SIMULATED CLINICAL-EVALUATION OF CONVENTIONAL AND NEWER FLUID-WARMINGDEVICES

The purpose of the study was to evaluate the ability of five commercia lly available devices utilizing a variety of heat exchange technologie s to deliver normothermic (37 degrees C) fluids. Conditions of slow (6 .5 mL/min), moderate (13-25 mL/min), and rapid (gravity and pressure d riven flows, roller clamp wide open) infusion were simulated. Fluid te mperatures were measured using rapid response thermistors after the fl uid exited the heat exchanger (T outlet) and before delivery to the pa tient intravenously (IV) (T distal). Devices tested were the FW537, H1 000, Hotline(TM), BairHugger(R), and Flotem lie. Fluids tested were cr ystalloid at room temperature and red cells diluted with saline (11-19 degrees C). At slow and moderate flows, T distal of crystalloid was b etween 35.3 and 37.9 degrees C for Hotline(TM) at 42 degrees C, 33.8 a nd 37.7 degrees C for H1000 at 42 degrees C, 29.4 and 34.2 degrees C f or BairHugger(R), 26.1 and 31.5 for Flotem IIe, and 23.8 and 32.1 for FW537 at 42 degrees C. With gravity and pressure driven flows, T dista l of crystalloid were 39.0 and 38.9 for H1000 at 42 degrees C, 38.7 an d 38.4 degrees C for FW537 at 42 degrees C, 34.7 and 28.9 degrees C fo r Hotline(TM) at 42 degrees C, 29.2 and 24.2 degrees C for BairHugger( R), and 29.7 and 24.2 degrees C for Flotem. In conclusion, only the H1 000 at 42 degrees C was effective at delivering normothermic fluids at all clinically relevant flow rates. The Hotline(TM) at 42 degrees C w as effective at slow and moderate flow, whereas the FW537 was effectiv e only at rapid flow.