Hemodynamic Characteristics of a Mixed Flow Pump Prototype: Progress Report of In Vitro and Acute Animal Experiments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A new dual-inlet mixed-flow blood pump was designed and tested in our laboratory. The objective of the present study was to analyze hemodynamic characteristics of the pump prototype in vitro and during acute in vivo experiments. The mixed-flow pump was first tested in vitro and then implanted in 11 pigs and 3 calves. The left ventricular apex was cannulated with the pump and an outflow graft was anastomosed to the descending thoracic aorta. Flow and pressure probes were also implanted. Animals were killed 3 to 12 hours after surgery. In 11 pigs, pump outflow averaged 3.8 +/- 0.4, 4.5 +/- 0.4, 5.2 +/- 0.8, 5.9 +/- 0.3, and 6.5 l/min at 8,000, 9,000, 10,000, 11,000, and 12,000 pump speed in rpm. Differential pressure at the pump averaged 45 +/- 6, 54 +/- 8, 68 +/- 16, 70 +/- 12, and 85 +/- 7 mm Hg at 8,000, 9,000, 10,000, 11,000 and 12,000 rpm. Mean aortic pressure averaged 64 +/- 15 mm Hg throughout the procedures. In 3 calves, mean aortic pressure and left ventricular pressure remained stable during 4, 6, and 9 hours of support at 9,500, 10,000, 10,500, 11,000, and 11,500 rpm. The hemodynamic performance of our mixed-flow pump appears satisfactory during short-term support in animals. It supports similarly to axial-flow blood pumps in clinical trials. Based on these findings, an ameliorated design of this mixed-flow pump running at smaller rotational speed against a similar pressure head is under way.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".