Evaluation of two warming systems after cardiopulmonary bypass

We have compared the Thermomat electric undermattress (JMW Systems, Edinburgh, UK) and the Bair Hugger (Augustine Medical, Courtelary, Switzerland) forced-air warming blanket in 30 adult patients after cardiac surgery. All patients were warmed to an oesophageal temperature of 38 degrees C before termination of cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB); those with oesophageal temperatures < 35.5 degrees C at skin closure were allocated randomly to be rewarmed in the intensive care unit either on the Thermomat (n = 15) or under the Bair Hugger blanket (n = 15), at their highest settings. Oesophageal and lateral thigh skin temperatures were recorded every 15 min for 4 h. There was a significantly faster increase in core temperature (0.5 vs 0.75 degrees C h-1; P < 0.0002) and skin temperature (0.86 vs 1.3 degrees C h-1; P < 0.001) in the Bair Hugger group. However, there was no difference in the number of patients who reached a core temperature of 36 degrees C (15 Bair Hugger, 14 Thermomat) or 37 degrees C (11 Bair Hugger, seven Thermomat), or in the number of patients who reached a skin temperature of 37 degrees C in 4 h (four Bair Hugger, one Thermomat). Twelve patients in the Bair Hugger group reached a skin temperature of 36 degrees C compared with two in the Thermomat group (P < 0.001). The Bair Hugger warmed faster than the Thermomat both centrally and peripherally, and warmed more patients to a core temperature of 37 degrees C in 4 h, but did not reduce the time to tracheal extubation or alter important clinical aspects of postoperative course.      

Comparison of two convective warming systems during major abdominal and orthopedic surgery

PURPOSE: Convective warming is routinely employed to maintain perioperative normothermia. However, due to differences in nozzle temperature and air flow of the power units, there are clinically relevant differences in heat transfer among convective warming systems. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the use of a quieter, convective warming system (WarmAir, sound pressure level 49 dba, air flow 35 cfm). The WarmAir system was compared to the standard, higher air flow system (Bair Hugger Model 750, sound pressure level 55 dba, air flow 48 cfm) with regards to temperature outcome. METHODS: Patients undergoing general anesthesia for major abdominal and orthopedic surgery were randomized into one of two groups: WarmAir or Bair Hugger. Both groups received an upper body, convective blanket using coverage appropriate for the given surgical procedure. Convective warming, at the high setting, was started after prepping and draping, and distal esophageal or nasopharyngeal temperature was measured intraoperatively. Sublingual temperature was measured preoperatively and on admission to the postanesthesia care unit. RESULTS: The WarmAir (n = 89) and Bair Hugger (n = 95) groups were similar with respect to age, gender, body mass index, ASA status, fluid balance, and duration of surgery. There was no difference in temperature outcomes between groups. In the WarmAir group, preoperative, lowest intraoperative, end of surgery, and postanesthesia care unit admission temperatures were (means +/- SD); 36.3 +/- 0.5, 35.4 +/- 1.1, 36.4 +/- 0.7, and 36.4 +/- 0.6 degrees C, respectively. Corresponding temperatures in the Bair Hugger group were; 36.3 +/- 0.6, 35.6 +/- 1.0, 36.5 +/- 0.6, and 36.4 +/- 0.5 degrees C, respectively. CONCLUSION: Despite differences in heating characteristics, both convective warming systems were effective in maintaining perioperative normothermia in patients undergoing major abdominal and orthopedic surgery. Therefore, choice of warming system is dependent on other factors such as ergonomics and cost.     

Effects of a forced-air system (Bair Hugger,OR-type) on intraoperative temperature in patients with open abdominal surgery

Intraoperative hypothermia is difficult to avoid and may present a significant clinical risk during the early postoperative phase. We evaluated a forced-air system [Bair Hugger, OR-type (BH)] for warming intraoperative patients with open abdominal surgery. Twenty patients received BH warming [BH(+) group] and another 20 patients, who served as controls, did not [BH(−) group]. Patients in both groups also received circulating blanket warming. Tempertures were measured at 30-min intervals throughout the operation in the rectum and on the tip of the index finger opposite the nail bed. The average operation time was 168.8±16.2 min. Rectal and fingertip temperatures in the BH(+) group were significantly higher than those in the BH(−) group, and central-peripheral temperature gradients in the BH(+) group were significantly smaller than those in the BH(−) group during the study, except at 180 min. No shivering occurred in either group. Therefore, BH is an effective warming device during open abdominal surgery.     

A reusable, custom-made warming blanket prevents core hypothermia during major neonatal surgery

PURPOSE: To introduce a reusable model of neonatal forced air warming blanket for intraoperative use during major noncardiac neonatal surgery and to determine clinical efficacy of this reusable blanket compared with the commonly used disposable blankets. METHODS: Delivered air temperature and calorie uptake of standard thermal bodies within the reusable blankets, Bair Hugger(R) blanket model 530 and model 555 were studied. Also, an efficacy study was conducted in 90 neonatal patients scheduled for major noncardiac surgery comparing the reusable blanket, the Bair Hugger(R) blanket model 530 and passive heat conservation as a control. The covered reusable blanket was used as a rescue procedure if the core temperature was < 35.5 degrees C. RESULTS: Delivered air temperature and heat transfer from the covered reusable blanket did not differ significantly from those of the Bair Hugger(R) blanket model 530 and model 555 (despite 0.75 degrees C-1.2 degrees C of heat trapped under the sheet and 1.3 Kcal less energy transfer). Temperatures measured underneath patients (correlated to poorly perfused areas) were highest using the Bair Hugger(R) blanket model 555. The reusable blanket was efficacious in preventing intraoperative core hypothermia and not different from the Bair Hugger(R) blanket model 530. About 1/3 of the patients in the control group had presented a core temperature < 35.5 degrees C but were successfully rescued using the reusable blanket. No adverse events were associated with any of these warming methods. CONCLUSION: This study shows the clinical efficacy of our reusable blanket for the prevention of core hypothermia during major neonatal surgery, which is not different from commonly used disposable blankets.     

Randomized Prospective Comparison of Forced Air Warming Using Hospital Blankets versus Commercial Blankets in Surgical Patients

Background: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of an experimental approach to forced air warming using hospital blankets or a Bair Hugger warming unit (Augustine Medical Inc., Eden Prairie, MN) to create a tent of warm air.

Methods: Adult patients undergoing major surgery were studied. Patients were randomized to receive forced air warming using either a commercial Bair Hugger blanket (control group, n = 44; set point, 43[degrees]C) or standard hospital blankets (experimental group, n = 39; set point, 38[degrees]C). Distal esophageal temperatures were monitored. Patients were contacted the following day regarding any problems with the assigned warming technique.

Results: Surface area covered was 36 +/- 12% (mean +/- SD) in the experimental group and 40 +/- 10% in the control group. Final temperatures at the end of surgery were similar between groups: experimental, 36.2 +/- 0.6[degrees]C; control, 36.4 +/- 0.7[degrees]C. A similar number of patients had esophageal temperature less than 36[degrees]C at the end of surgery in both groups (experimental, 12 of 39 [31%]; control, 12 of 44 [27%]). The majority of patients were satisfied with their anesthetic and warming technique: experimental, 38 of 39 patients; control, 44 of 44 patients. There were no thermal injuries.     

Convective warming combined with vasodilator therapy accelerates core rewarming after coronary artery bypass surgery

In a prospective, randomized, controlled study, we have investigated the effect of forced air warming on the rate of change of nasopharyngeal and rectal temperatures in 20 patients after coronary artery bypass grafting. All patients had nasopharyngeal temperatures less than 36 degrees C on arrival in the intensive care unit and received an infusion of glyceryl trinitrate 15 mg h-1, but none received inotropes. Ten patients were warmed under an aluminized plastic "space" blanket (control group) and 10 were warmed under a "Bair Hugger" blanket connected to its power unit on "high" setting (Bair Hugger group). The rates of increase in nasopharyngeal temperature were 0.4 and 0.95 degrees C h-1, respectively, in the control and Bair Hugger groups (P < 0.01) during the first 2 h after operation. Over the same period of time, rectal temperatures increased at a rate of 0.25 and 0.75 degrees C h-1 in the control and Bair Hugger groups, respectively (P < 0.01).      

Skin-surface warming: heat flux and central temperature

The authors determined the efficacy of four postoperative warming devices by measuring cutaneous and tympanic membrane temperatures, and heat loss/gain using 11 thermocouples and ten thermal flux transducers in five healthy, unanesthetized volunteers. Overall thermal comfort was evaluated at 5-10 min intervals using a 10-cm visual analog scale. The warming devices were: 1) a pair of 250-W infrared heating lamps mounted 71 cm above the abdomen; 2) the Thermal Ceiling MTC XI UL (500 W) set on "high" and mounted 56 cm above the volunteer; 3) a 54-by-145-cm circulating-water blanket set to 40 degrees C placed over the volunteer; and 4) the Bair Hugger forced air warmer with an adult-sized cover set on "low" (approximately 33 degrees C), "medium" (approximately 38 degrees C), and "high" (approximately 43 degrees C). Following a 10-min control period, each device was placed over the volunteer and activated for a 30-min period. All devices were started "cold" and warmed up during the study period. The Bair Hugger set on "medium" decreased heat loss more than each radiant warming device and as much as the circulating-water blanket. All methods reached maximum efficacy within 20 min. Set on "high," the Bair Hugger increased skin-surface temperature more than the circulating-water blanket. The Bair Hugger (all settings) and the water blanket raised skin temperature more than the radiant heaters. The circulating-water blanket was the most effective device for heating an optimally placed transducer on the chest (directly under and parallel to the radiant heat sources, and touching the water and Bair Hugger blankets).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Efficacy of postoperative rewarming after cardiac surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of forced-air warmers and radiant heaters on rewarming after cardiac surgery in a prospective randomized study. METHODS: Fifty male patients who had undergone coronary artery bypass graft surgery were studied. The control group (Gr. C, n=10) was nursed under a standard hospital blanket. Two groups were treated with forced-air warmers: WarmTouch 5700 (Gr. WT, n=10) and Bair Hugger 500 (Gr. BH, n=10). Two other groups were treated by radiant heaters: the Aragona Thermal Ceilings CTC X radiant heater (Gr. TC, n=10) and a self assembled radiant heater of 4 Hydrosun 500 infrared lamps (Gr. HY, n=10). Changes of oesophageal temperature, mean skin temperature, mean body temperature and relative heat balance were calculated from oesophageal temperature, 4 skin temperatures and oxygen consumption (VO(2)). RESULTS: All actively treated groups with exception of the TC group showed significantly faster oesophageal warming than the control group. The mean body temperature increased 1.1 (0.7-1.7) degrees Ch(-1) in Gr. WT, 1.3 (0.7-1.5) degrees Ch(-1) in Gr. BH, 0.8 (0.5-1.4) degrees Ch(-1) in Gr. TC and 0.7 (0.4-1.0) degrees Ch(-1) in Gr. HY compared to Gr. C with 0.4 (0.2-0.7) degrees Ch(-1). The mean VO(2) and the maxima of the VO(2) during the study period did not differ significantly between the groups. CONCLUSION: In the current setting active warming, forced-air warming more than radiant warming, increased speed of rewarming two- to threefold in comparison to insulation with a blanket.     

Randomized prospective comparison of forced air warming using hospital blankets versus commercial blankets in surgical patients

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of an experimental approach to forced air warming using hospital blankets or a Bair Hugger warming unit (Augustine Medical Inc., Eden Prairie, MN) to create a tent of warm air. METHODS: Adult patients undergoing major surgery were studied. Patients were randomized to receive forced air warming using either a commercial Bair Hugger blanket (control group, n = 44; set point, 43 degrees C) or standard hospital blankets (experimental group, n = 39; set point, 38 degrees C). Distal esophageal temperatures were monitored. Patients were contacted the following day regarding any problems with the assigned warming technique. RESULTS: Surface area covered was 36 +/- 12% (mean +/- SD) in the experimental group and 40 +/- 10% in the control group. Final temperatures at the end of surgery were similar between groups: experimental, 36.2 +/- 0.6 degrees C; control, 36.4 +/- 0.7 degrees C. A similar number of patients had esophageal temperature less than 36 degrees C at the end of surgery in both groups (experimental, 12 of 39 [31%]; control, 12 of 44 [27%]). The majority of patients were satisfied with their anesthetic and warming technique: experimental, 38 of 39 patients; control, 44 of 44 patients. There were no thermal injuries. CONCLUSIONS: Standard hospital blankets heated to 38 degrees C forced air were equally as effective as commercial blankets heated with forced air at 43 degrees C. However, based on concerns expressed by the manufacturer, this experimental technique should not be used until further safety evaluation has been undertaken.     

Efficacy of forced-air warming systems with full body blankets

PURPOSE: Postoperative hypothermia after cardiac surgery is still a common problem often treated with forced-air warming. This study was conducted to determine the heat transfer efficacy of 11 forced-air warming systems with full body blankets on a validated copper manikin. METHODS: The following systems were tested: 1) Bair Hugger 505; 2) Bair Hugger 750; 3) Life-Air 1000 S; 4) Snuggle Warm; 5) Thermacare; 6) Thermacare with reusable Optisan blanket; 7) WarmAir; 8) Warm-Gard; 9) Warm-Gard and reusable blanket; 10) WarmTouch; and 11) WarmTouch and reusable blanket. Heat transfer of forced-air warmers can be described as follows: Q = h x DeltaT x A. Where Q = heat flux (W), h = heat exchange coefficient (W x m-2 x degrees C-1), DeltaT = temperature gradient between blanket and manikin surface (degrees C), A = covered area (m2). Heat flux per unit area and surface temperature were measured with 16 heat flux transducers. Blanket temperature was measured using 16 thermocouples. The temperature gradient between blanket and surface (DeltaT) was varied and h was determined by linear regression analysis. Mean DeltaT was determined for surface temperatures between 32 degrees C and 38 degrees C. The covered area was estimated to be 1.21 m2. RESULTS: For the 11 devices, heat transfers of 30.7 W to 77.3 W were observed for surface temperatures of 32 degrees C, and between -8.8 W to 29.6 W for surface temperatures of 38 degrees C. CONCLUSION: There are clinically relevant differences between the tested forced-air warming systems with full body blankets. Several systems were unable to transfer heat to the manikin at a surface temperature of 38 degrees C.     

Effect of forced-air warming on the performance of operating theatre laminar flow ventilation

Forced‐air warming exhaust may disrupt operating theatre airflows via formation of convection currents, which depends upon differences in exhaust and operating room air temperatures. We investigated whether the floor‐to‐ceiling temperatures around a draped manikin in a laminar‐flow theatre differed when using three types of warming devices: a forced‐air warming blanket (Bair Hugger?); an over‐body conductive blanket (Hot Dog?); and an under‐body resistive mattress (Inditherm?). With forced‐air warming, mean (SD) temperatures were significantly elevated over the surgical site vs those measured with the conductive blanket (+2.73 (0.7) °C; p < 0.001) or resistive mattress (+3.63 (0.7) °C; p < 0.001). Air temperature differences were insignificant between devices at floor (p = 0.339), knee (p = 0.799) and head height levels (p = 0.573). We conclude that forced‐air warming generates convection current activity in the vicinity of the surgical site. The clinical concern is that these currents may disrupt ventilation airflows intended to clear airborne contaminants from the surgical site.     

Convection heating in pediatric general surgery - a comparison of warming alternatives in a mannequin study

BACKGROUND: Numerous methods of patient warming are used to prevent intraoperative hypothermia in children. Commercially available forced air warming blankets are effective, but are single-use items. We tested a custom-designed heat dissipation unit (HDU) against one such commercially available blanket. METHODS: Air temperatures at various points around a mannequin under simulated operating conditions were recorded using thermistors and thermal imaging. The only variable changed was the heating method: a forced air blanket or a customized HDU with two draping techniques - cotton drapes with and without a plastic 'undersheet'. RESULTS: The three methods produced similar temperature increases and plateaux across the 11 thermistor points measured. There were no significant differences between temperatures at 1 h. A plastic sheet did not appear to enhance the effectiveness of the HDU in this study. Thermal imaging photography suggested more uniform heating of the mannequin with the HDU arrangements. CONCLUSIONS: The custom-built HDU compares favorably in our mannequin study with a Bair Hugger forced air warming blanket. As it is reusable, it offers considerable potential savings.     

Temperature management during off-pump coronary artery bypass graft surgery: a randomized clinical trial on the efficacy of a circulating water system versus a forced-air system

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of a new temperature management system specifically designed for cardiac surgery (Allon ThermoWrapping Thermoregulation System; MTRE Advanced Technologies Ltd, Or Akiva, Israel) using a circulating-water garment and to compare it with a conventional forced-air cover system in order to determine whether it could reduce the incidence of perioperative hypothermia during off-pump coronary artery bypass graft (OPCAB) surgery. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized. SETTING: University, tertiary care hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-one patients undergoing primary OPCAB surgery. INTERVENTIONS: Patients undergoing OPCAB surgery were randomized into the new thermoregulation system, Allon (study group, n = 15), and the standard forced-air system, Bair Hugger (Sterile Cardiac Access blanket Model 645; Augustine SA, Berne, Switzerland) (control group, n = 16). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Rectal temperature was recorded each 30 minutes during surgery and at intensive care unit arrival. Patients in the study group had higher temperatures than the control group at all time points, and the difference reached statistical significance after 2 hours of surgery. Moreover, fewer patients in the study group suffered perioperative hypothermia (defined as rectal temperature <36 degrees C) than the control group (2/15 patients (13.3%) in the study group v 13/16 (81.3%) in the control group [p = 0.0006]). No difference in other outcomes was noted. None of the patients died in the hospital. There were no adverse events reported. CONCLUSIONS: The circulating-water garment, Allon ThermoWrapping Thermoregulation System, maintained normothermia during OPCAB surgery better than forced-air systems, especially after the first 2 hours of surgery, and it was not associated with surgical field disturbance.     

Comparison of forced-air warming and electric heating pad for maintenance of body temperature during total knee replacement

We conducted a randomised controlled trial to compare the efficacy of forced-air warming (Bair Hugger(trade mark), Augustine Medical model 500/OR, Prairie, MN) with that of an electric heating pad (Operatherm 202, KanMed, Sweden) for maintenance of intra-operative body temperature in 60 patients undergoing total knee replacement under combined spinal-epidural anaesthesia. Intra-operative tympanic and rectal temperatures and verbal analogue score for thermal comfort were recorded. There were no differences in any measurements between the two groups, with mean (SD) final rectal temperatures of 36.8 (0.4) degrees C with forced-air warming and 36.9 (0.4) degrees C with the electric pad. The heating pad is as effective as forced-air warming for maintenance of intra-operative body temperature.     

Thermal softening of tracheal tubes: an unrecognized hazard of the Bair Hugger active patient warming system

The Bair Hugger system is a new and highly effective active patient warming system which produces a layer of warm air between the patient and the warming system. We report an instance of marked softening and distortion of a polyvinyl chloride tracheal tube caused by this layer. We also present laboratory data indicating that this is a likely problem under routine theatre conditions, with suggestions for prevention.      

Simulated clinical evaluation of four fluid warming devices*

The fluid warming capabilities of the Bair Hugger, Hotline, Standard Ranger and Fluido devices were evaluated in the laboratory with gravity flow via a 14G cannula (1 m head of fluid) and with the fluid bag pressurised to 300 mmHg. The resulting flows (70-450 ml.min(-1)) were recorded. At a room temperature of 22 degrees C, no device warmed the fluid to 37 degrees C. However, the Standard Ranger with gravity flow and the Fluido with both gravity and pressurised flow achieved 35 degrees C, whereas the Bair Hugger and Hotline with both gravity and pressurised flow, and the Standard Ranger with pressurised flow, achieved only 24-31 degrees C. However, from the way delivered temperatures changed with flow, we calculated that all four devices would achieve close to 37 degrees C at the flows specified by the manufacturers: 17, 83, 150 and 800 ml.min(-1) for the Bair Hugger, Hotline, Standard Ranger and Fluido, respectively.     

Delayed forced air warming prevents hypothermia during abdominal aortic surgery

We have evaluated the efficacy of the delayed forced air warming during abdominal aortic surgery in 18 patients. Patients were allocated randomly to one of two groups: the control group (n = 9) received no intraoperative warming device; the Bair-Hugger group (n = 9) had active skin surface warming with an upper body cover. The device was activated when core temperature decreased to less than 36 degrees C. The reduction in core temperature was 0.6 degrees C during the first hour after induction and 0.4 degrees C during the second hour in both groups. In the control group, core temperature continued to decrease until the end of surgery, whereas in the Bair-Hugger group, the reduction in core temperature stopped after 1 h of warming, and then rewarming began. At the end of surgery, core temperature in the Bair- Hugger group was similar to core temperature before induction, and was higher than core temperature in the control group (P < 0.003).      

A randomised controlled trial of the electric heating pad vs forced-air warming for preventing hypothermia during laparotomy

A randomised controlled trial was conducted to compare the efficacy of upper body forced-air warming (Bair Hugger, Augustine Medical model 500/OR, Prairie, MN) with that of an electric heating pad (Operatherm 202, KanMed, Bromma, Sweden) for maintenance of intra-operative body temperature in 60 patients undergoing laparotomy under general anaesthesia. The nasopharyngeal temperature was recorded throughout the operative period. The mean (SD) final temperatures were 36.2 (0.4) degrees C with forced-air warming and 35.5 (1.0) degrees C with electric heating pad (p < 0.01). Upper body forced-air warming is more effective than the heating pad for maintenance of body temperature during laparotomy.     

Third-degree burns due to intraoperative use of a Bair Hugger warming device

We report the case of a 3-year-old boy who underwent correction of transposition of the great arteries who developed burns from use of a patient warming device. His repair had been delayed because he was from a developing country, and he was offered surgery as part of a humanitarian effort. Postoperatively he was noted to have second- and third-degree burns from use of a Bair Hugger (Augustine Medical, Eden Prairie, MN) warming system after cardiopulmonary bypass.     

Perioperative thermal insulation

To determine the efficacy of passive insulators advocated for prevention of cutaneous heat loss, we determined heat loss in unanesthetized volunteers covered by one of the following: a cloth "split sheet" surgical drape; a Convertors disposable-paper split sheet; a Thermadrape disposable laparotomy sheet; an unheated Bair Hugger patient-warming blanket; 1.5-mil-thick plastic hamper bags; and a prewarmed, cotton hospital blanket. Cutaneous heat loss was measured using 10 area-weighted thermal flux transducers while volunteers were exposed to a 20.6 degrees C environment for 1 h. Heat loss decreased significantly from 100 +/- 3 W during the control periods to 69 +/- 6 W (average of all covers) after 1 h of treatment. Heat losses from volunteers insulated by the Thermadrape (61 +/- 6 W) and Bair Hugger covers (64 +/- 5 W) were significantly less than losses from those insulated by plastic bags (77 +/- 11 W). The paper drape (67 +/- 7 W) provided slightly, but not significantly, better insulation than the cloth drape (70 +/- 4 W). Coverage by prewarmed cotton blankets initially resulted in the least heat loss (58 +/- 8 W), but after 40 min, resulted in heat loss significantly greater than that for the Thermadrape (71 +/- 7 W). Regional heat loss was roughly proportional to surface area, and the distribution of regional heat loss remained similar with all covers. These data suggest that cost and convenience should be major factors when choosing among passive perioperative insulating covers. It is likely that the amount of skin surface covered is more important than the choice of skin region covered or the choice of insulating material.