Key result
Oesophageal pulse oximetry showed good agreement with finger pulse oximetry (bias -0.3%, limits of agreement -3.3 to 2.7%) and remained reliable when finger oximetry failed in 10.2% of patients.
Why the study?
Does oesophageal pulse oximetry provide accurate oxygen saturation measurements compared to standard methods in patients undergoing cardiothoracic surgery?
Population
49 patients undergoing cardiothoracic surgery
Comparison
Oesophageal pulse oximetry using a reflectance… vs Blood gas analyser, CO-oximeter, and commercial…
Design
Cohort
Authors
Loading...
May offer reliable backup monitoring in cardiothoracic surgery when finger oximetry fails; leaves open randomized confirmation of clinical utility.
Observational (n=49)
Does oesophageal pulse oximetry provide accurate oxygen saturation measurements compared to standard methods in patients undergoing cardiothoracic surgery?
Mean Difference: -0.3 (95% CI -3.3–2.7)
Oesophageal pulse oximetry provides accurate oxygen saturation measurements and may be a reliable alternative monitoring site when peripheral perfusion is compromised during cardiothoracic surgery.
Kyriacou et al. (2003) conducted an observational in cardiothoracic surgery (n=49). Oesophageal pulse oximetry vs. Blood gas analyser, CO-oximeter, and finger pulse oximeter was evaluated on Agreement of oxygen saturation measurements (MD -0.3%, 95% CI -3.3 to 2.7). Oesophageal pulse oximetry showed good agreement with finger pulse oximetry (bias -0.3%, limits of agreement -3.3 to 2.7%) and remained reliable when finger oximetry failed in 10.2% of patients.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: