Table 2.

The 32-ml CPD and 40-ml IABP Both Produced a Significant Hemodynamic Improvement Compared to DCF Baseline

Device	Mode	HR (bpm)	SV (ml)	CO (L/min)	LVPpksys (mm Hg)	CAFdia (ml/min)	MAP (mm Hg)	AoPed (mm Hg)
DCF baseline		77 ±3	110 ±7	8.5 ±0.6	106 ±3	279 ±51	81 ±3	74 ±5
32-ml CPD	1:1	79 ±4	113 ±9	9.0 ±0.9*	99 ±3*	317 ±52*	86 ±4*	68 ±3*
	1:2	79 ±4	113 ±8	9.3 ±0.6*	100 ±3*	297 ±49*	85 ±3*	68 ±3*
40-ml IABP	1:1	79 ±3	113 ±7	9.0 ±0.5*	96 ±3*	297 ±70*	85 ±3*	60 ±3*†
	1:2	80 ±4	111 ±4	8.9 ±0.6*	95 ±2*	294 ±64*	81 ±3*	60 ±3*†

Values are given as mean [±] SD.

^*Vs. DCF baseline (p < 0.05).

^†IABP vs. CPD (p < 0.05).

HR, heart rate; SV, stroke volume; CO, cardiac output; LVPpksys, left ventricular peak systolic pressure; CAFdia, mean diastolic coronary artery flow; MAP, mean aortic pressure; AoPed, aortic end-diastolic pressure at DCF, diminished cardiac function baseline, 1:1 and 1:2 modes.