Numerical analysis of aortic hemodynamics under the support of venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and intra-aortic balloon pump

Abstract Background and objective A gap still exists in the hemodynamic effect of intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP), venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO), and VA-ECMO plus IABP on the blood perfusion of the coronary artery, brain, and lower limb; the relation between heart flow and ECMO flow; and the wall stress of vessels. Methods A finite-element model of the aorta, ECMO, and IABP was proposed to calculate the mechanical response via fluid–structure interaction. Heart failure (HF), IABP, ECMO, and ECMO plus IABP were utilized to study the effect of support models. Results For the pressure curve, VA-ECMO weakened the dicrotic notch of pressure compared with HF and the pulsatile index (0.494 vs. 0.706 vs. 0.471 vs. 0.613). IABP, ECMO, and ECMO plus IABP increased the perfusion of the coronary, brain, and renal artery compared with HF. However, ECMO and ECMO plus IABP clearly reduced the blood flow of the left arteria femoralis compared to that of the right arteria femoralis (ECMO: 194.04 vs. 730.80 mL/min; ECMO plus IABP: 342.15 vs. 947.22 mL/min). In addition, the flow of ECMO accessed the renal artery more than the left ventricular flow. Greater ventricular flow perfused to the renal artery at a diastolic period for ECMO plus IABP, especially at the time points of 2.192 s and 2.304 s. Compared to the velocity distribution with ECMO, the flow of the right arteria femoralis was increased in the process of IABP-on. According to these four cases, the stress of the vascular wall was increased for ECMO support at the systolic period. The peak wall stress of ECMO is increased by 20% at 1.68 s. Conclusions ECMO plus IABP is more conducive to the blood supply than other cases from the result of numerical simulation. The location of blood intersection was generated in the region of the renal artery, which is estimated carefully.