Skip to main content
. 2020 Jun 25;69(4):609–620. doi: 10.33549/physiolres.934429

Table 2.

Comparison of the effects of extracorporeal blood flow on hemodynamic parameters and electrical impedance of lungs in healthy circulation and heart failure conditions.

l/min EBF 1 Healthy EBF 2 Healthy EBF 3 Healthy EBF 4 Healthy P value Healthy
MAP mmHg 75 ± 5 84 ± 5 *87 ± 6 **92 ± 6 < 0.01
Carotid flow ml/min 395 ± 26 425 ± 30 *456 ± 31 435 ± 38 < 0.05
MPAP mmHg 29 ± 4 27 ± 4 *24 ± 3 **23 ± 3 < 0.001
PCWP mmHg 5.4 ± 0.9 5.4 ± 0.9 5.1 ± 0.5 4.4 ± 0.6 < 0.05
CVP mmHg 4.4 ± 0.5 3.9 ± 0.5 3.3 ± 0.6 *2.6 ± 0.7 < 0.01
SvO 2 % 76 ± 3 80 ± 3 *82 ± 2 *83 ± 3 < 0.01
rSO 2 head % 72 ± 2 73 ± 2 *76 ± 2 **76 ± 1 < 0.01
rSO 2 limb % 69 ± 2 69 ± 2 69 ± 2 70 ± 2 ns
EIT 1.000 0.999 ± 0.006 1.006 ± 0.007 1.006 ± 0.009 ns

l/min EBF 1 Heart failure EBF 2 Heart failure EBF 3 Heart failure EBF 4 Heart failure P value Heart failure

MAP mmHg 52 ± 5 53 ± 5 60 ± 4 **74 ± 6 < 0.01
Carotid flow ml/min 258 ± 28 310 ± 43 319 ± 23 **410 ± 34 < 0.01
MPAP mmHg 32 ± 4 29 ± 5 25 ± 3 25 ± 3 ns
PCWP mmHg 8.3 ± 1.9 8.8 ± 2.0 10.5 ± 2.1 *10.3 ± 1.8 < 0.001
CVP mmHg 7.5 ± 0.5 6.5 ± 0.5 6.0 ± 0.5 *5.1 ± 0.4 < 0.01
SvO 2 % 56 ± 6 67 ± 4 *74 ± 3 ****84 ± 4 < 0.0001
rSO 2 head % 52 ± 4 54 ± 5 61 ± 3 **66 ± 3 < 0.01
rSO 2 limb % 58 ± 3 61 ± 2 62 ± 3 **65 ± 3 < 0.01
EIT 1.000 0.986 ± 0.003 **0.9785 ± 0.005 ***0.9744 ± 0.006 < 0.001

Values expressed as mean ± SEM. Values significantly different to 1 l/min (EBF 1) are marked with * for P<0.05, ** for P<0.01, *** for P<0.001, **** for P<0.0001. The P values reflect the whole EBF trend statistics. CVP – central venous pressure, EBF – extracorporeal blood flow, EIT – electrical impedance normalized to EBF 1, MAP – mean arterial pressure, MPAP – mean pulmonary artery pressure, PCWP – pulmonary capillary wedge pressure, ns – non-significant, rSO2 – regional tissue oxygenation, SvO2 – mixed venous oxygen saturation.