  Gaseous microemboli (GME) introduced during cardiac surgery are considered as
a potential source of morbidity, which has driven the development of the first
bubble counters. Two new generation bubble counters claim correct sizing and
counting of GME. This in-vitro study aims to validate the accuracy of two
bubble counters using monodisperse bubbles in a highly controlled setting at
low GME concentrations. Monodisperse GME with a radius of 43 {\mu}m were
produced in a microfluidic chip. Directly after their formation, they were
injected one-by-one into the BCC200 and the EDAC sensors. GME size and count
were optically verified using high-speed imaging. During best-case scenarios or
low GME concentrations of GME with a size of 43 {\mu}m in radius in an in-vitro
setup, the BCC200 overestimates GME size by a factor of 2 to 3 while the EDAC
underestimates the average GME size by at least a factor of two. The BCC200
overestimates the GME concentration by approximately 20% while the EDAC
overestimates the concentration by nearly one order of magnitude. Nevertheless,
the calculated total GME volume is only over-predicted by a factor 2 since the
EDAC underestimates the actual GME size. For the BCC200, the total GME volume
was over-predicted by 25 times due to the over-estimation of GME size. The
measured errors in the absolute sizing/counting of GME do not imply that all
results obtained using the bubble counters are insignificant or invalid. A
relative change in bubble size or bubble concentration can accurately be
measured. However, care must be taken in the interpretation of the results and
their absolute values. Moreover, the devices cannot be used interchangeably
when reporting GME activity. Nevertheless, both devices can be used to study
the relative air removal characteristics of CPB components or for the
quantitative monitoring of GME production during CPB interventions.
