Research article
Assessment of a continuous blood gas monitoring system in animals during circulatory stress
-
* Corresponding author: Sandro Gelsomino sandro.gelsomino@libero.it
1 Department of Heart and Vessels, Careggi Hospital, Florence, Italy
2 Community Hospital, Brescia, Italy
3 Santa Maria Della Misericordia Hospital, Udine, Italy
4 University "Magna Graecia", Catanzaro, Italy
5 Rambam Medical Center, Haifa, Israel
6 Department of Cardiac Surgery, Academic Hospital, Maastricht, The Nederlands
BMC Anesthesiology 2011, 11:1 doi:10.1186/1471-2253-11-1
Published: 11 January 2011Abstract
Background
The study was aimed to determine the measurement accuracy of The CDI™ blood parameter monitoring system 500 (Terumo Cardiovascular Systems Corporation, Ann Arbor MI) in the real-time continuous measurement of arterial blood gases under different cardiocirculatory stress conditions
Methods
Inotropic stimulation (Dobutamine 2.5 and 5 μg/kg/min), vasoconstriction (Arginine-vasopressin 4, 8 and 16 IU/h), hemorrhage (-10%, -20%, -35%, and -50% of the theoretical volemia), and volume resuscitation were induced in ten swine (57.4 ± 10.7 Kg).Intermittent blood gas assessments were carried out using a routine gas analyzer at any experimental phase and compared with values obtained at the same time settings during continuous monitoring with CDI™ 500 system. The Bland-Altman analysis was employed.
Results
Bias and precision for pO2 were - 0.06 kPa and 0.22 kPa, respectively (r2 = 0.96); pCO2 - 0.02 kPa and 0.15 kPa, respectively; pH -0.001 and 0.01 units, respectively ( r2 = 0.96). The analysis showed very good agreement for SO2 (bias 0.04,precision 0.33, r2 = 0.95), Base excess (bias 0.04,precision 0.28, r2 = 0.98), HCO3 (bias 0.05,precision 0.62, r2 = 0.92),hemoglobin (bias 0.02,precision 0.23, r2 = 0.96) and K+ (bias 0.02, precision 0.27, r2 = 0.93). The sensor was reliable throughout the experiment during hemodynamic variations.
Conclusions
Continuous blood gas analysis with the CDI™ 500 system was reliable and it might represent a new useful tool to accurately and timely monitor gas exchange in critically ill patients. Nonetheless, our findings need to be confirmed by larger studies to prove its reliability in the clinical setting.