| ||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||

Department of *Anesthesia, Tokyo Womens Medical University, Tokyo, Japan;
OUTCOMES RESEARCHTM Institute, Department of Anesthesiology and Pharmacology, University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky; and
Ludwig Boltzmann Institute, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
Address correspondence and reprint requests to Daniel I. Sessler, MD, OUTCOMES RESEARCHTM Institute, 501 E. Broadway, Ste. 210, Louisville, KY 40202. Address e-mail to sesslerdan{at}aol.com
Serious adverse outcomes from perioperative hypothermia are well documented. Consequently, intraoperative warming has become routine. We thus evaluated the efficacy of a novel, nondisposable carbon-fiber resistive-heating system. Twenty-four patients undergoing open abdominal surgery lasting approximately 4 h were randomly assigned to warming with 1) a full-length circulating water mattress set at 42°C, 2) a lower-body forced-air cover with the blower set on high, or 3) a three-extremity carbon-fiber resistive-heating blanket set to 42°C. Patients were anesthetized with a combination of continuous epidural and general anesthesia. All fluids were warmed to 37°C, and ambient temperature was kept near 22°C. Core (tympanic membrane) temperature changes among the groups were compared by using factorial analysis of variance and Scheffé F tests; results are presented as means ± SD. Potential confounding factors did not differ significantly among the groups. In the first 2 h of surgery, core temperature decreased by 1.9°C ± 0.5°C in the circulating-water group, 1.0°C ± 0.6°C in the forced-air group, and 0.8°C ± 0.2°C in the resistive-heating group. At the end of surgery, the decreases were 2.0°C ± 0.8°C in the circulating-water group, 0.6°C ± 1.0°C in the forced-air group, and 0.5°C ± 0.4°C in the resistive-heating group. Core temperature decreases were significantly greater in the circulating-water group at all times after 150 elapsed minutes; however, temperature changes in the forced-air and resistive-heating groups never differed significantly. Even during major abdominal surgery, resistive heating maintains core temperature as effectively as forced air.
IMPLICATIONS: Efficacy was similar for forced-air and resistive heating, and both maintained intraoperative core temperature far better than circulating-water mattresses. We thus conclude that even during major abdominal surgery, resistive heating maintains core temperature as effectively as forced air.
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
J. V. Roth Forced-Air Warming May Have Benefits Even in Short Cases Anesth. Analg., April 1, 2009; 108(4): 1352 - 1352. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Fanelli, G. Danelli, D. Ghisi, A. Ortu, E. Moschini, and G. Fanelli The Efficacy of a Resistive Heating Under-Patient Blanket Versus a Forced-Air Warming System: A Randomized Controlled Trial Anesth. Analg., January 1, 2009; 108(1): 199 - 201. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
O. Kimberger, C. Held, K. Stadelmann, N. Mayer, C. Hunkeler, D. I. Sessler, and A. Kurz Resistive Polymer Versus Forced-Air Warming: Comparable Heat Transfer and Core Rewarming Rates in Volunteers Anesth. Analg., November 1, 2008; 107(5): 1621 - 1626. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C.K. Hofer, M. Worn, R. Tavakoli, L. Sander, M. Maloigne, R. Klaghofer, and A. Zollinger Influence of body core temperature on blood loss and transfusion requirements during off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting: A comparison of 3 warming systems J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., April 1, 2005; 129(4): 838 - 843. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
|