Increased core body temperature in astronauts during long-duration space missions.

Humans' core body temperature (CBT) is strictly controlled within a narrow range. Various studies dealt with the impact of physical activity, clothing, and environmental factors on CBT regulation under terrestrial conditions. However, the effects of weightlessness on human thermoregulation are not well understood. Specifically, studies, investigating the effects of long-duration spaceflight on CBT at rest and during exercise are clearly lacking. We here show that during exercise CBT rises higher and faster in space than on Earth. Moreover, we observed for the first time a sustained increased astronauts' CBT also under resting conditions. This increase of about 1 °C developed gradually over 2.5 months and was associated with augmented concentrations of interleukin-1 receptor antagonist, a key anti-inflammatory protein. Since even minor increases in CBT can impair physical and cognitive performance, both findings have a considerable impact on astronauts' health and well-being during future long-term spaceflights. Moreover, our findings also pinpoint crucial physiological challenges for spacefaring civilizations, and raise questions about the assumption of a thermoregulatory set point in humans, and our evolutionary ability to adapt to climate changes on Earth.

Circadian rhythms in bed rest: Monitoring core body temperature via heat-flux approach is superior to skin surface temperature.

Continuous recordings of core body temperature (CBT) are a well-established approach in describing circadian rhythms. Given the discomfort of invasive CBT measurement techniques, the use of skin temperature recordings has been proposed as a surrogate. More recently, we proposed a heat-flux approach (the so-called Double Sensor) for monitoring CBT. Studies investigating the reliability of the heat-flux approach over a 24-hour period, as well as comparisons with skin temperature recordings, are however lacking. The first aim of the study was therefore to compare rectal, skin, and heat-flux temperature recordings for monitoring circadian rhythm. In addition, to assess the optimal placement of sensor probes, we also investigated the effect of different anatomical measurement sites, i.e. sensor probes positioned at the forehead vs. the sternum. Data were collected as part of the Berlin BedRest study (BBR2-2) under controlled, standardized, and thermoneutral conditions. 24-hours temperature data of seven healthy males were collected after 50 days of -6° head-down tilt bed-rest. Mean Pearson correlation coefficients indicated a high association between rectal and forehead temperature recordings (r > 0.80 for skin and Double Sensor). In contrast, only a poor to moderate relationship was observed for sensors positioned at the sternum (r = -0.02 and r = 0.52 for skin and Double Sensor, respectively). Cross-correlation analyses further confirmed the feasibility of the forehead as a preferred monitoring site. The phase difference between forehead Double Sensor and rectal recordings was not statistically different from zero (p = 0.313), and was significantly smaller than the phase difference between forehead skin and rectal temperatures (p = 0.016). These findings were substantiated by cosinor analyses, revealing significant differences for mesor, amplitude, and acrophase between rectal and forehead skin temperature recordings, but not between forehead Double Sensor and rectal temperature measurements. Finally, Bland-Altman analysis indicated narrower limits of agreement for rhythm parameters between rectal and Double Sensor measurements compared to between rectal and skin recordings, irrespective of the measurement site (i.e. forehead, sternum). Based on these data we conclude that (1) Double Sensor recordings are significantly superior to skin temperature measurements for non-invasively assessing the circadian rhythm of rectal temperature, and (2) temperature rhythms from the sternum are less reliable than from the forehead. We suggest that forehead Double Sensor recordings may provide a surrogate for rectal temperature in circadian rhythm research, where constant routine protocols are applied. Future studies will be needed to assess the sensor's ecological validity outside the laboratory under changing environmental and physiological conditions.

The accuracy of a disposable noninvasive core thermometer.

PURPOSE: Perioperative hypothermia is still a common occurrence, and it can be difficult to measure a patient's core temperature accurately, especially during regional anesthesia, with placement of a laryngeal mask airway device, or postoperatively. We evaluated a new disposable double-sensor thermometer and compared the resulting temperatures with those of a distal esophageal thermometer and a bladder thermometer in patients undergoing general and regional anesthesia, respectively. Furthermore, we compared the accuracy of the thermometer between regional and general anesthesia, since forehead microcirculation might differ between the two types of anesthesia. METHODS: We assessed core temperature in 36 general anesthesia patients and 20 patients having regional anesthesia for orthopedic surgery. The temperatures obtained using the double-sensor thermometer were compared with those obtained with the distal esophageal thermometer in the general anesthesia population and those obtained with the bladder thermometer in regional anesthesia patients. RESULTS: In our general anesthesia patients, 90% (95% confidence interval [CI] 85 to 95) of all double-sensor values were within 0.5°C of esophageal temperatures. The average difference (bias) between the esophageal and double-sensor temperatures was -0.01°C. In patients undergoing regional anesthesia 89% (95% CI 80 to 97) of all double-sensor values were within 0.5°C of bladder temperatures. The average difference (bias) between the bladder and double-sensor temperatures was -0.13°C, limits of agreement were -0.65 to 0.40°C. CONCLUSIONS: In a perioperative patient population undergoing general or regional anesthesia, the accuracy of the noninvasive disposable double-sensor thermometer is comparable with that of the distal esophageal and bladder thermometers in routine clinical practice. Furthermore, the sensor performed comparably in patients undergoing regional and general anesthesia.