| Literature DB >> 25056252 |
Sofie De Cooman, Jan F A Hendrickx1, Philip John Peyton, Jean-Luc Demeere, Andre M De Wolf.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Earlier software versions of the Zeus® (Lübeck, Dräger, Germany) failed to provide true closed circuit anesthesia (CCA) conditions. We examined whether the latest software (SW 4.03 MK 04672-00) achieves this goal.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25056252 PMCID: PMC4118792 DOI: 10.1186/1756-0500-7-469
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Res Notes ISSN: 1756-0500
Figure 1Carrier gas characteristics. Total fresh gas flow remained below 200 mL/min (a), but the composition of the fresh gas changed over time: air fresh gas flow (b) decreased, while O2 fresh gas flow (c) increased. The inspired O2 concentration progressively decreased towards the target of 50% (d). Thick lines = median, thin lines = quartiles.
Overview of intermittent high fresh gas episodes and ensuing sevoflurane spikes
| | | | | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FAsevo overshoot + | Autoflush | 2 | 6.4 | 21 | 36 | 3.86 | part of washin after overshoot, | N/A | | 1 | ||
| CO2 sampling issue | Autoflush | 7 | 2.1 | 100 | 31 | 1.10 | followed by sampling issue | N/A | | 1 | ||
| During calibration | Calibration | 27 | 2.0 | 33 | 19 | 0.65 | | no change | | N/A | | 2 |
| Pressure on abdomen | Bag filling | 14 | 14.0 | 38 | 7 | 1.64 | 7 | 84-198 | 7 | 0.15-0.39* | 3-7 | 5 |
| | Bag filling | 20 | 13.8 | 100 | 7 | 1.61 | 8 | 79-165 | 7 | 0.14-0.32 * | 3-6 | 4 |
| | Bag filling | 25 | 13.3 | 99 | 6 | 1.33 | 6 | 58-131 | 11 | 0.16-0.40* | 3-7 | 5 |
| | Bag filling | 25 | 13.2 | 21 | 6 | 1.32 | 4 | 72-172 | 8 | 0.15-0.38* | 3-7 | 2 |
| | Bag filling | 33 | 16.6 | 100 | 6 | 1.66 | 4 | 89 | 6 | 0.14 | 3 | 3 |
| | Bag filling | 34 | 16.9 | 98 | 6 | 1.69 | 4 | 100-300 | 6 | 0.16-0.49* | 3-9 | 3 |
| FIO2 < 50% | Autoflush | 45 | 1.9 | 100 | 27 | 0.87 | 5 | 6 | 209 | 0.08 | 2 | 6 |
| | Autoflush | 51 | 2.3 | 100 | 26 | 0.98 | 7 | 21 | 20 | 0.08 | 1 | 4 |
| | Autoflush | 52 | 1.9 | 100 | 33 | 1.07 | 5 | 7 | 311 | 0.19 | 3 | 7 |
| | Autoflush | 55 | 1.7 | 100 | 37 | 1.04 | 2 | 4 | 254 | 0.16 | 3 | 1 |
| Pressure on abdomen + FIO2 < 50% | Bag filling, then autoflush | 36 | 3.1 | 60 | 32 | 1.68 | 4 | 13 | 60 | 0.15 | 3 | 3 |
FAsevo = end-expired sevoflurane %; FGF = fresh gas flow; Av = average; Vsevo = sevoflurane usage; Pt = patient; N/A = not applicable.
*Sevoflurane injection rate at least temporarily > 100 mL/h, thus a range is given. See text for details.
Figure 2Inspired and end-expired sevoflurane concentrations during wash-in (a) and maintenance (b) (upper and lower line, thick line = mean, thin lines = standard deviation), and corresponding liquid sevoflurane injection rate (mL/h) (c and d, respectively). During the first 5 minutes (c), the liquid sevoflurane injection rate (mL/h) could not be accurately measured between 15 ± 2 and 46 ± 6 sec because Vinjsevo was > 100 mL/h (see text for details). The sevoflurane injection rates match those of previously published sevoflurane uptake data derived from several different sources (d): closed circuit liquid injection (yellow line = Lockwood data, green line = Hendrickx data) [3,4], indirect calorimetry (gas balances within the circuit = red line) [5,6], and the reverse Fick method (pink line) [5,6]. Thick lines = median, thin lines = quartiles.