4.5 Article

Cerebral microdialysis methodology - evaluation of 20 kDa and 100 kDa catheters

Journal

PHYSIOLOGICAL MEASUREMENT
Volume 26, Issue 4, Pages 423-428

Publisher

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/0967-3334/26/4/008

Keywords

cerebral metabolism; brain injury; microdialysis; cytokines; lactate/pyruvate ratio

Funding

  1. Medical Research Council [G9439390] Funding Source: Medline
  2. Medical Research Council [G9439390] Funding Source: researchfish
  3. MRC [G9439390] Funding Source: UKRI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Microdialysis monitoring of cerebral metabolism is now performed in several neuro-intensive care units. Conventional microdialysis utilizes CMA70 catheters with 20 kDa molecular weight cut-off membranes enabling the measurement of small molecules such as glucose, lactate, pyruvate and glutamate. The CMA71 100 kDa molecular weight cut-off microdialysis catheter has recently been introduced to allow detection of larger molecules such as cytokines. The objective of this study was to perform in vitro and in vivo testing of the CMA71 microdialysis catheter, comparing its performance with the CMA70. In vitro comparison studies of three of each catheter using reference analyte solutions, demonstrated equivalent recovery for glucose, lactate, pyruvate and glutamate (range 94-97% for CMA70 and 88-103% for CMA71). In vivo comparison involved intracranial placement of paired CMA70 and CMA71 catheters (through the same cranial access device) in six patients with severe traumatic brain injury. Both catheters were perfused with CNS Perfusion Fluid without dextran at 0.3 mu l min(-1) with hourly sampling and bedside analysis on a CMA600 microdialysis analyser. The two catheters yielded equivalent results for glucose, lactate, pyruvate, glutamate and lactate/pyruvate ratio. CMA71 microdialysis catheters can, therefore, be used for routine clinical monitoring of extracellular substances, as well as for their intended research role of larger molecular weight protein sampling.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available