Efficacy of different cooling technologies for therapeutic temperature management: A prospective intervention study

Mild therapeutic hypothermia (32–36 °C) is associated with improved outcomes in patients with brain injury after cardiac arrest (CA). Various devices are available to induce and maintain hypothermia, but few studies have compared the performance of these devices. We performed a prospective study to...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Resuscitation 2018-03, Vol.124, p.14-20
Hauptverfasser: Sonder, Petra, Janssens, Gladys N., Beishuizen, Albertus, Henry, Connie L., Rittenberger, Jon C., Callaway, Clifton W., Dezfulian, Cameron, Polderman, Kees H.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 20
container_issue
container_start_page 14
container_title Resuscitation
container_volume 124
creator Sonder, Petra
Janssens, Gladys N.
Beishuizen, Albertus
Henry, Connie L.
Rittenberger, Jon C.
Callaway, Clifton W.
Dezfulian, Cameron
Polderman, Kees H.
description Mild therapeutic hypothermia (32–36 °C) is associated with improved outcomes in patients with brain injury after cardiac arrest (CA). Various devices are available to induce and maintain hypothermia, but few studies have compared the performance of these devices. We performed a prospective study to compare four frequently used cooling systems in inducing and maintaining hypothermia followed by controlled rewarming. We performed a prospective multi-centered study in ten ICU’s in three hospitals within the UPMC health system. Four different cooling technologies (seven cooling methods in total) were studied: two external water-circulating cooling blankets (Meditherm® and Blanketrol®), gel-coated adhesive cooling pads (Arctic Sun®), and endovascular cooling catheters with balloons circulating ice-cold saline (Thermogard®). For the latter system we studied three different types of catheter with two, three or four water-circulating balloons, respectively. In contrast to previous studies, we not only studied the cooling rate (i.e., time to target temperature) in the induction phase, but also the percentage of the time during the maintenance phase that temperature was on target ±0.5 °C, and the efficacy of devices to control rewarming. We believe that these are more important indicators of device performance than induction speed alone. 129 consecutive patients admitted after CA and treated with hypothermia were screened, and 120 were enrolled in the study. Two researchers dedicated fulltime to this study monitored TH treatment in all patients, including antishivering measures, additional cooling measures used (e.g. icepacks and cold fluid infusion), and all other issues related to temperature management. Baseline characteristics were similar for all groups. Cooling rates were 2.06 ± 1.12 °C/h for endovascular cooling, 1.49 ± 0.82 for Arctic sun, 0.61 ± 0.36 for Meditherm and 1.22 ± 1.12 for Blanketrol. Time within target range ±0.5 °C was 97.3 ± 6.0% for Thermogard, 81.8 ± 25.2% for Arctic Sun, 57.4 ± 29.3% for Meditherm, and 64.5 ± 20.1% for Blanketrol. The following differences were significant: Thermogard vs. Meditherm (p 
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2017.12.026
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1982841263</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0300957217308146</els_id><sourcerecordid>1982841263</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c449t-7c0fa6ca54eb983ff6ae2155a4d869f23e75c6819c9280947e1db898d834e6213</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkE1LAzEQhoMotn78BQl48bJrkv1K9CRSP0DwoueQZidtyu5mTbKF_nsjVcGbp2GY951550HokpKcElpfb3IPYQraRhWtG3JGaJNTlhNWH6A55U2R0aohh2hOCkIyUTVshk5C2BBCiko0x2jGBOOc0HKOwsIYq5XeYWdwa40BD0PE2rnODiscQa8H17mVhYCN8ziuwasRpmh1GvZj6uLkAfdqUCvok_cG3-HRuzCCjnYL2A4R_DYNUlYc4tTuztCRUV2A8-96it4fFm_3T9nL6-Pz_d1LpstSxKzRxKhaq6qEpeCFMbUCRqtKlS2vhWEFNJWuORU6fUNE2QBtl1zwlhcl1IwWp-hqvzfF-ZggRNnboKHr1ABuCpIKznhJWV0k6e1eqlPy4MHI0dte-Z2kRH5Rlxv5h7r8oi4pk4l6cl98H5qWPbS_3h_MSbDYCyC9u7XgZVoEg4bW-oRJts7-69Ancb6evg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1982841263</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Efficacy of different cooling technologies for therapeutic temperature management: A prospective intervention study</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present)</source><creator>Sonder, Petra ; Janssens, Gladys N. ; Beishuizen, Albertus ; Henry, Connie L. ; Rittenberger, Jon C. ; Callaway, Clifton W. ; Dezfulian, Cameron ; Polderman, Kees H.</creator><creatorcontrib>Sonder, Petra ; Janssens, Gladys N. ; Beishuizen, Albertus ; Henry, Connie L. ; Rittenberger, Jon C. ; Callaway, Clifton W. ; Dezfulian, Cameron ; Polderman, Kees H.</creatorcontrib><description>Mild therapeutic hypothermia (32–36 °C) is associated with improved outcomes in patients with brain injury after cardiac arrest (CA). Various devices are available to induce and maintain hypothermia, but few studies have compared the performance of these devices. We performed a prospective study to compare four frequently used cooling systems in inducing and maintaining hypothermia followed by controlled rewarming. We performed a prospective multi-centered study in ten ICU’s in three hospitals within the UPMC health system. Four different cooling technologies (seven cooling methods in total) were studied: two external water-circulating cooling blankets (Meditherm® and Blanketrol®), gel-coated adhesive cooling pads (Arctic Sun®), and endovascular cooling catheters with balloons circulating ice-cold saline (Thermogard®). For the latter system we studied three different types of catheter with two, three or four water-circulating balloons, respectively. In contrast to previous studies, we not only studied the cooling rate (i.e., time to target temperature) in the induction phase, but also the percentage of the time during the maintenance phase that temperature was on target ±0.5 °C, and the efficacy of devices to control rewarming. We believe that these are more important indicators of device performance than induction speed alone. 129 consecutive patients admitted after CA and treated with hypothermia were screened, and 120 were enrolled in the study. Two researchers dedicated fulltime to this study monitored TH treatment in all patients, including antishivering measures, additional cooling measures used (e.g. icepacks and cold fluid infusion), and all other issues related to temperature management. Baseline characteristics were similar for all groups. Cooling rates were 2.06 ± 1.12 °C/h for endovascular cooling, 1.49 ± 0.82 for Arctic sun, 0.61 ± 0.36 for Meditherm and 1.22 ± 1.12 for Blanketrol. Time within target range ±0.5 °C was 97.3 ± 6.0% for Thermogard, 81.8 ± 25.2% for Arctic Sun, 57.4 ± 29.3% for Meditherm, and 64.5 ± 20.1% for Blanketrol. The following differences were significant: Thermogard vs. Meditherm (p &lt; 0.01), Thermogard vs. Blanketrol (p &lt; 0.01), and Arctic Sun vs. Meditherm (p &lt; 0.02). No major complications occurred with any device. Endovascular cooling and gel-adhesive pads provide more rapid hypothermia induction and more effective temperature maintenance compared to water-circulating cooling blankets. This applied to induction speed, but (more importantly) also to time within target range during maintenance.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0300-9572</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-1570</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2017.12.026</identifier><identifier>PMID: 29288014</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Ireland: Elsevier B.V</publisher><subject>Adult ; Aged ; Catheters - adverse effects ; Cold Temperature ; Cooling catheters ; Female ; Heart Arrest - complications ; Heart Arrest - mortality ; Heart Arrest - therapy ; Humans ; Hypothermia, Induced - adverse effects ; Hypothermia, Induced - instrumentation ; Hypothermia, Induced - methods ; Hypothermia, Induced - mortality ; Hypoxia, Brain - etiology ; Hypoxia, Brain - therapy ; Male ; Mechanical cooling ; Middle Aged ; Neurological injury ; Prospective Studies ; Rewarming - adverse effects ; Rewarming - methods ; Surface cooling ; Targeted temperature management ; Therapeutic hypothermia</subject><ispartof>Resuscitation, 2018-03, Vol.124, p.14-20</ispartof><rights>2017</rights><rights>Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier B.V.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c449t-7c0fa6ca54eb983ff6ae2155a4d869f23e75c6819c9280947e1db898d834e6213</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c449t-7c0fa6ca54eb983ff6ae2155a4d869f23e75c6819c9280947e1db898d834e6213</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2017.12.026$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3549,27923,27924,45994</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29288014$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Sonder, Petra</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Janssens, Gladys N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Beishuizen, Albertus</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Henry, Connie L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rittenberger, Jon C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Callaway, Clifton W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dezfulian, Cameron</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Polderman, Kees H.</creatorcontrib><title>Efficacy of different cooling technologies for therapeutic temperature management: A prospective intervention study</title><title>Resuscitation</title><addtitle>Resuscitation</addtitle><description>Mild therapeutic hypothermia (32–36 °C) is associated with improved outcomes in patients with brain injury after cardiac arrest (CA). Various devices are available to induce and maintain hypothermia, but few studies have compared the performance of these devices. We performed a prospective study to compare four frequently used cooling systems in inducing and maintaining hypothermia followed by controlled rewarming. We performed a prospective multi-centered study in ten ICU’s in three hospitals within the UPMC health system. Four different cooling technologies (seven cooling methods in total) were studied: two external water-circulating cooling blankets (Meditherm® and Blanketrol®), gel-coated adhesive cooling pads (Arctic Sun®), and endovascular cooling catheters with balloons circulating ice-cold saline (Thermogard®). For the latter system we studied three different types of catheter with two, three or four water-circulating balloons, respectively. In contrast to previous studies, we not only studied the cooling rate (i.e., time to target temperature) in the induction phase, but also the percentage of the time during the maintenance phase that temperature was on target ±0.5 °C, and the efficacy of devices to control rewarming. We believe that these are more important indicators of device performance than induction speed alone. 129 consecutive patients admitted after CA and treated with hypothermia were screened, and 120 were enrolled in the study. Two researchers dedicated fulltime to this study monitored TH treatment in all patients, including antishivering measures, additional cooling measures used (e.g. icepacks and cold fluid infusion), and all other issues related to temperature management. Baseline characteristics were similar for all groups. Cooling rates were 2.06 ± 1.12 °C/h for endovascular cooling, 1.49 ± 0.82 for Arctic sun, 0.61 ± 0.36 for Meditherm and 1.22 ± 1.12 for Blanketrol. Time within target range ±0.5 °C was 97.3 ± 6.0% for Thermogard, 81.8 ± 25.2% for Arctic Sun, 57.4 ± 29.3% for Meditherm, and 64.5 ± 20.1% for Blanketrol. The following differences were significant: Thermogard vs. Meditherm (p &lt; 0.01), Thermogard vs. Blanketrol (p &lt; 0.01), and Arctic Sun vs. Meditherm (p &lt; 0.02). No major complications occurred with any device. Endovascular cooling and gel-adhesive pads provide more rapid hypothermia induction and more effective temperature maintenance compared to water-circulating cooling blankets. This applied to induction speed, but (more importantly) also to time within target range during maintenance.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Catheters - adverse effects</subject><subject>Cold Temperature</subject><subject>Cooling catheters</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Heart Arrest - complications</subject><subject>Heart Arrest - mortality</subject><subject>Heart Arrest - therapy</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Hypothermia, Induced - adverse effects</subject><subject>Hypothermia, Induced - instrumentation</subject><subject>Hypothermia, Induced - methods</subject><subject>Hypothermia, Induced - mortality</subject><subject>Hypoxia, Brain - etiology</subject><subject>Hypoxia, Brain - therapy</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Mechanical cooling</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Neurological injury</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>Rewarming - adverse effects</subject><subject>Rewarming - methods</subject><subject>Surface cooling</subject><subject>Targeted temperature management</subject><subject>Therapeutic hypothermia</subject><issn>0300-9572</issn><issn>1873-1570</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkE1LAzEQhoMotn78BQl48bJrkv1K9CRSP0DwoueQZidtyu5mTbKF_nsjVcGbp2GY951550HokpKcElpfb3IPYQraRhWtG3JGaJNTlhNWH6A55U2R0aohh2hOCkIyUTVshk5C2BBCiko0x2jGBOOc0HKOwsIYq5XeYWdwa40BD0PE2rnODiscQa8H17mVhYCN8ziuwasRpmh1GvZj6uLkAfdqUCvok_cG3-HRuzCCjnYL2A4R_DYNUlYc4tTuztCRUV2A8-96it4fFm_3T9nL6-Pz_d1LpstSxKzRxKhaq6qEpeCFMbUCRqtKlS2vhWEFNJWuORU6fUNE2QBtl1zwlhcl1IwWp-hqvzfF-ZggRNnboKHr1ABuCpIKznhJWV0k6e1eqlPy4MHI0dte-Z2kRH5Rlxv5h7r8oi4pk4l6cl98H5qWPbS_3h_MSbDYCyC9u7XgZVoEg4bW-oRJts7-69Ancb6evg</recordid><startdate>201803</startdate><enddate>201803</enddate><creator>Sonder, Petra</creator><creator>Janssens, Gladys N.</creator><creator>Beishuizen, Albertus</creator><creator>Henry, Connie L.</creator><creator>Rittenberger, Jon C.</creator><creator>Callaway, Clifton W.</creator><creator>Dezfulian, Cameron</creator><creator>Polderman, Kees H.</creator><general>Elsevier B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201803</creationdate><title>Efficacy of different cooling technologies for therapeutic temperature management: A prospective intervention study</title><author>Sonder, Petra ; Janssens, Gladys N. ; Beishuizen, Albertus ; Henry, Connie L. ; Rittenberger, Jon C. ; Callaway, Clifton W. ; Dezfulian, Cameron ; Polderman, Kees H.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c449t-7c0fa6ca54eb983ff6ae2155a4d869f23e75c6819c9280947e1db898d834e6213</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Catheters - adverse effects</topic><topic>Cold Temperature</topic><topic>Cooling catheters</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Heart Arrest - complications</topic><topic>Heart Arrest - mortality</topic><topic>Heart Arrest - therapy</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Hypothermia, Induced - adverse effects</topic><topic>Hypothermia, Induced - instrumentation</topic><topic>Hypothermia, Induced - methods</topic><topic>Hypothermia, Induced - mortality</topic><topic>Hypoxia, Brain - etiology</topic><topic>Hypoxia, Brain - therapy</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Mechanical cooling</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Neurological injury</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>Rewarming - adverse effects</topic><topic>Rewarming - methods</topic><topic>Surface cooling</topic><topic>Targeted temperature management</topic><topic>Therapeutic hypothermia</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Sonder, Petra</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Janssens, Gladys N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Beishuizen, Albertus</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Henry, Connie L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rittenberger, Jon C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Callaway, Clifton W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dezfulian, Cameron</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Polderman, Kees H.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Resuscitation</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Sonder, Petra</au><au>Janssens, Gladys N.</au><au>Beishuizen, Albertus</au><au>Henry, Connie L.</au><au>Rittenberger, Jon C.</au><au>Callaway, Clifton W.</au><au>Dezfulian, Cameron</au><au>Polderman, Kees H.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Efficacy of different cooling technologies for therapeutic temperature management: A prospective intervention study</atitle><jtitle>Resuscitation</jtitle><addtitle>Resuscitation</addtitle><date>2018-03</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>124</volume><spage>14</spage><epage>20</epage><pages>14-20</pages><issn>0300-9572</issn><eissn>1873-1570</eissn><abstract>Mild therapeutic hypothermia (32–36 °C) is associated with improved outcomes in patients with brain injury after cardiac arrest (CA). Various devices are available to induce and maintain hypothermia, but few studies have compared the performance of these devices. We performed a prospective study to compare four frequently used cooling systems in inducing and maintaining hypothermia followed by controlled rewarming. We performed a prospective multi-centered study in ten ICU’s in three hospitals within the UPMC health system. Four different cooling technologies (seven cooling methods in total) were studied: two external water-circulating cooling blankets (Meditherm® and Blanketrol®), gel-coated adhesive cooling pads (Arctic Sun®), and endovascular cooling catheters with balloons circulating ice-cold saline (Thermogard®). For the latter system we studied three different types of catheter with two, three or four water-circulating balloons, respectively. In contrast to previous studies, we not only studied the cooling rate (i.e., time to target temperature) in the induction phase, but also the percentage of the time during the maintenance phase that temperature was on target ±0.5 °C, and the efficacy of devices to control rewarming. We believe that these are more important indicators of device performance than induction speed alone. 129 consecutive patients admitted after CA and treated with hypothermia were screened, and 120 were enrolled in the study. Two researchers dedicated fulltime to this study monitored TH treatment in all patients, including antishivering measures, additional cooling measures used (e.g. icepacks and cold fluid infusion), and all other issues related to temperature management. Baseline characteristics were similar for all groups. Cooling rates were 2.06 ± 1.12 °C/h for endovascular cooling, 1.49 ± 0.82 for Arctic sun, 0.61 ± 0.36 for Meditherm and 1.22 ± 1.12 for Blanketrol. Time within target range ±0.5 °C was 97.3 ± 6.0% for Thermogard, 81.8 ± 25.2% for Arctic Sun, 57.4 ± 29.3% for Meditherm, and 64.5 ± 20.1% for Blanketrol. The following differences were significant: Thermogard vs. Meditherm (p &lt; 0.01), Thermogard vs. Blanketrol (p &lt; 0.01), and Arctic Sun vs. Meditherm (p &lt; 0.02). No major complications occurred with any device. Endovascular cooling and gel-adhesive pads provide more rapid hypothermia induction and more effective temperature maintenance compared to water-circulating cooling blankets. This applied to induction speed, but (more importantly) also to time within target range during maintenance.</abstract><cop>Ireland</cop><pub>Elsevier B.V</pub><pmid>29288014</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.resuscitation.2017.12.026</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0300-9572
ispartof Resuscitation, 2018-03, Vol.124, p.14-20
issn 0300-9572
1873-1570
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1982841263
source MEDLINE; ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present)
subjects Adult
Aged
Catheters - adverse effects
Cold Temperature
Cooling catheters
Female
Heart Arrest - complications
Heart Arrest - mortality
Heart Arrest - therapy
Humans
Hypothermia, Induced - adverse effects
Hypothermia, Induced - instrumentation
Hypothermia, Induced - methods
Hypothermia, Induced - mortality
Hypoxia, Brain - etiology
Hypoxia, Brain - therapy
Male
Mechanical cooling
Middle Aged
Neurological injury
Prospective Studies
Rewarming - adverse effects
Rewarming - methods
Surface cooling
Targeted temperature management
Therapeutic hypothermia
title Efficacy of different cooling technologies for therapeutic temperature management: A prospective intervention study
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-08T12%3A09%3A00IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Efficacy%20of%20different%20cooling%20technologies%20for%20therapeutic%20temperature%20management:%20A%20prospective%20intervention%20study&rft.jtitle=Resuscitation&rft.au=Sonder,%20Petra&rft.date=2018-03&rft.volume=124&rft.spage=14&rft.epage=20&rft.pages=14-20&rft.issn=0300-9572&rft.eissn=1873-1570&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2017.12.026&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1982841263%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1982841263&rft_id=info:pmid/29288014&rft_els_id=S0300957217308146&rfr_iscdi=true