Open AccessMeasuring pulmonary arterial compliance: mission impossible? Insights from a novel in vivo continuous‐flow based experimental model
Author(s) -
Vanden Eynden Frédéric,
Bové Thierry,
Chirade MarieLuce,
Van Nooten Guido,
Segers Patrick
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
pulmonary circulation
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.791
H-Index - 40
ISSN - 2045-8940
DOI - 10.1177/2045894018776882
Subject(s) - pulsatile flow , compliance (psychology) , medicine , pulse pressure , diastole , flow (mathematics) , cardiology , stroke volume , mechanics , vascular resistance , hemodynamics , biomedical engineering , blood pressure , heart failure , physics , ejection fraction , psychology , social psychology
Arterial compliance (C) is related to the elasticity, size, and geometrical distribution of arteries. Compliance is a determinant of the load that impedes ventricular ejection. Measuring compliance is difficult, particularly in the pulmonary circulation in which resistive and compliant vessels overlap. Comparing different methods for quantification of compliance to a method that involves a continuous flow might help to identify the optimal method. Pulmonary arterial compliance was computed in six pigs based on the stroke volume to pulse pressure ratio, diastolic decay exponential fitting, area method, and the pulse pressure method (PPM). Compliance measurements were compared to those obtained under continuous flow conditions through a right ventricular bypass (Heartware Inc., Miami Lakes, FL, USA). Compliance was computed for various flows using diastolic decay exponential fitting after an abrupt interruption of the pump. Under the continuous flow conditions, resistance (R) was a decreasing function of the flow, and the fitting to P = e ‐t/RC yielded a pulmonary time constant (RC) of 2.06 s ( ± 0.48). Compliance was an increasing function of flow. Steady flow inter‐method comparisons of compliance under pulsatile flow conditions showed large discrepancies and values (7.23 ± 4.47 mL/mmHg) which were lower than those obtained under continuous flow conditions (10.19 ± 1 0.31 mL/mmHg). Best agreement with steady flow measurements is obtained with the diastolic decay method. Resistance and compliance are both flow‐dependent and are inversely related in the pulmonary circulation. The dynamic nature of the pulsatile flow may induce a non‐uniformly distributed compliance, with an influence on the methods of measurement.