Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 Nov;5(11):1280-1288.
doi: 10.1016/j.jacep.2019.07.013. Epub 2019 Oct 2.

Differences in Transient Thermal Response of Commercial Esophageal Temperature Probes: Insights From an Experimental Study

Mohit K Turagam  1 , Steve Miller  2 , Sharan Prakash Sharma  3 , Punit Prakash  4 , Rakesh Gopinathannair  3 , Prajwala Lakkireddy  5 , Sanghamitra Mohanty  6 , Jie Cheng  7 , Andrea Natale  6 , Dhanunjaya Lakkireddy  8
Affiliations
Free article

Differences in Transient Thermal Response of Commercial Esophageal Temperature Probes: Insights From an Experimental Study

Mohit K Turagam et al. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2019 Nov.
Free article

Abstract

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the differences in transient thermal response (TTR) among various types of commercial esophageal temperature probes (ETPs) in the United States in an experimental model.

Background: There is little information regarding the variation in TTR among various commercial ETPs that are approved for atrial fibrillation ablation.

Methods: We compared various thermodynamic characteristics including, mean thermal time constant (τ), time to rise 1°C (T1°C), time to peak temperature (Tpeak), and decay time among 22 different ETPs. Each probe was submerged in a constant-temperature water bath maintained at 37 ± 0.5°C and then quickly (<0.5 s) submerged into another water bath at 45 ± 0.5°C. The experiments were repeated 3 times with each probe. TTR properties were compared on the basis of probe size, design, and number of sensors.

Results: The τ was significantly higher with the larger 24- and 18-F ETPs compared with the smaller 9-F ETPs. Compared with the 18-F probe, T1°C (11.9 s vs. 5 s), Tpeak (40.3 s vs. 14.4 s), and Tdecay (92.4 s vs. 32.4 s) was shorter with the 9-F ETPs. Solid-shaft ETPs had shorter τ (8.6 s vs. 20.5 s), T1°C (4.4 s vs. 10.1 s) and Tpeak (13.5 s vs. 32.5 s) compared with acoustascopes. Multisensor ETPs had shorter τs (3.9 s vs. 9.1 s), T1°C (2.3 s vs. 5 s), and Tpeak (6.2 s vs. 14.4 s) compared with single-sensor ETPs.

Conclusions: There is a significant variation in TTR among the various commercially available ETPs. The use of certain ETPs might result in underestimation of luminal esophageal temperature, which can potentially lead to adverse events.

Keywords: atrial fibrillation; esophageal injury; esophageal temperature monitoring; esophageal temperature probe; pulmonary vein isolation; thermodynamics.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in