• 1

    Rohling R, Biro P. Clinical investigation of a new combined pulse oximetry and carbon dioxide tension sensor in adult anaesthesia. J Clin Monit Comput 1999;15:2327.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2

    Thurmon JC, Tranquilli WJ, Benson GJ. Veterinary anesthesia, consideration for general anesthesia. In:Lumb WV, Jones EW, ed.Veterinary anesthesia. 3rd ed. Baltimore: The Williams & Wilkins Co, 1996;22.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3

    Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986;1:307310.

  • 4

    Cuvelier A, Grigoriu B, Molano LC, et al. Limitations of transcutaneous carbon dioxide measurements for assessing longterm mechanical ventilation. Chest 2005;127:17441748.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5

    Janssens JP, Howarth-Frey C, Chevrolet JC, et al. Transcutaneous PCO2 to monitor noninvasive mechanical ventilation in adults: assessment of a new transcutaneous PCO2 device. Chest 1998;113:768773.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6

    Kocher S, Rohling R, Tschupp A. Performance of a digital PCO2/SPO2 ear sensor. J Clin Monit Comput 2004;18:7579.

  • 7

    Hansen TN, Sonoda Y, McIlroy MB. Transfer of oxygen, nitrogen, and carbon dioxide through normal adult human skin. J Appl Physiol 1980;49:438443.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8

    Garcia-Villar R, Toutain PL, Alvinerie M, et al. The pharmacokinetics of xylazine hydrochloride: an interspecific study. J Vet Pharmacol Ther 1981;4:8792.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9

    Kastner SB. A2-agonists in sheep: a review. Vet Anaesth Analg 2006;33:7996.

  • 10

    Abitbol MM, Monheit AG, Stone ML. Arterial PO2, PCO 2, and pH versus transcutaneous PO2 and PCO 2 and tissue pH in the fetal dog. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1986;155:437443.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11

    Hazinski TA, Severinghaus JW. Transcutaneous analysis of arterial PCO2. Med Instrum 1982;16:150153.

  • 12

    Lofgren O. Continuous transcutaneous carbon dioxide monitoring in the fetus during labor. Crit Care Med 1981;9:750751.

  • 13

    Rochat MC, Payne JT, Pope ER, et al. Evaluation of skin viability in dogs, using transcutaneous carbon dioxide and sensor current monitoring. Am J Vet Res 1993;54:476480.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14

    Tremper KK, Shoemaker WC. Continuous CPR monitoring with transcutaneous oxygen and carbon dioxide sensors. Crit Care Med 1981;9:417418.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15

    Reid CW, Martineau RJ, Miller DR, et al. A comparison of transcutaneous end-tidal and arterial measurements of carbon dioxide during general anaesthesia. Can J Anaesth 1992;39:3136.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16

    Beran AV, Huxtable RF, Shigezawa GY, et al. In vivo evaluation of transcutaneous CO2 partial pressure monitoring. J Appl Physiol 1981;50:12201223.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17

    Tremper KK, Mentelos RA, Shoemaker WC. Effect of hypercarbia and shock on transcutaneous carbon dioxide at different electrode temperatures. Crit Care Med 1980;8:608612.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18

    Tremper KK, Shoemaker WC, Shippy CR, et al. Transcutaneous PCO2 monitoring on adult patients in the ICU and the operating room. Crit Care Med 1981;9:752755.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19

    Schmidt S, Langner K, Laiblin C, et al. Response time of the tcPCO2 electrode—an animal experiment study [German]. Biomed Tech (Berl) 1984;29:289294.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 20

    Bergmans MG, Stevens GH, Keunen H, et al. Transcutaneous and arterial carbon dioxide tension at various conditions of fetal stress in lambs. Gynecol Obstet Invest 1997;43:15.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Advertisement

Evaluation of a combined transcutaneous carbon dioxide pressure and pulse oximetry sensor in adult sheep and dogs

View More View Less
  • 1 Vetsuisse Faculty, Anesthesia Division, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
  • | 2 Institute of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, Private Clinic Bethanien, Zurich, Switzerland
  • | 3 Clinic for Small Animals, University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Hannover, Germany

Abstract

Objective—To evaluate a combined transcutaneous carbon dioxide pressure (tcPCO2) and pulse oximetry sensor in sheep and dogs.

Animals—13 adult sheep and 11 adult dogs.

Procedures—During inhalation anesthesia, for the first 10 minutes following sensor placement, arterial blood gas was analyzed and tcPCO2 was recorded every 2 minutes. Subsequently, the animals were hyper-, normo-, and hypoventilated. The simultaneously obtained tcPCO2 and PaCO2 values were analyzed by use of Bland-Altman statistical analysis.

Results—Mean ± SD overall difference between tcPCO2 and PaCO2 10 minutes after sensor application was 13.3 ± 8.4 mm Hg in sheep and 8.9 ± 12 mm Hg in dogs. During hyper-, normo-, and hypoventilation, mean difference (bias) and precision (limits of agreement [bias ± 2 SD]) between tcPCO2 and PaCO2 values were 13.2 ± 10.4 mm Hg (limits of agreement, −7.1 and 33.5 mm Hg) in sheep and 10.6 ± 10.5 mm Hg (limits of agreement, −9.9 and 31.2 mm Hg) in dogs, respectively. Changes in PaCO2 induced by different ventilation settings were detected by the tcPCO2 sensor with a lag (response) time of 4.9 ± 3.5 minutes for sheep and 6.2 ± 3.6 minutes for dogs.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—The tcPCO2 sensor overestimated PaCO2 in sheep and dogs and followed changes in PaCO2 with a considerable lag time. The tcPCO2 sensor might be useful for noninvasive monitoring of changes but cannot be used as a surrogate measure for PaCO2.

Abstract

Objective—To evaluate a combined transcutaneous carbon dioxide pressure (tcPCO2) and pulse oximetry sensor in sheep and dogs.

Animals—13 adult sheep and 11 adult dogs.

Procedures—During inhalation anesthesia, for the first 10 minutes following sensor placement, arterial blood gas was analyzed and tcPCO2 was recorded every 2 minutes. Subsequently, the animals were hyper-, normo-, and hypoventilated. The simultaneously obtained tcPCO2 and PaCO2 values were analyzed by use of Bland-Altman statistical analysis.

Results—Mean ± SD overall difference between tcPCO2 and PaCO2 10 minutes after sensor application was 13.3 ± 8.4 mm Hg in sheep and 8.9 ± 12 mm Hg in dogs. During hyper-, normo-, and hypoventilation, mean difference (bias) and precision (limits of agreement [bias ± 2 SD]) between tcPCO2 and PaCO2 values were 13.2 ± 10.4 mm Hg (limits of agreement, −7.1 and 33.5 mm Hg) in sheep and 10.6 ± 10.5 mm Hg (limits of agreement, −9.9 and 31.2 mm Hg) in dogs, respectively. Changes in PaCO2 induced by different ventilation settings were detected by the tcPCO2 sensor with a lag (response) time of 4.9 ± 3.5 minutes for sheep and 6.2 ± 3.6 minutes for dogs.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—The tcPCO2 sensor overestimated PaCO2 in sheep and dogs and followed changes in PaCO2 with a considerable lag time. The tcPCO2 sensor might be useful for noninvasive monitoring of changes but cannot be used as a surrogate measure for PaCO2.

Contributor Notes

Address correspondence to Dr. Vogt.