• Hong Ju Seo, Sang Hun Kim, Tae Hun An, and Dong Joon Kim.
• Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Chosun University, School of Medicine, 375 Seosuk-Dong, Dong-Gu, Gwangju, 61452, Republic of Korea.
• J Clin Monit Comput. 2018 Dec 1; 32 (6): 1127-1134.

AbstractWe 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.

26 keywords...

hide…