Some surgeons prefer pulsatile to nonpulsatile flow in extracorporeal circu lation. They believe that pulsatile flow is more physiologic, provides better tis sue perfusion, gives less damage to the blood elements and plasma proteins and causes less complement activation when compared with nonpulsatile perfusion.
In order to compare the pulsatile with nonpulsatile flow during extracorporeal circulation, the authors studied two different groups of patients, each consist ing of 20 coronary bypass candidates. The patients in the two groups had almost the same properties and were operated on under the same circumstances. In the first group extracorporeal circulation was established with a nonpulsatile roller pump. In the other group a pulsatile assist device was integrated into the arterial line of the extracorporeal circuit with the roller pump. Extracorporeal circula tion was maintained with pulsatile flow obtained by an intraaortic balloon pump pneumatic console. The patients in the two groups were selected to be similar in terms of sex, age, preoperative clinical characteristics and hemodynamic and angiographic findings. Thirty-two operative and early and late postoperative parameters were compared in these two groups. In conclusion, no superiority of pulsatile flow established with the pulsatile assist device over nonpulsatile flow during extracorporeal circulation was seen.
