|
Optimal transfer of stroke volume from the LV to the arterial circulation requires appropriate matching of these mechanical systems. LV-arterial coupling has most often been described using a series elastic chamber model of the cardiovascular system ( Fig. 7-8 ). [128] The elastance of the contracting LV (Ees ) and the arterial vasculature (Ea ) is determined from LV end-systolic pressure-volume and
Figure 7-8
Left ventricular (LV) pressure versus LV volume diagrams
during inferior vena caval occlusion and the definition of LV-arterial coupling.
The LV maximal elastances of each pressure-volume diagram are used to calculate
the slope (EES
) of the end-systolic pressure-volume relationship. Effective
arterial elastance (EA
) is determined as the ratio of end-systolic arterial
pressure and stoke volume during steady-state hemodynamic conditions. In the pressure-volume
plane, EA
represents the magnitude of the slope connecting end-systole
to end-diastole. (Adapted from Hettrick DA, Pagel PS, Warltier DC: Desflurane,
sevoflurane, and isoflurane impair canine left ventricular-arterial coupling and
mechanical efficiency. Anesthesiology 85:403–413, 1996.)
The influence of volatile anesthetics on LV-arterial coupling and mechanical efficiency has been studied in the normal canine cardiovascular system but has not been described in models of heart failure. LV-arterial coupling may theoretically be maintained during anesthesia because declines in LV afterload may balance simultaneous reductions in myocardial contractility. Low concentrations of halothane (1 MAC), but not isoflurane, reduced Ees /Ea in barbiturate-anesthetized, acutely instrumented dogs, consistent with depression of mechanical coupling between the LV and arterial circulation.[134] However, isoflurane also decreased Ees /Ea at 2 MAC, suggesting that the vasodilating effects of this anesthetic were unable to compensate for the relatively greater declines in contractility. Desflurane, sevoflurane, and isoflurane maintained optimal LV-arterial coupling and mechanical efficiency as evaluated by Ees /Ea and SW/PVA at low anesthetic concentrations (0.9 MAC) by producing simultaneous declines in myocardial contractility and LV afterload ( Fig. 7-9 ).[41] However, mechanical matching between the LV and
Figure 7-9
Histograms depicting left ventricular-arterial coupling
(Ees
/Ea
, top panel) and mechanical
efficiency (SW/PVA; bottom panel) before (control
1 [C1]); during 0.6, 0.9, and 1.2 minimum alveolar concentrations (MAC); and after
sevoflurane (control 2 [C2]). a, Significantly (P
< .05) different from C1; b, significantly (P
< .05) different from 0.9 MAC of sevoflurane; c, significantly (P
< .05) different from 1.2 MAC of sevoflurane. (Adapted from Hettrick
DA, Pagel PS, Warltier DC: Desflurane, sevoflurane, and isoflurane impair canine
left ventricular-arterial coupling and mechanical efficiency. Anesthesiology 85:403–413,
1996.)
|