Department of Anaesthesiology, ZNA Middelheim General Hospital, Antwerp, Belgium.
Anaesthesia. 2011 Feb;66(2):104-10. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2010.06609.x.
We conducted a randomised controlled trial to compare the efficacy of underbody forced-air warming (Arizant Healthcare Inc, Eden Prairie, MN, USA) with an underbody resistive heating mattress (Inditherm Patient Warming System, Rotherham, UK) and passive insulation in 129 patients having hypothermic cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass. Patients were separated from cardiopulmonary bypass at a core temperature of 35 °C and external warming continued until the end of surgery. Before cardiopulmonary bypass, the temperature-vs-time slopes were significantly greater in both active warming groups than in the passive insulation group (p < 0.001 for each). However, the slopes of forced-air and resistive warming did not differ (p = 0.55). After cardiopulmonary bypass, the rate of rewarming was significantly greater with forced-air than with resistive warming or passive insulation (p < 0.001 for each), while resistive warming did not differ from passive insulation (p = 0.14). However, absolute temperature differences among the groups were small.
我们进行了一项随机对照试验，比较了下半身强制空气加热（美国明尼苏达州伊登普雷里的 Arizant Healthcare Inc.）与下半身电阻加热床垫（英国罗瑟勒姆的 Inditherm 患者加热系统）和被动保温在下半身低温心脏手术伴体外循环的 129 例患者中的疗效。患者在核心温度为 35°C 时从体外循环中分离出来，并继续进行外部加热，直到手术结束。在体外循环前，主动加热组的温度-时间斜率明显大于被动保温组（p<0.001）。然而，强制空气和电阻加热的斜率没有差异（p=0.55）。体外循环后，强制空气的复温速度明显快于电阻加热或被动保温（p<0.001），而电阻加热与被动保温无差异（p=0.14）。然而，各组之间的绝对温度差异较小。
