The esophageal temperature gradient in anesthetized children

Optimal Positioning of Nasopharyngeal Temperature Probes in Infants and Children: A Prospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

The nasopharynx is an easily accessible core-temperature monitoring site, but insufficient or excessive nasopharyngeal probe insertion can underestimate core temperature. Our goal was to estimate optimal nasopharyngeal probe insertion depth as a function of age.

METHODS

We enrolled 157 pediatric patients who had noncardiac surgery with endotracheal intubation in 5 groups: (1) newborn to 6 months old, (2) infants 7 months to 1 year old, (3) children 13 to 23 months old, (4) children 2 to 5 years old, and (5) children 6 to 12 years old. A reference esophageal temperature probe was inserted at an appropriate depth based on each patient's height. A nasopharyngeal temperature probe was inserted from the naris at 10 cm in newborn and infants, 15 cm in children aged 1 to 5 years old, and 20 cm in children who were 6 years or older. The study nasopharyngeal probes were withdrawn 1, 2.5, or 2 cm (depending on age) 10 times at 5-minute intervals. Optimal probe insertion distances were defined by limits of agreement (LOAs) between nasopharyngeal and esophageal temperatures <0.5 °C.

RESULTS

Optimal nasopharyngeal temperature probe position ranged from 6 to 10 cm in infants up to 6 months old, 7 to 8 cm in infants 7 to 12 months old, 7.5 to 12 cm in children 13 to 23 months old, and 10 to 12 cm in children aged 6 years and older. The 95% LOAs were <0.5 °C for all age categories except the 2- to 5-year-old group where the limits extended from -0.67 °C to 0.52 °C at 9 cm. At the optimal position within each age range, the bias (average nasopharyngeal-to-esophageal temperature difference) was ≤0.1 °C.

CONCLUSIONS

Nasopharyngeal thermometers accurately measure core temperature, but only when probes are inserted a proper distance, which varies with age. As with much in pediatrics, nasopharyngeal thermometer insertion depths should be age appropriate.

Perioperative Hypothermia in Children

Background: First described by paediatric anaesthesiologists, perioperative hypothermia is one of the earliest reported side effects of general anaesthesia. Deviations from normothermia are associated with numerous complications and adverse outcomes, with infants and small children at the highest risk. Nowadays, maintenance of normothermia is an important quality metric in paediatric anaesthesia. Methods: This review is based on our collection of publications regarding perioperative hypothermia and was supplemented with pertinent publications from a MEDLINE literature search. Results: We provide an overview on perioperative hypothermia in the paediatric patient, including definition, history, incidence, development, monitoring, risk factors, and adverse events, and provide management recommendations for its prevention. We also summarize the side effects and complications of perioperative temperature management. Conclusions: Perioperative hypothermia is still common in paediatric patients and may be attributed to their vulnerable physiology, but also may result from insufficient perioperative warming. An effective perioperative warming strategy incorporates the maintenance of normothermia during transportation, active warming before induction of anaesthesia, active warming during anaesthesia and surgery, and accurate measurement of core temperature. Perioperative temperature management must also prevent hyperthermia in children.

Simple calculation of the optimal insertion depth of esophageal temperature probes in children

Placing an esophageal temperature probe (ETP) in the optimal esophageal site is important in various anesthetic and critical care settings to accurately monitor the core temperature of a pediatric patient. However, no reported study has provided a formula to calculate the optimal insertion depth of ETP placement in children based on direct measurement of the optimal depth. The aim of this study was to develop a simple and reliable method to determine the optimal depth of ETP placement in children via their mouth. Using preoperative chest computed tomography scans, intraoperative chest X-rays, and the actual depth of ETP insertion, we measured the optimal depth of ETP placement retrospectively in 181 children aged 3-13 years who underwent minimally invasive repairs of the pectus excavatum and removal of a pectus bar. A linear regression analysis was performed to assess the correlation of the optimal depth of ETP placement with the children's age, weight, and height. The optimal depth of ETP placement had a greater correlation with height than with age or weight, and the best-fit equation was '0.180 × height + 6.749 (cm) (R² = 0.920).' We obtained three simplified formulae, which showed no statistically significant difference in predicting the optimal depth of ETP placement: height/6 + 8 (cm), height/5 + 4 (cm), and height/5 + 5 (cm). The optimal depth of ETP via children's mouths has a close correlation with height and can be calculated with a simple formula 'height/5 + 5 (cm)'.

Agreement between lower esophageal and nasopharyngeal temperatures in children ventilated with an endotracheal tube with leak

BACKGROUND

A temperature probe placed in the lower third of the esophagus accurately reflects core temperature in anesthetized children. Temperature probes are commonly placed in the nasopharynx in children, but when utilizing an uncuffed endotracheal tube (ETT) with a softly audible leak, ventilated gases from the trachea can escape upwards toward the nasopharynx, thereby potentially causing a cooling effect in the nasopharynx.

OBJECTIVES

We sought to establish if nasopharyngeal and lower esophageal temperatures are in agreement in children undergoing general anesthesia, both in scenarios of ventilation with a cuffed ETT that has minimal or no leak (cuff up), as well as an ETT with leak (cuff down).

METHODS

A prospective, crossover agreement study was performed on anesthetized children. Children were intubated with a MicroCuff(®) ETT and had temperature probes inserted into both the nasopharynx and lower esophagus. Under standardized ventilator and gas flow settings, temperatures were recorded with the ETT cuff inflated, and with the cuff deflated. Bland-Altman plots were utilized to assess agreement of temperatures.

RESULTS

Fifty patients successfully completed this study. The mean difference between esophageal and nasopharyngeal temperature was found to be -0.03°C in the presence of minimal or no leak around the ETT (cuff up), with 95% limits of agreement (LOA) of -0.22 to 0.15°C. The mean difference between esophageal and nasopharyngeal temperature was found to be 0.1°C when a larger leak existed around the ETT (cuff down), with LOA of -0.31 to 0.51°C.

CONCLUSIONS

Nasopharyngeal temperature accurately reflects lower esophageal temperature when there is minimal or no ETT leak. When a larger ETT leak is present, nasopharyngeal temperature is on average 0.1°C cooler than lower esophageal temperature. As the nasopharyngeal temperature probe site confers the advantage of simplicity of accurate placement compared to its esophageal counterpart, our findings support the use of nasopharyngeal temperature probes in children ventilated with both cuffed and uncuffed ETTs.

Optimal nasopharyngeal temperature probe placement

BACKGROUND

Although the nasopharynx is a commonly used temperature-monitoring site during general anesthesia, it is unknown whether the position of nasopharyngeal temperature probes placed blindly by anesthesia practitioners is optimal. The purposes of this study were (1) to determine where the nasopharyngeal mucosa is in closest proximity to the internal carotid artery (ICA) and (2) to evaluate the tip position of nasopharyngeal temperature probes that were placed by anesthesiology residents and nurse anesthetists.

METHODS

In the first phase of the study, we reviewed enhanced axial computed tomography images of 100 patients to determine where the nasopharyngeal mucosa was in closest proximity to the left or the right ICA. The distance from this point to the nares was then measured in the sagittal image. In the second phase of the study, nasendoscopy was used to evaluate the positioning of nasopharyngeal temperature probes placed by anesthesiology residents (244 patients) or nurse anesthetists (116 patients). Malpositioned probes were repositioned to an optimal location, and the temperature differences were recorded.

RESULTS

In the computed tomography images, the mucosa in closest proximity to the ICA was in the upper, mid-, and lower nasopharynx in 60%, 38%, and 2% of patients, respectively. The average distances between the ICA and the nasopharyngeal mucosa in the upper portion were significantly shorter than those in the lower portion (female: 9.4 vs 16.8 mm, P < 0.001; male: 12.4 vs 18.8 mm, P < 0.001). The average distances (95% prediction interval) from the nares to the upper portion of the nasopharynx through the inferior meatus were 9.1 (8.1-10.2) cm in females and 9.7 (8.6-10.8) cm in males. Temperature probes were correctly positioned in the upper or mid-nasopharynx by residents and nurses in 43% (95% confidence interval [CI], 37%-49%) and 41% (95% CI, 36%-50%), respectively. When the probe was inadvertently placed in the nasal cavity, the median (95% CI) temperature difference from the upper nasopharynx was 0.2°C (0.15°C-0.25°C).

CONCLUSIONS

The closest portion of the nasopharyngeal mucosa to the ICA is within the upper or mid-nasopharynx. The depth from the nares to the upper one-third of the nasopharynx is approximately 10 cm. Less than half of nasopharyngeal temperature probes placed blindly by practitioners were optimally positioned.

Feasibility, accuracy and optimal location for oesophageal core temperature measurements using the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway drain tube

We determined the feasibility, accuracy and optimal location of oesophageal core temperature measurements using the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway drain tube. Thirty normothermic anaesthetized ventilated adults (ASA 1 to 2, aged 18 to 80 years) were studied. Temperatures were recorded using a thermistor at six different locations (middle of drain tube and at 0 to 20 cm distal to the drain tube in 5 cm increments) and compared to nasopharyngeal (thermistor) and aural (infrared tympanic thermometer) reference core temperatures. The temperature probe was successfully inserted into the oesophagus in all patients at the first attempt. Oesophageal temperature increased with depth from 0 to 5 cm (35.2 v 35.9, P < 0.0001) and 5 to 10 cm (35.9 v 36.3, P < 0.01), but was unchanged from 10 to 15 cm (36.3 v 36.6) and 15 to 20 cm (36.6 v 36.7). Aural temperature was higher than nasopharyngeal temperature (36.8 v 36.0, P < 0.0001). Aural temperature was 0.89 to 1.59 degrees C higher than the oesophagus at 0 to 5 cm and 0.21 to 0.30 degree C higher than the oesophagus at 15 to 20 cm. Nasopharyngeal temperature was 0.06 to 0.76 degree C higher than the oesophagus at 0 to 5 cm and 0.62 to 0.84 degree C lower than the oesophagus at 15 to 20 cm. The lowest temperature was in the mid-point of the drain tube (34.7). We conclude that oesophageal core temperature measurement is feasible and accurate using the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway. The optimal location for the temperature probe is at 15 to 20 cm.

Infrared ear thermometry compared with rectal thermometry in children: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Infrared ear thermometry is frequently used in children, because this is a quick method of taking temperature and the ear is easily accessible. Our aim was to evaluate agreement between temperature measured at the rectum and ear in children.

METHODS

We did a systematic review of studies comparing temperature measured at the rectum (the reference site) using mercury, electronic, or indwelling probe thermometers, with temperature measured at the ear (the test site) using infrared ear thermometers. Heterogeneity between studies was investigated by exploring subgroups according to the mode of the infrared ear thermometer.

FINDINGS

44 studies containing 58 comparisons (5935 children) were eligible for inclusion in this review. Outcome data were available in reports from 12 comparisons (2312 [39%] children), and data on individual patients were obtained for a further 19 comparisons (2129 [36%] children). 31 comparisons (4441 [75%] children) were therefore included in the meta-analysis. The pooled mean temperature difference (rectal minus ear) was 0.29 degrees C (95% limits of agreement -0.74 to 1.32). We pooled data by ear device mode and the mean temperature differences were rectal mode 0.15 degrees C (-0.95 to 1.25), actual 0.70 degrees C (-0.20 to 1.60), core 0.25 degrees C (-0.78 to 1.27), oral 0.34 degrees C (-0.86 to 1.54), tympanic 0.62 degrees C (-0.40 to 1.64) and mode not stated 0.32 degrees C (-0.57 to 1.21). There was significant residual heterogeneity in both mean differences and sample SDs within the groups of ear device mode.

INTERPRETATION

Although the mean differences between rectal and ear temperature measurements were small, the wide limits of agreement mean that ear temperature is not a good approximation of rectal temperature, even when the ear thermometer is used in rectal mode. Our finding suggests that infrared ear thermometry does not show sufficient agreement with an established method of temperature measurement to be used in situations where body temperature needs to be measured with precision.

Monitoring body-core temperature from the trachea: comparison between pulmonary artery, tympanic, esophageal, and rectal temperatures

INTRODUCTION

We designed an endotracheal tube (ETT) for acquiring body-core temperature from the trachea. This ETT had two temperature sensors, one attached to the inside surface of the cuff, the other mounted on the ETT shaft underneath the cuff. The ETT was evaluated in vitro and in dogs to determine: 1) optimal position of temperature sensors and 2) the responsiveness, accuracy, and resistance to ventilatory artifacts.

METHODS

In vitro. An artificial trachea assessed the response-time and accuracy of ETT temperature sensors to abrupt temperature changes and ventilatory flow-rates. In vivo. Body temperature in 5 dogs was lowered to approximately 26 degrees C then elevated toward 39 degrees C using a heat exchanger during carotid-jugular bypass. ETT temperature measurements were compared simultaneously with those from the artificial trachea (in vitro) or from the pulmonary artery, tympanic cavity, esophagus, and rectum of dogs using dry and humidified gas.

RESULTS

Cuff temperature sensor responded quickly and accurately to temperature changes and was less prone than the tube sensor to ventilatory and humidity artifacts. During carotid-jugular bypass, in vivo tube and cuff mean temperatures averaged 1.4 degrees C and 0.36 degree C lower, respectively, than pulmonary artery temperatures. There were no statistical differences (P > 0.05) between cuff temperatures and those measured from the pulmonary artery, tympanic cavity, esophagus, and rectum. Heating and humidifying the inspiratory gas of dogs with a water-bath humidifer or heat moisture exchanger (HME) had minimal effects on the cuff temperature sensor. An in-line HME increased in vivo tube temperature from baseline values by 1.13 +/- 0.80 degree C, while cuff temperature increased by 0.21 +/- 0.24 degree C.

CONCLUSION

The cuff of the ETT is a reliable site for measuring body-core temperature in intubated patients.

The etiology and management of inadvertent perioperative hypothermia

Mild perioperative hypothermia is a frequent complication of anesthesia and surgery. Core temperature should be monitored during general anesthesia and during regional anesthesia for large operations. Reliable sites of core temperature monitoring include the tympanic membrane, nasopharynx, esophagus, bladder, rectum, and pulmonary artery. The skin surface is not an acceptable site for monitoring core temperature. Anesthetic-induced vasodilation initially rapidly decreases core temperature secondary to an internal redistribution of heat rather than an increased heat loss to the environment. Both general and regional anesthetics impair thermoregulation, increasing the interthreshold range; that is, the range of core temperatures over which no autonomic response to cold or warmth occurs. Preinduction skin surface warming is the only means to prevent this initial redistribution hypothermia. Forced-air warming is the most effective method of rewarming hypothermic patients intraoperatively.