• J Clin Monit Comput · Jun 2023

    Comparative Study

    A comparison of the NeurOs® and the INVOS 5100C® cerebral oximeter during variations of the partial pressure of carbon dioxide and fractional inspiratory concentration of oxygen.

    • Matthias Heringlake, Hauke Benhöfer, Simon Schemke, Holger Maurer, Christian Schmidt, Tobias Scheeren, and Astrid Ellen Berggreen.
    • Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Heart and Diabetes Center Mecklenburg - Western Pomerania, Karlsburg Hospital, Greifswalder Straße 11, 17495, Karlsburg, Germany. Heringlake@t-online.de.
    • J Clin Monit Comput. 2023 Jun 1; 37 (3): 735742735-742.

    AbstractThis prospective method comparison study compared cerebral oxygen saturation (ScO2) measurement performance of the new cerebral oximeter (NeurOs®, Mespere LifeSciences, Ontario, Canada) in comparison to the established INVOS 5100C® (Medtronic, Boulder, USA) cerebral oximeter. We performed measurements during different levels of carbon dioxide pressure (PaCO2) during hyper- and hypoventilation and different levels of arterial oxygen saturation (SaO2) induced by variation of the inspiratory fraction of oxygen (FiO2). 59 anesthetized cardiac and vascular surgical patients were studied during hemodynamically stable conditions. Two versions of the NeurOs® oximeter were used in 39 and 20 patients, respectively: an older version with one bi-hemispherical sensor attached to the midline of the forehead and a newer version with two sensors that were attached to the left and right forehead. Alternating measurements of ScO2 with the INVOS® oximeter (bifrontal sensors) and the NeurOs® oximeter were performed during baseline conditions and after PaCO2 had been randomly in- and decreased by changes in ventilation (constant FiO2) and SaO2 had been randomly modified by variations in FiO2 (constant PaCO2). Employing the most recent NeurOs® version, measurements were additionally performed in a default and a high penetration mode. Bland-Altman analyses revealed comparable bias and limits of agreement for INVOS® and NeurOS® measurements during baseline conditions when using the bi-hemispherical sensor and the version with two sensors, respectively. Consequently, further analyses were performed on the pooled data of 59 patients. Bland-Altman analysis for repeated measurements revealed a bias of - 0.5%, a lower limit of agreement of - 16.3% (95% CI - 19.6 to - 13.7%) and an upper limit of agreement of 15.4% (95% CI 12.8 to 18.8%) during variations of PaCO2. The respective analysis during changes in SaO2 induced by variation of the FiO2 revealed a bias of - 0.8%, a lower limit of agreement of - 16.3% (95% CI - 19.7 to - 13.6%) and an upper limit of agreement of 14.7% (95% CI 12.1 to 18.2%). Both analyses showed a proportional error. No significant differences in ScO2 were observed during measurements with the bi-frontal sensors in the default as well as the high penetration mode. The ScO2 measurement performance of the NeurOs® cerebral oximeter is not interchangeable with the INVOS® cerebral oximeter during variations of ventilation and oxygenation in elective cardiac or vascular surgical patients. The lack of reactivity to changes in ventilation (by variation of PaCO2) and oxygen delivery (by variation of FiO2) question the reliability of NeurOs® measurements to reflect changes in cerebral blood flow and cerebral oxygen balance. This holds true not only for different sensor positions at the forehead but also for different modes of penetration.© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V.

      Pubmed     Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.