Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Monitoring of carbon dioxide in ventilated neonates: a prospective observational study
  1. Tobias Werther1,
  2. Lukas Aichhorn1,
  3. Sina Stellberg1,
  4. Francesco Stefano Cardona1,
  5. Katrin Klebermass-Schrehof1,
  6. Angelika Berger1,
  7. Georg M Schmölzer2,3,
  8. Michael Wagner1
  1. 1 Department of Pediatrics, Division of Neonatology, Pediatric Intensive Care and Neuropediatrics, Comprehensive Center for Pediatrics, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
  2. 2 Department of Pediatrics, Division of Neonatology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
  3. 3 Centre for the Studies of Asphyxia and Resuscitation, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
  1. Correspondence to Dr Tobias Werther, Department of Pediatrics, Comprehensive Center for Pediatrics, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna 1090, Austria; tobias.werther{at}meduniwien.ac.at

Abstract

Objective To assess the reliability, accuracy and precision of distal end-tidal capnography (detCO2) in neonates compared with transcutaneous (tcCO2) carbon dioxide measurements.

Design Observational, prospective clinical study.

Setting Neonatal intensive care unit at Medical University of Vienna.

Participants Conventionally ventilated neonates with a body weight between 1000 g and 3000 g.

Intervention End-tidal partial pressure of CO2 was measured in distal position using the separate lumen of a double-lumen endotracheal tube connected to an external side-stream capnometer. Three consecutive detCO2 and tcCO2 values were recorded simultaneously and compared with simultaneous arterialised partial pressure of CO2 (paCO2) measurements in each patient.

Main outcome measures Reliability, accuracy and precision of detCO2 and tcCO2 measurements compared with paCO2 in neonates.

Results Twenty-five neonates were included with a median (range) weight at enrolment of 1410 (1010–2980) g, from which 81 simultaneous measurements of detCO2, tcCO2 and paCO2 were obtained. The mean (SD) of paCO2, detCO2 and tcCO2 was 45.0 (8.6) mmHg, 42.4 (8.4) mmHg and 50.4 (20.4) mmHg, respectively. The intraclass correlation between paCO2 and detCO2 and between paCO2 and tcCO2 reached 0.80 (95% CI 0.71 to 0.87, p<0.001) and 0.59 (95% CI 0.43 to 0.72, p<0.001), respectively. In the Bland-Altman analysis, bias and precision of detCO2 with respect to paCO2 amounted to −2.68 mmHg and 10.62 mmHg (95% CI 8.49 to 14.51), respectively. Bias and precision of tcCO2 with respect to paCO2 amounted to 5.39 mmHg and 17.22 mmHg (95% CI 13.21 to 23.34), respectively.

Conclusion DetCO2 had better reliability, accuracy and precision with paCO2 than tcCO2 in ventilated neonates without severe lung diseas.

Trial registration number NCT03758313.

  • neonatology
  • technology

Data availability statement

All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplementary information. Individual participant data that underlie the results reported in this article will be shared after deidentification (text, tables, figures). Data will be shared immediately following publication (no end date). Data will be shared to researchers who provide a methodologically sound proposal to achieve aims in the approved proposal. Proposals should be directed to the corresponding author. To gain access, data requestors will need to sign a data access agreement.

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Data availability statement

All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplementary information. Individual participant data that underlie the results reported in this article will be shared after deidentification (text, tables, figures). Data will be shared immediately following publication (no end date). Data will be shared to researchers who provide a methodologically sound proposal to achieve aims in the approved proposal. Proposals should be directed to the corresponding author. To gain access, data requestors will need to sign a data access agreement.

View Full Text

Footnotes

  • Twitter @fracardo

  • Contributors TW, LA, FSC, KK-S, AB, GMS and MW devised and designed the study. TW and MW devised the data collection protocol. TW, LA, SS and MW helped with data collection. TW performed the data analysis. TW and MW wrote the manuscript. All authors revised and edited the manuscript.

  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.