Resistive-Polymer Versus Forced-Air Warming: Comparable Efficacy in Orthopedic Patients

BACKGROUND: Several adverse consequences are caused by mild perioperative hypothermia. Maintaining normothermia with patient warming systems, today mostly with forced air (FA), has thus become a standard procedure during anesthesia. Recently, a polymer-based resistive patient warming system was developed. We compared the efficacy of a widely distributed FA system with the resistive-polymer (RP) system in a prospective, randomized clinical study. METHODS: Eighty patients scheduled for orthopedic surgery were randomized to either FA warming (Bair Hugger warming blanket #522 and blower #750, Arizant, Eden Prairie, MN) or RP warming (Hot Dog Multi-Position Blanket and Hot Dog controller, Augustine Biomedical, Eden Prairie, MN). Core temperature, skin temperature (head, upper and lower arm, chest, abdomen, back, thigh, and calf), and room temperature (general and near the patient) were recorded continuously. RESULTS: After an initial decrease, core temperatures increased in both groups at comparable rates (FA: 0.33 degrees C/h +/- 0.34 degrees C/h; RP: 0.29 degrees C/h +/- 0.35 degrees C/h; P = 0.6). There was also no difference in the course of mean skin and mean body (core) temperature. FA warming increased the environment close to the patient (the workplace of anesthesiologists and surgeons) more than RP warming (24.4 degrees C +/- 5.2 degrees C for FA vs 22.6 degrees C +/- 1.9 degrees C for RP at 30 minutes; P(AUC) <0.01). CONCLUSION: RP warming performed as efficiently as FA warming in patients undergoing orthopedic surgery.

Resistive polymer versus forced-air warming: comparable heat transfer and core rewarming rates in volunteers

BACKGROUND: Mild perioperative hypothermia increases the risk of several severe complications. Perioperative patient warming to preserve normothermia has thus become routine, with forced-air warming being used most often. In previous studies, various resistive warming systems have shown mixed results in comparison with forced-air. Recently, a polymer-based resistive patient warming system has been developed. We compared the efficacy of a standard forced-air warming system with the resistive polymer system in volunteers. METHODS: Eight healthy volunteers participated, each on two separate study days. Unanesthetized volunteers were cooled to a core temperature (tympanic membrane) of 34 degrees C by application of forced-air at 10 degrees C and a circulating-water mattress at 4 degrees C. Meperidine and buspirone were administered to prevent shivering. In a randomly designated order, volunteers were then rewarmed (until their core temperatures reached 36 degrees C) with one of the following active warming systems: (1) forced-air warming (Bair Hugger warming cover #300, blower #750, Arizant, Eden Prairie, MN); or (2) polymer fiber resistive warming (HotDog whole body blanket, HotDog standard controller, Augustine Biomedical, Eden Prairie, MN). The alternate system was used on the second study day. Metabolic heat production, cutaneous heat loss, and core temperature were measured. RESULTS: Metabolic heat production and cutaneous heat loss were similar with each system. After a 30-min delay, core temperature increased nearly linearly by 0.98 (95% confidence interval 0.91-1.04) degrees C/h with forced-air and by 0.92 (0.85-1.00) degrees C/h with resistive heating (P = 0.4). CONCLUSIONS: Heating efficacy and core rewarming rates were similar with full-body forced-air and full-body resistive polymer heating in healthy volunteers.

Supported Cu(II) polymer catalysts for aqueous phenol oxidation

Supported Cu(II) polymer catalysts were used for the catalytic oxidation of phenol at 30 degrees C and atmospheric pressure using air and H(2)O(2) as oxidants. Heterogenisation of homogeneous Cu(II) catalysts was achieved by adsorption of Cu(II) salts onto polymeric matrices (poly(4-vinylpyridine), Chitosan). The catalytic active sites were represented by Cu(II) ions and showed to conserve their oxidative activity in heterogeneous catalysis as well as in homogeneous systems. The catalytic deactivation was evaluated by quantifying released Cu(II) ions in solution during oxidation, from where Cu-PVP(25) showed the best leaching levels no more than 5 mg L(-1). Results also indicated that Cu-PVP(25) had a catalytic activity (56% of phenol conversion when initial Cu(II) catalytic content was 200 mg L(Reaction)(-1)) comparable to that of commercial catalysts (59% of phenol conversion). Finally, the balance between activity and copper leaching was better represented by Cu-PVP(25) due to the heterogeneous catalytic activity had 86% performance in the heterogeneous phase, and the rest on the homogeneous phase, while Cu-PVP(2) had 59% and CuO/gamma-Al(2)O(3) 68%.

Poly(ethylene oxide)-b-poly(3-sulfopropyl methacrylate) block copolymers for calcium phosphate mineralization and biofilm inhibition.

Poly(ethylene oxide) (PEO) has long been used as an additive in toothpaste, partly because it reduces biofilm formation on teeth. It does not, however, reduce the formation of dental calculus or support the remineralization of dental enamel or dentine. The present article describes the synthesis of new block copolymers on the basis of PEO and poly(3-sulfopropyl methacrylate) blocks using atom transfer radical polymerization. The polymers have very large molecular weights (over 10(6) g/mol) and are highly water-soluble. They delay the precipitation of calcium phosphate from aqueous solution but, upon precipitation, lead to relatively monodisperse hydroxyapatite (HAP) spheres. Moreover, the polymers inhibit the bacterial colonization of human enamel by Streptococcus gordonii, a pioneer bacterium in oral biofilm formation, in vitro. The formation of well-defined HAP spheres suggests that a polymer-induced liquid precursor phase could be involved in the precipitation process. Moreover, the inhibition of bacterial adhesion suggests that the polymers could be utilized in caries prevention.