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

Carola Gianni, Moustapha Atoui, Sanghamitra Mohanty, Chintan Trivedi, Rong Bai, Amin Al-Ahmad, J. David Burkhardt, G. Joseph Gallinghouse, Patrick M. Hranitzky, Rodney P. Horton, Javier E. Sanchez, Luigi Di Biase, Dhanunjaya R. Lakkireddy, Andrea Natale

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

12 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

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.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)2195-2200
Number of pages6
JournalHeart Rhythm
Volume13
Issue number11
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 1 2016

Fingerprint

Thermodynamics
Stethoscopes
Temperature
Baths
Water

Keywords

  • Atrio-esophageal fistula
  • Esophageal luminal temperature monitoring
  • Esophagus
  • Temperature probe
  • Thermodynamics

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
  • Physiology (medical)

Cite this

Gianni, C., Atoui, M., Mohanty, S., Trivedi, C., Bai, R., Al-Ahmad, A., ... Natale, A. (2016). Difference in thermodynamics between two types of esophageal temperature probes: Insights from an experimental study. Heart Rhythm, 13(11), 2195-2200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrthm.2016.07.021

Difference in thermodynamics between two types of esophageal temperature probes : Insights from an experimental study. / Gianni, Carola; Atoui, Moustapha; Mohanty, Sanghamitra; Trivedi, Chintan; Bai, Rong; Al-Ahmad, Amin; Burkhardt, J. David; Gallinghouse, G. Joseph; Hranitzky, Patrick M.; Horton, Rodney P.; Sanchez, Javier E.; Di Biase, Luigi; Lakkireddy, Dhanunjaya R.; Natale, Andrea.

In: Heart Rhythm, Vol. 13, No. 11, 01.11.2016, p. 2195-2200.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Gianni, C, Atoui, M, Mohanty, S, Trivedi, C, Bai, R, Al-Ahmad, A, Burkhardt, JD, Gallinghouse, GJ, Hranitzky, PM, Horton, RP, Sanchez, JE, Di Biase, L, Lakkireddy, DR & Natale, A 2016, 'Difference in thermodynamics between two types of esophageal temperature probes: Insights from an experimental study', Heart Rhythm, vol. 13, no. 11, pp. 2195-2200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrthm.2016.07.021
Gianni, Carola ; Atoui, Moustapha ; Mohanty, Sanghamitra ; Trivedi, Chintan ; Bai, Rong ; Al-Ahmad, Amin ; Burkhardt, J. David ; Gallinghouse, G. Joseph ; Hranitzky, Patrick M. ; Horton, Rodney P. ; Sanchez, Javier E. ; Di Biase, Luigi ; Lakkireddy, Dhanunjaya R. ; Natale, Andrea. / Difference in thermodynamics between two types of esophageal temperature probes : Insights from an experimental study. In: Heart Rhythm. 2016 ; Vol. 13, No. 11. pp. 2195-2200.
@article{6376772e03374aa598d784fef4220221,
title = "Difference in thermodynamics between two types of esophageal temperature probes: Insights from an experimental study",
abstract = "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.",
keywords = "Atrio-esophageal fistula, Esophageal luminal temperature monitoring, Esophagus, Temperature probe, Thermodynamics",
author = "Carola Gianni and Moustapha Atoui and Sanghamitra Mohanty and Chintan Trivedi and Rong Bai and Amin Al-Ahmad and Burkhardt, {J. David} and Gallinghouse, {G. Joseph} and Hranitzky, {Patrick M.} and Horton, {Rodney P.} and Sanchez, {Javier E.} and {Di Biase}, Luigi and Lakkireddy, {Dhanunjaya R.} and Andrea Natale",
year = "2016",
month = "11",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.hrthm.2016.07.021",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "13",
pages = "2195--2200",
journal = "Heart Rhythm",
issn = "1547-5271",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "11",

}

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

VL - 13

SP - 2195

EP - 2200

JO - Heart Rhythm

JF - Heart Rhythm

SN - 1547-5271

IS - 11

ER -