Difference in thermodynamics between two types of esophageal temperature probes: Insights from an experimental study

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Carola Gianni ; MD ; PhD^⁎ ; ^&dagger ; ; Moustapha Atoui ; MD^&Dagger ; ; Sanghamitra Mohanty ; MD ; MS ; FHRS^⁎ ; ^§ ; ; Chintan Trivedi ; MD ; FHRS^⁎ ; Rong Bai ; MD ; FHRS^⁎ ; Amin Al-Ahmad ; MD ; CCDS ; FHRS^⁎ ; J. David Burkhardt ; MD ; FHRS^⁎ ; G. Joseph Gallinghouse ; MD ; FHRS^⁎ ; Patrick M. Hranitzky ; MD ; FHRS^⁎ ; Rodney P. Horton ; MD ; FHRS^⁎ ; ^¶ ; ; Javier E. Sanchez ; MD^⁎ ; Luigi Di Biase ; MD ; PhD ; FHRS^⁎ ; ^¶ ; ; ^# ; ^⁎⁎ ; Dhanunjaya R. Lakkireddy ; MD ; FHRS^&Dagger ; ; Andrea Natale ; MD ; FHRS^⁎ ; ^§ ; ; ^¶ ; ; ^&dagger ; &dagger ; ; ^&Dagger ; &Dagger ; ; ^§ ; § ; ; ^¶ ; ¶ ; ; ^{dr.natale@gmail.com" class="auth_mail" title="E-mail the corresponding author}
• 关键词：Esophageal luminal temperature monitoring ; Esophagus ; Atrio-esophageal fistula ; Thermodynamics ; Temperature probe
• 刊名：Heart Rhythm
• 出版年：2016
• 出版时间：November 2016
• 年：2016
• 卷：13
• 期：11
• 页码：2195-2200
• 全文大小：1570 K

文摘

Luminal esophageal temperature monitoring is performed with a variety of temperature probes, but little is known about the relationship between the structure of a given probe and its thermodynamic characteristics.

Objective

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the difference in thermodynamics between a 9Fr standard esophageal probe and an 18Fr esophageal stethoscope.

Methods

In the experimental setting, each probe was submerged in a constant temperature water bath maintained at 42°C; in the patient setting, we monitored the temperature with both probes at the same time.

Results

The time constant of the stethoscope was higher than that of the probe (33.5 vs 8.3 s). Compared to the probe, the mean temperature measured by the stethoscope at 10 seconds was significantly lower (22.5°C ± 0.4°C vs 33.5°C ± 0.3°C, P<.0001), whereas the time to reach the peak temperature was significantly longer (132.6 ± 5.9 s vs 38.8 ± 1.0 s, P<.0001). Even in the ablation cases we observed that when the esophageal probe reached a peak temperature of 39.6°C ± 0.3°C, the esophageal stethoscope still displayed a temperature of 37.3°C ± 0.2°C (a mean of 2.39°C ± 0.3°C lower, P<.0001), showing a <0.5°C increase in temperature half of the times.

Conclusion

The 18Fr esophageal stethoscope has a significantly slower time response compared to the 9Fr esophageal probe. In the clinical setting, this might result in a considerable underestimation of the luminal esophageal temperature with potentially fatal consequences.