Transcutaneous PTCCO measurement in combination with arterial blood gas analysis provides superior accuracy and reliability in ICU patients.

Hyper or hypoventilation may have serious clinical consequences in critically ill patients and should be generally avoided, especially in neurosurgical patients. Therefore, monitoring of carbon dioxide partial pressure by intermittent arterial blood gas analysis (PaCO) has become standard in intensive care units (ICUs). However, several additional methods are available to determine PCO including end-tidal (PETCO) and transcutaneous (PTCCO) measurements. The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy and reliability of different methods to determine PCO in mechanically ventilated patients on ICU. After approval of the local ethics committee PCO was determined in n = 32 ICU consecutive patients requiring mechanical ventilation: (1) arterial PaCO blood gas analysis with Radiometer ABL 625 (ABL; gold standard), (2) arterial PaCO analysis with Immediate Response Mobile Analyzer (IRMA), (3) end-tidal PETCO by a Propaq 106 EL monitor and (4) transcutaneous PTCCO determination by a Tina TCM4. Bland-Altman method was used for statistical analysis; p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Statistical analysis revealed good correlation between PaCO by IRMA and ABL (R = 0.766; p < 0.01) as well as between PTCCO and ABL (R = 0.619; p < 0.01), whereas correlation between PETCO and ABL was weaker (R = 0.405; p < 0.01). Bland-Altman analysis revealed a bias and precision of 2.0 ± 3.7 mmHg for the IRMA, 2.2 ± 5.7 mmHg for transcutaneous, and -5.5 ± 5.6 mmHg for end-tidal measurement. Arterial CO partial pressure by IRMA (PaCO) and PTCCO provided greater accuracy compared to the reference measurement (ABL) than the end-tidal CO measurements in critically ill in mechanically ventilated patients patients.