Literature DB >> 23525901

Determination of breath isoprene allows the identification of the expiratory fraction of the propofol breath signal during real-time propofol breath monitoring.

Cyrill Hornuss1, Michael E Dolch, Silke Janitza, Kimberly Souza, Siegfried Praun, Christian C Apfel, Gustav Schelling.   

Abstract

Real-time measurement of propofol in the breath may be used for routine clinical monitoring. However, this requires unequivocal identification of the expiratory phase of the respiratory propofol signal as only expiratory propofol reflects propofol blood concentrations. Determination of CO2 breath concentrations is the current gold standard for the identification of expiratory gas but usually requires additional equipment. Human breath also contains isoprene, a volatile organic compound with low inspiratory breath concentration and an expiratory concentration plateau. We investigated whether breath isoprene could be used similarly to CO2 to identify the expiratory fraction of the propofol breath signal. We investigated real-time breath data obtained from 40 study subjects during routine anesthesia. Propofol, isoprene, and CO2 breath concentrations were determined by a combined ion molecule reaction/electron impact mass spectrometry system. The expiratory propofol signal was identified according to breath CO2 and isoprene concentrations and presented as median of intervals of 30 s duration. Bland-Altman analysis was applied to detect differences (bias) in the expiratory propofol signal extracted by the two identification methods. We investigated propofol signals in a total of 3,590 observation intervals of 30 s duration in the 40 study subjects. In 51.4 % of the intervals (1,844/3,590) both methods extracted the same results for expiratory propofol signal. Overall bias between the two data extraction methods was -0.12 ppb. The lower and the upper limits of the 95 % CI were -0.69 and 0.45 ppb. Determination of isoprene breath concentrations allows the identification of the expiratory propofol signal during real-time breath monitoring.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23525901     DOI: 10.1007/s10877-013-9452-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput        ISSN: 1387-1307            Impact factor:   2.502


  21 in total

Review 1.  Measuring agreement in method comparison studies.

Authors:  J M Bland; D G Altman
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  1999-06       Impact factor: 3.021

2.  Blood gas partition coefficient and pulmonary extraction ratio for propofol in goats and pigs.

Authors:  M Grossherr; A Hengstenberg; L Dibbelt; B-W Igl; R Noel; A v d Knesebeck; P Schmucker; H Gehring
Journal:  Xenobiotica       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 1.908

3.  Phase-resolved real-time breath analysis during exercise by means of smart processing of PTR-MS data.

Authors:  Henny Schwoebel; Roland Schubert; Martin Sklorz; Sabine Kischkel; Ralf Zimmermann; Jochen K Schubert; Wolfram Miekisch
Journal:  Anal Bioanal Chem       Date:  2011-06-26       Impact factor: 4.142

4.  Impact of sampling procedures on the results of breath analysis.

Authors:  Wolfram Miekisch; Sabine Kischkel; Annika Sawacki; Tina Liebau; Maren Mieth; Jochen K Schubert
Journal:  J Breath Res       Date:  2008-06-09       Impact factor: 3.262

5.  Molecular breath-gas analysis by online mass spectrometry in mechanically ventilated patients: a new software-based method of CO(2)-controlled alveolar gas monitoring.

Authors:  M E Dolch; L Frey; C Hornuss; M Schmoelz; S Praun; J Villinger; G Schelling
Journal:  J Breath Res       Date:  2008-09-08       Impact factor: 3.262

6.  Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement.

Authors:  J M Bland; D G Altman
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1986-02-08       Impact factor: 79.321

7.  Comparing methods of measurement: why plotting difference against standard method is misleading.

Authors:  J M Bland; D G Altman
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1995-10-21       Impact factor: 79.321

8.  Determination of serum propofol concentrations by breath analysis using ion mobility spectrometry.

Authors:  T Perl; E Carstens; A Hirn; M Quintel; W Vautz; J Nolte; M Jünger
Journal:  Br J Anaesth       Date:  2009-11-03       Impact factor: 9.166

9.  Breath isoprene concentrations in persons undergoing general anesthesia and in healthy volunteers.

Authors:  Cyrill Hornuss; Armin Zagler; Michael E Dolch; Dirk Wiepcke; Siegfried Praun; Anne-Laure Boulesteix; Florian Weis; Christian C Apfel; Gustav Schelling
Journal:  J Breath Res       Date:  2012-11-15       Impact factor: 3.262

10.  Assessment of propofol concentrations in human breath and blood by means of HS-SPME-GC-MS.

Authors:  Wolfram Miekisch; Patricia Fuchs; Svend Kamysek; Christine Neumann; Jochen K Schubert
Journal:  Clin Chim Acta       Date:  2008-05-01       Impact factor: 3.786

View more
  2 in total

1.  Propofol Breath Monitoring as a Potential Tool to Improve the Prediction of Intraoperative Plasma Concentrations.

Authors:  Pieter Colin; Douglas J Eleveld; Johannes P van den Berg; Hugo E M Vereecke; Michel M R F Struys; Gustav Schelling; Christian C Apfel; Cyrill Hornuss
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  2016-07       Impact factor: 6.447

2.  Online exhaled propofol monitoring in normal-weight and obese surgical patients.

Authors:  Martin R Braathen; Ivan Rimstad; Terje Dybvik; Ståle Nygård; Johan Raeder
Journal:  Acta Anaesthesiol Scand       Date:  2022-02-19       Impact factor: 2.274

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.