Correspondence  |   October 2016
In Cerebral Oximetry, Do We Trust?
Author Notes
  • Hôpital Cardiologique Louis Pradel, Lyon, France (J.-L.F.). jean-luc.fellahi@chu-lyon.fr
  • (Accepted for publication June 21, 2016.)
    (Accepted for publication June 21, 2016.)×
Article Information
Correspondence
Correspondence   |   October 2016
In Cerebral Oximetry, Do We Trust?
Anesthesiology 10 2016, Vol.125, 818. doi:10.1097/ALN.0000000000001255
Anesthesiology 10 2016, Vol.125, 818. doi:10.1097/ALN.0000000000001255
We read with a great interest the recent publication by Deschamps et al.1  for the Canadian Perioperative Anesthesia Clinical Trials Group. While the results of this randomized controlled study are quite encouraging and further highlight both the feasibility and the potential clinical utility of cerebral oximetry in the setting of cardiac surgery, several concerns should be outlined.
First, the authors proposed a well-known algorithm to be used in the operating theater in order to reverse a cerebral desaturation below 10% relative to baseline. This notably low threshold value differs from those previously recommended and used by the same authors and others.2  Interestingly, an extracranial contamination affecting near-infrared spectro scopy measurements of cerebral oxygen saturation beyond 10% has been reported in healthy volunteers for at least two of the three near-infrared spectroscopy devices used in the current study.3  This last point could be of paramount importance and should be cleared up before conducting a large multicenter randomized controlled trial aiming to demonstrate a positive impact of preventing and treating cerebral desaturation on perioperative outcomes in high-risk surgical patients.
First Page Preview
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview ×
View Large