Display options
Cite
Chang BY, Zhang Z, Feng K, et al. Hysteretic device characteristics indicate cardiac contractile state for guiding mechanical circulatory support device use. Intensive Care Med Exp. 2021;9(1):62doi: 10.1186/s40635-021-00426-3.
Chang, B. Y., Zhang, Z., Feng, K., Josephy, N., Keller, S. P., & Edelman, E. R. (2021). Hysteretic device characteristics indicate cardiac contractile state for guiding mechanical circulatory support device use. Intensive care medicine experimental, 9(1), 62. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40635-021-00426-3
Chang, Brian Y, et al. "Hysteretic device characteristics indicate cardiac contractile state for guiding mechanical circulatory support device use." Intensive care medicine experimental vol. 9,1 (2021): 62. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40635-021-00426-3
Chang BY, Zhang Z, Feng K, Josephy N, Keller SP, Edelman ER. Hysteretic device characteristics indicate cardiac contractile state for guiding mechanical circulatory support device use. Intensive Care Med Exp. 2021 Dec 20;9(1):62. doi: 10.1186/s40635-021-00426-3. PMID: 34928472.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Intensive Care Med Exp. 2021 Dec 20;9(1):62. doi: 10.1186/s40635-021-00426-3.

Hysteretic device characteristics indicate cardiac contractile state for guiding mechanical circulatory support device use.

Intensive care medicine experimental

Brian Y Chang, Zhengyang Zhang, Kimberly Feng, Noam Josephy, Steven P Keller, Elazer R Edelman

Affiliations

  1. Institute for Medical Engineering and Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA.
  2. Program in Health Sciences and Technology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
  3. Abiomed, Danvers, MA, USA.
  4. Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
  5. Institute for Medical Engineering and Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA. [email protected].
  6. Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. [email protected].

PMID: 34928472 DOI: 10.1186/s40635-021-00426-3

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Acute heart failure and cardiogenic shock remain highly morbid conditions despite prompt medical therapy in critical care settings. Mechanical circulatory support (MCS) is a promising therapy for these patients, yet remains managed with open-loop control. Continuous measure of cardiac function would support and optimize MCS deployment and weaning. The nature of indwelling MCS provides a platform for attaining this information. This study investigates how hysteresis modeling derived from MCS device signals can be used to assess contractility changes to provide continuous indication of changing cardiac state. Load-dependent MCS devices vary their operation with cardiac state to yield a device-heart hysteretic interaction. Predicting and examining this hysteric relation provides insight into cardiac state and can be separated by cardiac cycle phases. Here, we demonstrate this by predicting hysteresis and using the systolic portion of the hysteresis loop to estimate changes in native contractility. This study quantified this measurement as the enclosed area of the systolic portion of the hysteresis loop and correlated it with other widely accepted contractility metrics in animal studies (n = 4) using acute interventions that alter inotropy, including a heart failure model. Clinical validation was performed in patients (n = 8) undergoing Impella support.

RESULTS: Hysteresis is well estimated from device signals alone (r = 0.92, limits of agreement: - 0.18 to 0.18). Quantified systolic area was well correlated in animal studies with end-systolic pressure-volume relationship (r = 0.84), preload recruitable stroke work index (r = 0.77), and maximum slope of left ventricular pressure (dP/dt

CONCLUSIONS: Mechanical circulatory support hysteretic behavior can be well modeled using device signals and used to estimate contractility changes. Contractility estimate is correlated with other accepted metrics, captures temporal trends that elucidate changing cardiac state, and is able to accurately indicate changes in inotropy. Inherently available during MCS deployment, this measure will guide titration and inform need for further intervention.

© 2021. The Author(s).

Keywords: Cardiovascular monitoring; Contractility; Device weaning; Hysteresis; Mechanical circulatory support

References

  1. Harjola VP, Lassus J, Sionis A et al (2015) Clinical picture and risk prediction of short-term mortality in cardiogenic shock. Eur J Heart Fail 17:501–509. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejhf.260 - PubMed
  2. Vincent JL, De Backer D (2013) Circulatory shock. N Engl J Med 369:1726–1734. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra1208943 - PubMed
  3. Menees DS, Peterson ED, Wang Y et al (2013) Door-to-balloon time and mortality among patients undergoing primary PCI. N Engl J Med 369:901–909. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1208200 - PubMed
  4. Reyentovich A, Barghash MH, Hochman JS (2016) Management of refractory cardiogenic shock. Nat Rev Cardiol 13:481–492. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrcardio.2016.96 - PubMed
  5. Sunagawa G, Saku K, Arimura T et al (2018) Mechano-chronotropic unloading during the acute phase of myocardial infarction markedly reduces infarct size via the suppression of myocardial oxygen consumption. J Cardiovasc Transl Res 12:124–134. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12265-018-9809-x - PubMed
  6. Miller L (2016) Cardiogenic shock in acute myocardial infarction the era of mechanical support. J Am Coll Cardiol 67:1881–1884. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2015.12.074 - PubMed
  7. Giridharan GA, Koenig SC, Soucy KG et al (2015) Left ventricular volume unloading with axial and centrifugal rotary blood pumps. ASAIO J 61:292–300. https://doi.org/10.1097/MAT.0000000000000201 - PubMed
  8. Saku K, Kakino T, Arimura T et al (2018) Left ventricular mechanical unloading by total support of impella in myocardial infarction reduces infarct size, preserves left ventricular function, and prevents subsequent heart failure in dogs. Circ Hear Fail 11:e004397. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.117.004397 - PubMed
  9. Trivella MG, Piersigilli A, Bernini F et al (2017) Percutaneous cardiac support during myocardial infarction drastically reduces mortality: perspectives from a swine model. Int J Artif Organs 40:338–344. https://doi.org/10.5301/ijao.5000604 - PubMed
  10. Tongers J, Sieweke JT, Kühn C et al (2020) Early escalation of mechanical circulatory support stabilizes and potentially rescues patients in refractory cardiogenic shock. Circ Heart Fail. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.118.005853 - PubMed
  11. Dandel M, Hetzer R (2015) Myocardial recovery during mechanical circulatory support: weaning and explantation criteria. Hear lung Vessel 7:280–288 - PubMed
  12. Garan AR, Eckhardt C, Takeda K et al (2018) Predictors of survival and ability to wean from short-term mechanical circulatory support device following acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. Eur Hear J Acute Cardiovasc Care 7:755–765. https://doi.org/10.1177/2048872617740834 - PubMed
  13. Granegger M, Moscato F, Casas F et al (2012) Development of a pump flow estimator for rotary blood pumps to enhance monitoring of ventricular function. Artif Organs 36:691–699. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1525-1594.2012.01503.x - PubMed
  14. Keller SP, Chang BY, Tan Q et al (2020) Dynamic modulation of device-arterial coupling to determine cardiac output and vascular resistance. Ann Biomed Eng. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-020-02510-3 - PubMed
  15. Chang BY, Keller SP, Bhavsar SS et al (2018) Mechanical circulatory support device-heart hysteretic interaction can predict left ventricular end diastolic pressure. Sci Transl Med 10:1–9 - PubMed
  16. Chang BY, Keller SP, Edelman ER (2019) Leveraging device-arterial coupling to determine cardiac and vascular state. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 66:2800–2808. https://doi.org/10.1109/TBME.2019.2895752 - PubMed
  17. Pennings KAMA, van Tuijl S, van de Vosse FN et al (2015) Estimation of left ventricular pressure with the pump as “sensor” in patients with a continuous flow LVAD. Int J Artif Organs 38:433–443. https://doi.org/10.5301/ijao.5000424 - PubMed
  18. Endo G, Araki K, Kojima K et al (2001) The index of motor current amplitude has feasibility in control for continuous flow pumps and evaluation of left ventricular function. Artif Organs 25:697–702. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1525-1594.2001.06859.x - PubMed
  19. Naiyanetr P, Moscato F, Vollkron M et al (2010) Continuous assessment of cardiac function during rotary blood pump support: a contractility index derived from pump flow. J Hear Lung Transpl 29:37–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healun.2009.05.032 - PubMed
  20. Chang BY (2018) Determination of physiologic states during mechanical circulatory support through characterization of device-organ interactions. Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology - PubMed
  21. Visintin A (2005) Mathematical models of hysteresis - PubMed
  22. Stoliński J, Rosenbaum C, Flameng W, Meyns B (2002) The heart-pump interaction: effects of a microaxial blood pump. Int J Artif Organs 25:1082–1088 - PubMed
  23. Moscato F, Danieli GA, Schima H (2009) Dynamic modeling and identification of an axial flow ventricular assist device. Int J Artif Organs 32:336–343 - PubMed
  24. Chang BY, Moyer C, El Katerji A et al (2020) A scalable approach to determine intracardiac pressure from mechanical circulatory support device signals. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 68:905–913. https://doi.org/10.1109/tbme.2020.3016220 - PubMed
  25. Burkhoff D, Mirsky I, Suga H (2005) Assessment of systolic and diastolic ventricular properties via pressure–volume analysis: a guide for clinical, translational, and basic researchers. Am J Physiol. https://doi.org/10.1152/ajpheart.00138.2005 - PubMed
  26. Glower DD, Spratt JA, Snow ND et al (1985) Linearity of the Frank-Starling relationship in the intact heart: the concept of preload recruitable stroke work. Circulation 71:994–1009. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.CIR.71.5.994 - PubMed
  27. Burkhoff D, Sayer G, Doshi D, Uriel N (2015) Hemodynamics of mechanical circulatory support. J Am Coll Cardiol 66:2663–2674. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2015.10.017 - PubMed
  28. Mason DT, Braunwald E, Covell JW et al (1971) Assessment of cardiac contractility. The relation between the rate of pressure rise and ventricular pressure during isovolumic systole. Circulation 44:47–58. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.CIR.44.1.47 - PubMed
  29. Gidwani UK, Goel S (2016) The pulmonary artery catheter in 2015: the swan and the phoenix. Cardiol Rev 24:1–13 - PubMed
  30. Aghajani E, Muller S, Kjørstad KE et al (2006) The pressure–volume loop revisited: is the search for a cardiac contractility index a futile cycle? Shock 25:370–376. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.shk.0000209521.20496.7a - PubMed
  31. Karunanithi MK, Feneley MP (2000) Single-beat determination of preload recruitable stroke work relationship: derivation and evaluation in conscious dogs. J Am Coll Cardiol 35:502–513. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0735-1097(99)00566-5 - PubMed
  32. Gayat E, Ahmad H, Weinert L et al (2011) Reproducibility and inter-vendor variability of left ventricular deformation measurements by three-dimensional speckle-tracking echocardiography. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 24:878–885. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.echo.2011.04.016 - PubMed
  33. Pellikka PA, She L, Holly TA et al (2018) Variability in ejection fraction measured by echocardiography, gated single-photon emission computed tomography, and cardiac magnetic resonance in patients with coronary artery disease and left ventricular dysfunction. JAMA 1:e181456. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2018.1456 - PubMed
  34. Udesen NLJ, Helgestad OKL, Banke ABS et al (2020) Impact of concomitant vasoactive treatment and mechanical left ventricular unloading in a porcine model of profound cardiogenic shock. Crit Care 24:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-020-2816-8 - PubMed

Publication Types

Grant support