TY - JOUR
T1 - Difference in thermodynamics between two types of esophageal temperature probes
T2 - Insights from an experimental study
AU - Gianni, Carola
AU - Atoui, Moustapha
AU - Mohanty, Sanghamitra
AU - Trivedi, Chintan
AU - Bai, Rong
AU - Al-Ahmad, Amin
AU - Burkhardt, J. David
AU - Gallinghouse, G. Joseph
AU - Hranitzky, Patrick M.
AU - Horton, Rodney P.
AU - Sanchez, Javier E.
AU - Di Biase, Luigi
AU - Lakkireddy, Dhanunjaya R.
AU - Natale, Andrea
PY - 2016/11/1
Y1 - 2016/11/1
N2 - Background 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.
AB - Background 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.
KW - Atrio-esophageal fistula
KW - Esophageal luminal temperature monitoring
KW - Esophagus
KW - Temperature probe
KW - Thermodynamics
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84992533479&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84992533479&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.hrthm.2016.07.021
DO - 10.1016/j.hrthm.2016.07.021
M3 - Article
C2 - 27451285
AN - SCOPUS:84992533479
SN - 1547-5271
VL - 13
SP - 2195
EP - 2200
JO - Heart Rhythm
JF - Heart Rhythm
IS - 11
ER -