Forehead reflectance oximetry: a clinical comparison with conventional digit sensors during laparotomic and laparoscopic abdominal surgery.

OBJECTIVE: This study compared the performance of forehead reflectance and conventional pulse oximetry (SpO(2)) in mechanically ventilated, anesthetized patients undergoing major abdominal surgery with either laparoscopic or laparotomic techniques. METHODS: SpO(2) was continuously measured both with a forehead reflectance and a conventional digit sensor in 20 ASA physical status I-III, anesthetized patients undergoing either a laparotomic (group Laparotomy, n = 10) or laparoscopic (group Laparoscopy, n = 10) major abdominal surgery. SpO(2) values measured with the two sensors were continuously recorded at 10-second intervals during the entire procedure, and then analyzed for consistency. RESULTS: In group Laparotomy finger and forehead readings remained consistently similar during the study period; on the contrary, in group Laparoscopy forehead SpO(2) readings showed a much wider variability. The mean (95% Confidence Intervals) difference between finger and forehead SpO(2) readings was 2.0% (-1.3% to +6.0%) in group Laparotomy and 2.5% (-3.5% to +8.4%) in group Laparoscopy (p = 0.001); however, in group Laparoscopy the mean difference between digit and forehead SpO(2) values increased from 0.2% (CI(95): -2.1% to +2.5%) during the first hour to 4.5% (CI(95): -2.5% to +11-5%) in the second hour (p = 0.0005), and 3.1% (CI(95): -2.4% to + 8.6%) in the third hour of surgery (p = 0.0005). Clinically relevant desaturation (decrease of SpO(2) < 89% for > or =30 s) detected with the forehead sensor in the Laparoscopy group was significantly more frequent and longer lasting than with conventional digit sensor. No differences were observed in group Laparotomy. CONCLUSIONS: Forehead reflectance oximetry is as accurate as conventional digit based oximetry in mechanically ventilated patients undergoing laparotomic surgery in the supine position, but is significantly influenced by patient positioning and pneumoperitoneum during laparoscopic surgery.

Transcutaneous monitoring of partial pressure of carbon dioxide in the elderly patient: a prospective, clinical comparison with end-tidal monitoring.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the accuracy and precision of estimation of partial pressure of carbon dioxide (Pa(CO2)) using end-tidal or transcutaneous CO2 (TcP(CO2)) measurements during mechanical ventilation in the elderly patient. DESIGN: A prospective, observational study was conducted. SETTINGS: The study was done in the anesthesia department of a university hospital. PATIENTS: Seventeen anesthetized, mechanically ventilated patients older than 60 years were studied. INTERVENTIONS AND MEASUREMENTS: During standard sevoflurane anesthesia, and after proper calibration and an equilibration time of 30 minutes with stable hemodynamic and respiratory variables, arterial (Pa(CO2)), end-tidal (Pet(CO2)), and transcutaneous (TcP(CO2)) CO2 partial pressures were determined. In each patient, 1 to 5 sample sets (Pa(CO2), Pet(CO2), and TcP(CO2)) were obtained. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 45 sample sets were obtained from the patients studied. The Pa(CO2) values ranged between 21 and 58 mm Hg. The Pa(CO2) - Pet(CO2) tension gradient was 6 +/- 5 mmHg (95% confidence interval, -3 to 16 mmHg), whereas the Pa(CO2) - TcP(CO2) tension gradient was 2 +/- 4 mmHg (95% confidence interval, -6 to 9 mmHg) (P = 0.0005). The absolute value of the difference between Pa(CO2) and Pet(CO2) was 3 mm Hg or less in 7 of 45 sample sets (15%), whereas the absolute value of the difference between Pa(CO2) and TcP(CO2) was 3 mm Hg or less in 21 of 45 sample sets (46%) (P = 0.003). Linear regression analysis for TcP(CO2) versus Pa(CO2) showed a slope of 0.84 (r(2) = 0.73), whereas the linear regression analysis for Pet(CO2) versus Pa(CO2) showed a slope of 0.54 (r(2) = 0.50). CONCLUSION: Transcutaneous monitoring of CO(2) partial pressure gives a more accurate estimation of arterial CO(2) partial pressure than does Pet(CO2) monitoring.