Eshraghi Yashar, Nasr Vivian, Parra-Sanchez Ivan, Van Duren Albert, Botham Mark, Santoscoy Thomas, Sessler Daniel I
From the Departments of Outcomes Research, General Anesthesiology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio; Infection Prevention Division, The 3M Company, St. Paul, Minnesota.
Anesth Analg. 2014 Sep;119(3):543-549. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000000319.
Although core temperature can be measured invasively, there are currently no widely available, reliable, noninvasive thermometers for its measurement. We thus compared a prototype zero-heat-flux thermometer with simultaneous measurements from a pulmonary artery catheter. Specifically, we tested the hypothesis that zero-heat-flux temperatures are sufficiently accurate for routine clinical use.
Core temperature was measured from the thermistor of a standard pulmonary artery catheter and with a prototype zero-heat-flux deep-tissue thermometer in 105 patients having nonemergent cardiac surgery. Zero-heat-flux probes were positioned on the lateral forehead and lateral neck. Skin surface temperature probes were attached to the forehead just adjacent to the zero-heat-flux probe. Temperatures were recorded at 1-minute intervals, excluding the period of cardiopulmonary bypass, and for the first 4 postoperative hours. Zero-heat-flux and pulmonary artery temperatures were compared with bias analysis; differences exceeding 0.5°C were considered to be potentially clinically important.
The mean duration in the operating room was 279 ± 75 minutes, and the mean cross-clamp time was 118 ± 50 minutes. All subjects were monitored for an additional 4 hours in the intensive care unit. The average overall difference between forehead zero-heat-flux and pulmonary artery temperatures (i.e., forehead minus pulmonary artery) was -0.23°C (95% limits of agreement of ±0.82); 78% of the differences were ≤0.5°C. The average intraoperative temperature difference was -0.08°C (95% limits of agreement of ±0.88); 84% of the differences were ≤0.5°C. The average postoperative difference was -0.32°C (95% limits of agreement of ±0.75); 84% of the differences were ≤0.5°C. Bias and precision values for neck site were similar to the forehead values. Uncorrected forehead skin temperature showed an increasing negative bias as core temperature decreased.
Core temperature can be noninvasively measured using the zero-heat-flux method. Bias was small, but precision was slightly worse than our designated 0.5°C limits compared with measurements from a pulmonary artery catheter.
尽管中心体温可通过侵入性方式测量,但目前尚无广泛可用、可靠的非侵入性体温计用于测量。因此,我们将一种零热流体温计原型与肺动脉导管同步测量结果进行了比较。具体而言,我们检验了零热流温度对于常规临床应用足够准确这一假设。
在105例非急诊心脏手术患者中,使用标准肺动脉导管的热敏电阻和零热流深部组织体温计原型测量中心体温。零热流探头置于前额外侧和颈部外侧。皮肤表面温度探头贴在前额,紧邻零热流探头。每隔1分钟记录一次温度,不包括体外循环期间以及术后头4小时。通过偏倚分析比较零热流温度和肺动脉温度;超过0.5°C的差异被认为可能具有临床重要性。
手术室平均时长为279±75分钟,平均夹闭时间为118±50分钟。所有受试者在重症监护病房又接受了4小时监测。前额零热流温度与肺动脉温度的平均总体差异(即前额温度减去肺动脉温度)为-0.23°C(95%一致性界限为±0.82);78%的差异≤0.5°C。术中平均温度差异为-0.08°C(95%一致性界限为±0.88);84%的差异≤0.5°C。术后平均差异为-0.32°C(95%一致性界限为±0.75);84%的差异≤0.5°C。颈部测量点的偏倚和精密度值与前额测量点相似。未校正的前额皮肤温度随中心体温降低呈现出越来越大的负偏倚。
可使用零热流方法非侵入性测量中心体温。偏倚较小,但与肺动脉导管测量相比,精密度略逊于我们设定的0.5°C界限。