Clinical Evaluation of the CDI-100 In-Line Hematocrit/Saturation Monitor

Abstract

This study was undertaken to evaluate the accuracy, reliability, consistency and biases of the CDI-100 saturation monitor when compared with a blood gas analyzer. The advantage of continuous in-line monitoring is that the perfusionist has continuous updates as to the patient’s changing physiologic state. During this study, if the sample readout of the CDI-100 was off by greater than 10% from that of the Gem-Premier, the CDI-100 parameter was recalibrated. The accuracy of the CDI-100 was fair (greater than 10% of the samples needed recalibration) with regards to the initial sample comparisons. Recalibration was needed 67% of the time for the hematocrit and 35% for the saturation. The reliability of the CDI-100 was good (no equipment failure). The CDI-100 was consistent. It consistently overestimated both the hematocrit and saturation. This overestimation is the bias of the monitor. We recommend recalibration of the CDI-100 during clinical use to insure greater accuracy.