Advertisement

Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing

, Volume 32, Issue 6, pp 1127–1134 | Cite as

Experimental comparison of performances of Mega Acer Kit, Ranger and ThermoSens according to flow rates and distances

  • Hong Ju Seo
  • Sang Hun KimEmail author
  • Tae Hun An
  • Dong Joon Kim
Original Research

Abstract

We experimentally investigated the fluid warming performances of three warmers with different technology, according to flow rates and distances. We used the following intravenous fluid warmers: Mega Acer Kit (Group M, n = 8), Ranger (group R, n = 8), and ThermoSens (group T, n = 8). Fluids that had been stored in the operating room over the previous 24 h were delivered at sequent flow rates of from 440 mL/h up to 2500 mL/h through preheated warming devices. The fluid temperatures were recorded at the inlet point, 76-cm proximal (Pout1) and 166-cm distal outlet points (Pout2) every 1 min for 10 min. We repeated each test eight times. The delivered fluid temperature [mean (95% confidence interval)] was significantly higher in group M than group R and T at flow rates up to 650 mL/h with the highest value at 440 mL/h [34.30 (33.35–35.24)°C] (P < 0.001), and was higher in group T and R at flow rates over 1140 mL/h at Pout1 [36.67 (36.62–36.73)°C and 37.85 (37.52–38.17)°C at 2500 mL/h, respectively] (P < 0.001). It was significantly higher at the Pout1 than the Pout2 at all flow rates for each device (P < 0.001). Mega Acer Kit can warm fluid more effectively compared with ThermoSens and Ranger at the low flow rate whereas the ThermoSens and the Ranger are suitable at higher flow rates. Furthermore, the device performance is more effective with shorter extension lines.

Keywords

Distance Flow rate Fluid warmer Mega Acer Kit Ranger ThermoSens 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by research fund from Chosun University, 2015.

Author contributions

Hong Ju Seo, M.D., Ph.D., Associate Professor: This author Participated in manuscript preparation and proof reading of the first draft of the paper. This author also approved the final manuscript to be submitted. Dong Joon Kim, M.D., Doctor: This author Participated in data collection and writing up of the first draft of the paper. This author also approved the final manuscript to be submitted. Sang Hun Kim, M.D., Ph.D., Associate Professor: This author Participated in manuscript preparation, statistical analysis and proof reading of the first draft of the paper. This author also approved the final manuscript to be submitted. Tae Hun An, M.D., Ph.D., Professor: This author Participated in manuscript preparation and proof reading of the first draft of the paper. This author also approved the final manuscript to be submitted.

Funding

This study was supported by research fund from Chosun University, 2015.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Research involving human participants and/or animals

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

References

  1. 1.
    Buggy DJ, Crossley AW. Thermoregulation, mild perioperative hypothermia and postanaesthetic shivering. Br J Anaesth. 2000;84(5):615–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Putzu M, Casati A, Berti M, Pagliarini G, Fanelli G. Clinical complications, monitoring and management of perioperative mild hypothermia: anesthesiological features. Acta Biomed. 2007;78(3):163–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Andrzejowski J, Hoyle J (2011) Body temperature complications. In: Valchanov K, Webb ST, Sturgess J (eds) Anaesthetic and perioperative complications. 1st edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 153–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bieberich MT, Van Duren AP. Thermal control and design considerations for a high-performance fluid warmer. Biomed Instrum Technol. 2003;37(2):103–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Schnoor J, Macko S, Weber I, Rossaint R. The air elimination capabilities of pressure infusion devices and fluid-warmers. Anaesthesia. 2004;59(8):817–21. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2004.03841.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Turner M, Hodzovic I, Mapleson WW. Simulated clinical evaluation of four fluid warming devices. Anaesthesia. 2006;61(6):571–5. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2006.04589.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kim HJ, Yoo SM, Son HS, Ahn CB, Shin YS, Chung JH, Sun K. Evaluation of the performance and safety of a newly developed intravenous fluid warmer. Artif Organs. 2015;39(7):591–6. doi: 10.1111/aor.12441.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kim HJ, Yoo SM, Jung JS, Lee SH, Sun K, Son HS. The laboratory performance of the enFLOW(®), buddy lite(™) and ThermoSens(®) fluid warmers. Anaesthesia. 2015;70(2):205–8. doi: 10.1111/anae.12906.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kim E, Lee SY, Lim YJ, Choi JY, Jeon YT, Hwang JW, Park HP. Effect of a new heated and humidified breathing circuit with a fluid-warming device on intraoperative core temperature: a prospective randomized study. J Anesth. 2015;29(4):499–507. doi: 10.1007/s00540-015-1994-z.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jung KT, Kim SH, So KY, So HJ, Shim SB. Clinical evaluation of a newly designed fluid warming kit on fluid warming and hypothermia during spinal surgery. Korean J Anesthesiol. 2015;68(5):462–468. doi: 10.4097/kjae.2015.68.5.462.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Horowitz PE, Delagarza MA, Pulaski JJ, Smith RA. Flow rates and warming efficacy with Hotline and Ranger blood/fluid warmers. Anesth Analg. 2004;99(3):788–92. doi: 10.1213/01.ANE.0000129995.42008.A4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bissonnette B, Paut O. Active warming of saline or blood is ineffective when standard infusion tubing is used: an experimental study. Can J Anaesth. 2002;49(3):270–5. doi: 10.1007/BF03020526.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Faries G, Johnston C, Pruitt KM, Plouff RT. Temperature relationship to distance and flow rate of warmed i.v. fluids. Ann Emerg Med. 1991;20(11):1198–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Presson RG Jr, Bezruczko AP, Hillier SC, McNiece WL. Evaluation of a new fluid warmer effective at low to moderate flow rates. Anesthesiology. 1993;78(5):974–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular SurgeryChosun University, School of MedicineGwangjuRepublic of Korea
  2. 2.Department of Anesthesiology and Pain MedicineChosun University, School of medicineGwangjuRepublic of Korea
  3. 3.Department of Anesthesiology and Pain MedicineChosun University HospitalGwangjuRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations