Evaluation of the rectal-interdigital temperature gradient as a diagnostic marker of shock in dogs.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the difference in the rectal-interdigital temperature gradient (RITG) between dogs that were presented to an emergency room with clinical signs of shock compared to those without signs of shock, and if this gradient can be used as a diagnostic marker for shock. DESIGN: Prospective, single center, observational study conducted from 2014 to 2015. SETTING: University veterinary teaching hospital. ANIMALS: Twenty dogs with a clinical diagnosis of shock and 60 dogs without a clinical diagnosis of shock (controls). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Upon presentation to the emergency room and prior to intervention, measurements of rectal temperature, interdigital temperature, ambient temperature, systemic markers of perfusion (capillary refill time [CRT], heart rate [HR], respiratory rate [RR], Doppler blood pressure [DBP], and venous plasma lactate concentration), and venous blood gas analytes were recorded. Dogs were initially determined to be in shock by the attending clinician, and post hoc inclusion criteria were applied. Shock was defined as abnormalities in ≥3 of the 6 following criteria: HR > 120/min, RR > 40/min, CRT > 2 seconds, rectal temperature <37.8°C (100.0°F), venous plasma lactate concentration >2.5 mmol/L, or DBP < 90 mm Hg. Animals with circulatory shock had a significantly increased RITG. An increased RITG was also correlated with individual perfusion parameters including prolonged CRT (ρ = .353, P = 0.0013), tachycardia (ρ = .3485, P = 0.0015), decreased DBP (ρ = -0.6162, P = 0.0003), and shock index (ρ = 0.6168, P = 0.0003). Receiver operator curve analysis indicated a RITG cutoff point of 11.6°F had 90% specificity for the diagnosis of shock (area under the curve = 0.7604). CONCLUSIONS: The RITG in this study was associated with a diagnosis of shock and therefore may serve as a diagnostic marker of circulatory shock. Future studies with larger sample sizes to validate the use of temperature gradients and other peripheral perfusion abnormalities as diagnostic and monitoring tools are warranted.

Evaluation of the placement and maintenance of central venous jugular catheters in critically ill dogs and cats.

OBJECTIVE: To describe problems noted during central venous jugular catheter (CVJC) placement, conditions associated with unsuccessful catheterization, and CVJC maintenance complications. DESIGN: Prospective observational study from September 2014 to September 2015. SETTING: University veterinary teaching hospital. ANIMALS: Twenty-seven dogs and 20 cats hospitalized in a veterinary ICU. Patients were excluded if previously hospitalized with a CVJC or lacked sufficient data. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Ninety-one percent of indwelling CVJCs were placed successfully (43/47, 95% CI: 80%, 98%). Procedural-related difficulties that resulted in the inability to place a CVJC totaled 18/63 (28.6%, 95% CI: 18%, 41%) and included the inability to puncture the vessel (10), hematoma (6), malposition (1), and dislodgement (1). Procedural complications occurred in 24/47 patients (51%, 95% CI: 36%, 66%) and included cardiac dysrhythmias (13), hematoma (6), CVJC placement failure (4), and malposition (1). Risk factors associated with multiple catheterization attempts included increased age (7.5 years [± 4.2] vs 10.6 years [± 4.1], P = 0.04), smaller size (8.0 kg [0.6-51.9 kg] vs 4.4 kg [2.6-6.8 kg], P < 0.01) and thinner body condition score (median 5/9 [2/9-9/9] vs 4/9 [2/9-7/9], P = 0.04). The risk factor associated with dysrhythmias was smaller patient size (6.8 kg [2.6-51.9 kg] vs 4.8 kg [0.6-29.5 kg], P = 0.04). Eighteen indwelling complications occurred in 14 patients and included mechanical obstruction (7), skin irritation (6), malposition (4), and inflammation (1). Risk factors for indwelling complications included longer dwell time (5 days [2-30] vs 3 days [1-10], P < 0.01) and the administration of an irritant medication (P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Complications were documented in the placement and maintenance of CVJCs in critically ill patients with a low incidence of life-threatening sequelae. Risk factors associated with both unsuccessful CVJC placement and indwelling CVJC complications were identified.