosio Villegas., Baltazares-Lipp M; Department of Experimental Surgery, Instituto Nacional de Enfermedades Respiratorias Ismael Cosio Villegas. |
| Abstrakt: |
Due to their physiological similarities to humans, pigs are used as experimental models for ex vivo lung perfusion (EVLP). EVLP is a technique that perfuses lungs that are not suitable for transplantation via an extracorporeal circulation pump to improve their function and increase their viability. Existing EVLP protocols are differentiated by the type of perfusion solution and perfusion flow, which varies from 40%-100% of the estimated cardiac output (CO) according to the body surface area (BSA). Devices for measuring CO use simple physical principles and other mathematical models. Thermodilution in animal models continues to be the reference standard for estimating CO because of its simplicity and ease of reproduction. Therefore, the objective of this study was to reproduce the measurement of CO by thermodilution in pigs and compare its precision and accuracy with those obtained by the BSA, weight, and Fick's method, to establish perfusion flow during EVLP. In 23 pigs, a thermodilution catheter was placed in the right jugular vein, and the carotid artery on the same side was cannulated. Blood samples were obtained for gasometry, and CO was estimated by thermodilution, adjusted body surface area, Fick's principle, and per body weight. The CO obtained by the BSA was greater (p = 0.0001, ANOVA, Tukey) than that obtained by the other methods. We conclude that although the methods used in this study to estimate CO are reliable, there are significant differences between them; therefore, each method must be evaluated by the investigator to determine which meets the needs of the protocol. |
