Esophageal Heat Exchanger Versus Water-Circulating Cooling Blanket for Targeted Temperature Management.

To date, the optimal cooling device for targeted temperature management (TTM) remains unclear. Water-circulating cooling blankets are broadly available and quickly applied but reveal inaccuracy during maintenance and rewarming period. Recently, esophageal heat exchangers (EHEs) have been shown to be easily inserted, revealed effective cooling rates (0.26-1.12°C/h), acceptable deviations from target core temperature (<0.5°C), and rewarming rates between 0.2 and 0.4°C/h. The aim of this study was to compare cooling rates, accuracy during maintenance, and rewarming period as well as side effects of EHEs with water-circulating cooling blankets in a porcine TTM model. Mean core temperature of domestic pigs (n = 16) weighing 83.2 ± 3.6 kg was decreased to a target core temperature of 33°C by either using EHEs or water-circulating cooling blankets. After 8 hours of maintenance, rewarming was started at a goal rate of 0.25°C/h. Mean cooling rates were 1.3 ± 0.1°C/h (EHE) and 3.2 ± 0.5°C/h (blanket, p < 0.0002). Mean difference to target core temperature during maintenance ranged between ±1°C. Mean rewarming rates were 0.21 ± 0.01°C/h (EHE) and 0.22 ± 0.02°C/h (blanket, n.s.). There were no differences with regard to side effects such as brady- or tachycardia, hypo- or hyperkalemia, hypo- or hyperglycemia, hypotension, shivering, or esophageal tissue damage. Target temperature can be achieved faster by water-circulating cooling blankets. EHEs and water-circulating cooling blankets were demonstrated to be reliable and safe cooling devices in a prolonged porcine TTM model with more variability in EHE group.