AI Chat Paper
Note: Please note that the following content is generated by AMiner AI. SciOpen does not take any responsibility related to this content.
{{lang === 'zh_CN' ? '文章概述' : 'Summary'}}
{{lang === 'en_US' ? '中' : 'Eng'}}
Chat more with AI
PDF (2.2 MB)
Collect
Submit Manuscript AI Chat Paper
Show Outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Publishing Language: Chinese

Comparison of cerebral oxygen saturation values measured by different brands of near-infrared spectrometers under hypoxic conditions: a randomized controlled trial in healthy volunteers

Yang LITaotao PENGDukun ZUOHong LI( )
Department of Anesthesiology, Second Affiliated Hospital, Army Medical University(Third Military Medical University), Chongqing, 400037, China
Show Author Information

Abstract

Objective

By comparing the differences in cerebral oxygen parameters with 3 brands of near-infrared spectrometers, INVOS 5100C(Medtronic), EGOS-600(Aegean)and BRS-1(Casibrain Technology), to investigate their consistency, correlation and ability to detect key desaturation events in healthy volunteers in a hypoxic condition.

Methods

From December 6, 2021 to January 18, 2022, 20 healthy volunteers were recruited from our hospital. They were randomly divided into group E(a single sensor of INVOS 5100C at the left forehead and that of EGOS-600 at the right)and group B(INVOS 5100C and BRS-1, as the other group), with 10 subjects in each group. After the sensors were applied to the forehead of the subject, hypoxia was induced and reversed by adjusting the ratio of inhaled nitrogen to oxygen. Regional cerebral oxygen saturation(rSO2), heart rate and pulse oxygen saturation(SPO2)were continuously monitored and recorded in the whole process. Wilcoxon test was used to assess the baseline value and changes in rSO2 between different devices. Bland-Altman and Deming regression analyses were employed to analyze the consistency and correlation between the 2 devices. Receiver operating characteristic(ROC)curve was plotted to analyze the performance of the different devices in detection of hypoxia.

Results

All 3 devices responded similarly to the changes in inhaled oxygen concentration. ① The magnitude and rate of changes in rSO2 for EGOS-600 and BRS-1 were less than those of INVOS 5100C. The ΔrSO2 for INVOS 5100C, EGOS-600 and BRS-1 was 16%~34.15%, 6%~20.81% and 5%~23.81%, with an absolute median rate of change of(2.81~4.40)%/min,(1.50~2.14)%/min and(1.77~2.41)%/min, respectively. ②Bland-Altman analysis showed that the mean difference of EGOS-600 and BRS-1 to INVOS 5100C were 5.7 and 2.5 respectively. Deming regression displayed that the Person coefficient was 0.722 4 and 0.845 9, respectively(P<0.001), which were in good consistency and correlation with INVOS 5100C. ③In terms of absolute values of 10%, 20% and 50% relative reduction in INVOS 5100C as the key interventional rSO2 thresholds, EGOS-600 detection rates were 90%, 48% and 40% and BRS-1 detection rates were 80%, 48% and 50%. ④The ROC curve results indicated the AUC value was 0.893 and 0.715 for EGOS-600 and BRS-1, respectively, and the cut-off threshold for hypoxia prediction was 59.3% and 56.0%, respectively.

Conclusion

The response of EGOS-600 and BRS-1 to oxygenation changes is similar to that of INVOS 5100C, and the correlation and consistency are good, which can accurately predict brain oxygen changes.

CLC number: R197.13; R319; R446.112 Document code: A

References

【1】
【1】
 
 
Journal of Army Medical University
Pages 772-779

{{item.num}}

Comments on this article

Go to comment

< Back to all reports

Review Status: {{reviewData.commendedNum}} Commended , {{reviewData.revisionRequiredNum}} Revision Required , {{reviewData.notCommendedNum}} Not Commended Under Peer Review

Review Comment

Close
Close
Cite this article:
LI Y, PENG T, ZUO D, et al. Comparison of cerebral oxygen saturation values measured by different brands of near-infrared spectrometers under hypoxic conditions: a randomized controlled trial in healthy volunteers. Journal of Army Medical University, 2023, 45(8): 772-779. https://doi.org/10.16016/j.2097-0927.202209257

714

Views

12

Downloads

0

Crossref

0

Scopus

0

CSCD

Received: 27 September 2022
Revised: 16 October 2022
Published: 30 April 2023
© 2023 Journal of Army Medical University