Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Comparison of core temperature monitoring methods during cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy: a prospective observational study
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Comparison of core temperature monitoring methods during cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy: a prospective observational study
Do you wish to request the book?
Comparison of core temperature monitoring methods during cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy: a prospective observational study
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Comparison of core temperature monitoring methods during cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy: a prospective observational study
2025
Overview
Background
During cytoreductive surgery combined with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), precise core temperature monitoring is critical for patient safety. This prospective study evaluated the agreement among three core temperature monitoring modalities: nasopharyngeal temperature (Tnaso), zero-heat flux cutaneous thermometer (TSpotOn), and oesophageal temperature (Teso).
Methods
Temperatures were measured simultaneously; agreement between monitoring sites was assessed using Bland–Altman analysis for repeated measures including mean bias, 95% limits of agreement, and confidence intervals, alongside Lin’s concordance correlation coefficient (LCCC). The proportion of paired differences within the clinically acceptable limit of 0.5 °C was reported.
Results
The mean difference between Tnaso and TSpotOn was −0.04 ± 0.33 °C (95% limits: −0.69 to 0.62), and between Tnaso and Teso was 0.02 ± 0.35 °C (95% limits: −0.66 to 0.71), with LCCC for both comparisons at 0.94 (95% CI: 0.93–0.94), indicating substantial agreement. However, up to 14% of Teso pairs exceeded the 0.5 °C threshold, suggesting potential clinical relevance. Notable rapid temperature decline and subsequent rebound were observed post-HIPEC at Tnaso and TSpotOn sites.
Conclusion
All three monitoring methods correlated strongly overall, but Teso exhibited phase-dependent discrepancies, particularly after HIPEC. These findings support tailoring core temperature measurement site selection with attention to the target organ, especially in laparotomy-based HIPEC procedures.
Trial registration
: The study was registered in the clinical trials registry cris.nih.go.kr (Registration Number: KCT0003980).
Publisher
BioMed Central,BioMed Central Ltd,Springer Nature B.V,BMC
Subject
/ Aged
/ Analysis
/ Cancer
/ Cytoreduction Surgical Procedures - methods
/ Female
/ Heat
/ Humans
/ Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy
/ Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy - methods
/ Male
/ Medicine
/ Methods
/ Monitoring, Intraoperative - methods
/ Oncology
/ Patients
/ Peritoneal Neoplasms - therapy
/ Surgery
