Dr. Imad R. Khan, a practicing neurologist and Assistant Professor in the Division of Neurocritical Care, Department of Neurology, University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, and colleagues published a retrospective study that demonstrated significant cost savings using the EnsoETM while maintaining similar clinical efficacy as that observed using other temperature modulation methods.
Achieving and maintaining normothermia (NT) after subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) or intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) often require temperature modulating devices (TMD). Shivering is a common adverse effect of TMDs that can lead to further costs and complications. We evaluated an esophageal TMD, the EnsoETM (Attune Medical, Chicago, IL), to compare NT performance, shiver burden, and cost of shivering interventions with existing TMDs. Patients with SAH or ICH and refractory fever were treated with the EnsoETM. Patient demographics, temperature data, shiver severity, and amounts and costs of medications used for shiver management were prospectively collected. Controls who received other TMDs were matched for age, gender, and body surface area to EnsoETM recipients, and similar retrospective data were collected. All patients were mechanically ventilated. Fever burden was calculated as areas of curves of time spent above 37.5°C or 38°C. Demographics, temperature data, and costs of EnsoETM recipients were compared with recipients of other TMDs. Eight EnsoETM recipients and 24 controls between October 2015 and November 2016 were analyzed. There were no differences between the two groups in demographics or patient characteristics. No difference was found in temperature at initiation (38.7°C vs. 38.5°C, p = 0.4) and fever burden above 38°C (−0.44°C × hours vs. −0.53°C × hours, p = 0.47). EnsoETM recipients showed a nonsignificant trend in taking longer to achieve NT than other TMDs (5.4 hours vs. 2.9 hours, p = 0.07). EnsoETM recipients required fewer shiver interventions than controls (14 vs. 30, p = 0.02). EnsoETM recipients incurred fewer daily costs than controls ($124.27 vs. $232.76, p = 0.001). The EnsoETM achieved and maintained NT in SAH and ICH patients and was associated with less shivering and lower pharmaceutical costs than other TMDs. Further studies in larger populations are needed to determine the EnsoETM’s efficacy in comparison to other TMDs.