Why no artificial lungs?

I know that we have artificial hearts, and have had them for decades.

The lungs seem so much easier to emulate than the heart. All you have to do is take air in and put carbon dioxide out. To my untutored mind, you wouldn’t even need to have invasive surgery, you could have a sort of fanny pack hooked up to a shunt.

That simplicity, combined with the fact that the lungs are the most difficult organs to transplant successfully, with the lowest survival rates, really leaves me wondering why we don’t have artificial lungs at all.

The closest thing I’ve been able to find is this, which seems incredibly basic and unrefined to me compared with the state of medical technology elsewhere. Shouldn’t we be able to do away with the lungs entirely by now? Shouldn’t this be the first step when somebody starts having enough lung problems to effect their quality of life? It isn’t, that’s for sure. I know firsthand, I am a candidate for a transplant.

There are obviously huge glaring oversights I’m making when thinking about this, or large fatal errors in the concept of an artificial lung, so I was hoping some of the medical professionals on the board (like Qadgop) would be good enough to point them out.

The gas exchange that takes place in lungs requires tremendous amounts of surface area. The problem seems comprable to dialysis machines for those with kidney failure, except of course that you need to breathe a lot more often than you need to have dialysis.

I think what you’re talking about is an artificial diaphram, to move the air in and out. And they have those. They’re the little air pumps used in hospitals for people having trouble breathing.

Artificial lungs are in development and in limited animal testing at present: http://www.mc3corp.com/biolung.html

Yes, I know. But surely if there had been any sort of research put into the matter, we could come up with some fractal architecture, or some otherwise surface area maxing architecture.

The linked article says that an 18 inch long membrane lodged in the vena cava supplies half the oxygen a full sized adult needs, so surely if we did it externally (which the article also mentions as failing, but doesn’t say why), it would be easy to fold up enough surface area into something that is a practical size.

That’s not entirely accurate. It takes more than the diaphragm. There is a quite amazing gas exchange that takes place on the cellular level. Oxygen passes through membranes and is absorbed into the bloodstream, passing back to the heart via the rather popular and much-adored pulmonary vein. ( The only vein in the body that carries oxygenated blood ).

The CO2 that leaves the body as the oxygen is absorbed is the other half of the key. The two-way gaseous exchange that occurs is something that’s pretty darned hard to duplicate mechanically. You can build a CO2 “scrubber”, like the infamous ones repaired on the Apollo 13 flight but they did not sit inside a human chest cavity.

It is remarkable to think of how delicate the alveoli are and how little it takes to disturb that perfect two-way exchange, throwing a person into respiratory distress.

Cartooniverse

Well, holy shit. QtM , my apologies. That what ya get for posting before reading all posts. What a remarkable design.

:smack:

Don’t forget that blood tends to clot, and it loves to clot in and around foreign bodies. And lungs are all about moving the entire blood volume thru the lungs many, many times per hour. And clots tend to cause severe illness and death, especially when occurring in the lungs. So it’s not a matter of mere gas exchange and plumbing.

Lungs also secrete hormones, and seem to play some role in immune modulation.

The heart is nothing more than a pump and as amazing as it is it is less complex in design than your lungs are. Consider that the lungs have many, many, many (I do not know the number but alot) of incredibly tiny air sacs with all the amazingly small and likewise numerous capillaries that run through it to allow the absorbtion of oxygen and release of carbon dioxide. To replicate such a thing artificially would be an amazing feat of engineering and no simple thing. Artificial hearts are difficult enough.

That said the lung’s purpose is to oxygenate blood and we do have machines that can do that for us. Heart-Lung machines exist to aid in things like open heart surgery. Essentially it takes over for the lungs and heart during the surgery. Problem is it is a big and very expensive machine. If you needed one to do all the work of your lungs all the time you would never get out of the bed next to the machine. I also seem to recall that a heart-lung machine has some limitations on how long it can do the work. That is to say I do not think someone could be hooked to one indefinitely and expect to live very long. It is a vague notion of mine that I may have just made up so hopefully someone else can be more clear about it.

Thanks for the link, Qadgop.

I’m glad that they DO exist, if only in the almost-practical stage.

So is the surface area problem why these haven’t been perfected before? Or perhaps the lack of “ultra low blood flow resistance” that past machines presumably had?

Why hasn’t this seemingly simple concept been done before?

Ah, beat me to it, should have previewed. Thanks for the replies.

Coupla patents:
6,936,222
6,682,698

Effing hampsters…let’s try this again.

Where I work (I’m a mechanical engineer) we have this in-joke; it goes like this: “All you have to do is ____. After all, how hard could it be?” This is followed by laughter, and then a sober pause when we realize that people actually think it is just that easy to cram an ICBM booster into a medium-sized cargo aircraft.

Oh, where was I? Yeah, the lung. As the OP notes, the primary purpose of the lung is rather straightforward: to exchange waste carbon dioxide with fresh diatomic oxygen, which is transported by hemoglobin to the cells for use in the Krebs cycle. The specific mechanisms by which it does so, on the other hand, are very intricate. If the heart is a pump, the lungs are a refinery with stage after stage of fractionalization columns and distillation reactors. The lungs essentially take arterial blood and run it through successively finder capillaries until it runs through alveoli, which are little sacs that are thin enough to allow oxygen (and other air gases) in, while preventing the blood from spilling out or clotting up. Developing such organs was a major evolutionary stepping stone which allowed vertebrates to emerge from the thick, oxygenated fluid of the oceans into the tenuous, dangerously thin atmosphere and still absorb enough life-giving oxygen to make living worthwhile, and moreover, to feed the incredibly oxygen-greedy brains of primates.

The lungs are also, by nature of what they do, a very delicate organ; while treating them properly requires little maintanence for a lifetime of reliable function, subjecting them to inhaled toxicants, vaporous solvents, or sudden pressure changes can result in traumatic emphysema or other barotraumas, while regular exposure to even low levels of carcenogenic compounds or surfectant-destroying compounds (like those found in tobacco smoke) can cause various problems leading to chronic emphysema. Creating an artifical version that works as well while tolerating abuse that natural lungs without maintanence will is an enormous feat of biomedical engineering indeed.

There are machines that do this–the heart-lung machine that is regularly used in open-heart surgery to replace the temporarily bypassed heart–but as you can see from the picture these are large, complex machines that require expert monitoring. There is some research into implantable artificial lungs, but the machines are obviously far from perfect. In any case, implanted artificial organs are far from a mature field, suffering from high rates of infection, rejection reactions by surrounding tissue, and malfuction.

The lungs also perform some ancillary actions, such as releasing hormones that control blood consistancy, and of course they’re strongly tied into the most primitive parts of the brain as a primary member in the respiration system, so even relegating them to the job description of “air filter” is unfairly diminishing their complexity. The lungs may perform a “simple” job, but the structure that lets them do this is intricate indeed.

Stranger

I don’t have a link handy right now, but you might be thinking about “pump head” – a term coined by patients who noticed a distinct change in their mental abilities following surgery requiring a heart-lung machine. People in the medical field are starting to take it seriously; I’ve read a few good articles on the topic. No one is really sure what causes it, though problems are thought to stem from the beating (for lack of a better word) that the red blood cells endure while traveling through the machine.

[hijack, matey!]

You didn’t happen to work on that scheme for launching (!) a Minuteman I by dropping it out a C-5 in flight, did you?

[/arr]

There’s always ECMO

[hijack]We have something like that too (I’m in IT); as a general rule, when someone says “Can’t you just…” it means they don’t even understand what it is they originally asked for.

SRALT/LRALT, and no, I didn’t work on those programs. (Actually they’re just launching smaller boosters built from first or second stage MM motors, and out of C-130s and C-17s. The thing I did was far more…reality-challenged than that.

Stranger

Truer words were never spoken.

I don’t know much about this stuff, but I hope you get better Leviscomte .

It’s not? I mean, what could possibly go wrong?

:wink: