Comparison of temporal to pulmonary artery temperature in febrile patients.

BACKGROUND: As a routine part of clinical care, temperature measurement is a key indicator of illness. With the criterion standard of temperature measurement from the pulmonary artery catheter thermistor (PAT), which insertion of PAT carries significant risk to the patient, a noninvasive method that is accurate and precise is needed. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to measure the precision and accuracy of 2 commonly used methods of collecting body temperature: PAT considered the criterion standard and the temporal artery thermometer (TAT) in those patients with a temperature greater than 100.4°F. METHODS: This is a repeated-measures design with each patient with a PAT in the intensive care unit acting as their own control to investigate the difference in PAT readings and readings from TAT in the core mode. Accuracy and precision were analyzed. RESULTS: There were 60 subjects, 41 males and 19 females, with mean age of 60.8 years, and 97% (n = 58) were post-cardiac surgery. There was a statistically significant difference between PAT and TAT (101.0°F [SD, 0.5°F] vs 100.5°F [SD, 0.8°F]; bias, -0.49°F; P < .001). Differences in temperature between the 2 methods were clinically significant (ie, >0.9°F different) in 15 of 60 cases (25%). No TAT measurements were 0.9 F greater than the corresponding PAT measurement (0%; 95% confidence interval, 0%-6%). DISCUSSION: These data demonstrate the accuracy of TAT when compared with PAT in those with temperatures of 100.4°F or greater. This study demonstrates that TAT set to core mode is accurate with a 0.5°F lower temperature than PAT. There was 25% in variability in precision of TAT.

Prospective study of cardiac sarcoid mimicking arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia.

INTRODUCTION: Case studies indicate that cardiac sarcoid may mimic the clinical presentation of arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia/cardiomyopathy (ARVD/C); however, the incidence and clinical predictors to diagnose cardiac sarcoid in patients who meet International Task Force criteria for ARVD/C are unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients referred for evaluation of left bundle branch block (LBBB)-type ventricular arrhythmia and suspected ARVD/C were prospectively evaluated by a standardized protocol including right ventricle (RV) cineangiography-guided myocardial biopsy. Sixteen patients had definite ARVD/C and four had probable ARVD/C. Three patients were found to have noncaseating granulomas on biopsy consistent with sarcoid. Age, systemic symptoms, findings on chest X-ray or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), type of ventricular arrhythmia, RV function, ECG abnormalities, and the presence or duration of late potentials did not discriminate between sarcoid and ARVD/C. Left ventricular dysfunction (ejection fraction <50%) was present in 3/3 patients with cardiac sarcoid, but only 2/17 remaining patients with definite or probable ARVD/C (P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In this prospective study of consecutive patients with suspected ARVD/C evaluated by a standard protocol including biopsy, the incidence of cardiac sarcoid was surprisingly high (15%). Clinical features, with the exception of left ventricular dysfunction and histological findings, did not discriminate between the two entities.