Literature DB >> 25953416

In vitro performance of prefilled CO₂ absorbers with the Aisys®.

Jan F A Hendrickx1, Simon P A J De Ridder2, Alexander Dehouwer2, Rik Carette2, Sofie De Cooman3, Andre M De Wolf4.   

Abstract

Low flow anesthesia increases the use of CO2 absorbents, but independent data that compare canister life of the newest CO2 absorbents are scarce. Seven different pre-packed CO2 canisters were tested in vitro: Amsorb Plus, Spherasorb, LoFloSorb, Medisorb, Medisorb EF, LithoLyme, and SpiraLith. CO2 (160 mL min(-1)) flowed into the tip of a 2 L breathing bag that was ventilated with a tidal volume of 500 mL, a respiratory rate of 10/min, and an I:E ratio of 1:1 using the controlled mechanical ventilation mode of the Aisys (®) (GE, Madison, WI, USA). In part I, canister life of each brand (all of the same lot) was tested with 12 different fresh gas flows (FGF) ranging from 0.25 to 4 L min(-1). In part II, canister life of six canisters each of two different lots of each brand were tested with a 350 mL min(-1) FGF. Canister life is presented as "FCU", fractional canister usage, the fraction of a canister used per hour, and is defined for the inspired CO2 concentration (FICO2) that denotes exhaustion. In part III, canister life per 100 g fresh granule content was calculated. FCU decreased linearly with increasing FGF. The relative position of the FCU-FGF curves of the different brands depends on the FICO2 threshold because the exhaustion rate (the rate of rise once FICO2 starts to increase) differs among the brands. Intra-lot variability was 18 % or less. The different prepacks can be ranked according their efficiency (least to most efficient) as follows: Amsorb Plus = Medisorb EF < LoFloSorb < Medisorb = Spherasorb = LithoLyme < SpiraLith (all for an FICO2 threshold = 0.5 %). Canister life per 100 g fresh granule content is almost twice as long when LiOH is used as the primary absorbent. The most important factors that determine canister life of prepacks in a circle breathing system are the chemical composition of the canister, the absolute amount of absorbent present in the canister, and the FICO2 replacement threshold. The use of the fractional canister usage allows cost comparisons among different prepacks. Results should not be extrapolated to prepacks that fit onto other anesthesia machines.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Anesthesia machine; CO2 absorbers; Low flow anesthesia

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25953416     DOI: 10.1007/s10877-015-9699-2

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


  8 in total

1.  Continuous measurement of gas uptake and elimination in anesthetized patients using an extractable marker gas.

Authors:  Gavin J B Robinson; Philip J Peyton; David Terry; Shiva Malekzadeh; Bruce Thompson
Journal:  J Appl Physiol (1985)       Date:  2004-09

2.  Continuous measurement of multiple inert and respiratory gas exchange in an anaesthetic breathing system by continuous indirect calorimetry.

Authors:  Christopher Stuart-Andrews; Philip Peyton; Craig Humphries; Gavin Robinson; Brian Lithgow
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2009-01-24       Impact factor: 2.502

3.  A comparison of the efficiency of three anesthesia circle systems.

Authors:  M Harper; E I Eger
Journal:  Anesth Analg       Date:  1976 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 5.108

4.  [The resorption of carbon dioxide from the pneumoperitoneum in laparoscopic cholecystectomy].

Authors:  M Blobner; A R Felber; S Gögler; H Feussner; E M Weigl; G Jelen; S Jelen-Esselborn
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  1993-05       Impact factor: 1.041

5.  The carbon dioxide absorption capacity of Amsorb is half that of soda lime.

Authors:  H Higuchi; Y Adachi; S Arimura; M Kanno; T Satoh
Journal:  Anesth Analg       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 5.108

6.  Carbon dioxide absorption and gas exchange during pelvic laparoscopy.

Authors:  P L Tan; T L Lee; W A Tweed
Journal:  Can J Anaesth       Date:  1992-09       Impact factor: 5.063

7.  Comparative carbon dioxide output through injured and noninjured peritoneum during laparoscopic procedures.

Authors:  T Kazama; K Ikeda; Y Sanjo
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  1998-04       Impact factor: 2.502

8.  Effects of temperature gradient reduction in three different carbon dioxide absorbents.

Authors:  Go Hirabayashi; Hiroyuki Uchino; Takao Nakajima; Yukihiko Ogihara; Nagao Ishii
Journal:  Eur J Anaesthesiol       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 4.330

  8 in total
  6 in total

Review 1.  Journal of clinical monitoring and computing 2016 end of year summary: anesthesia.

Authors:  Jan F A Hendrickx; Andre M De Wolf
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2017-01-07       Impact factor: 2.502

2.  Carbon dioxide absorbents: does it matter which one you use?

Authors:  Jeffrey M Feldman
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2018-01-10       Impact factor: 2.502

3.  In vitro performance of prefilled CO2 absorbers with the Zeus®.

Authors:  Mohab Omer; Jan F A Hendrickx; Simon De Ridder; Alexander De Houwer; Rik Carette; Sofie De Cooman; Andre M De Wolf
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2017-12-13       Impact factor: 2.502

4.  In vitro efficiency of 16 different Ca(OH)2 based CO2 absorbent brands.

Authors:  Yan Jiang; Mohammed K Bashraheel; Hongliang Liu; Jan Poelaert; Marc Van de Velde; Geert Vandenbroucke; Rik Carette; Andre M De Wolf; Jan F A Hendrickx
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2019-01-04       Impact factor: 2.502

5.  Arterial to end-tidal CO2 gradients during isocapnic hyperventilation.

Authors:  Jennifer Jouwena; Sarah A Eerlings; Andre M De Wolf; Lieve Van Hoovels; Arne Neyrinck; Marc Van de Velde; Jan F A Hendrickx
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2022-07-27       Impact factor: 1.977

6.  Memsorb™, a novel CO2 removal device part I: in vitro performance with the Zeus IE®.

Authors:  Mohammed K Bashraheel; Sarah A Eerlings; Andre M De Wolf; Arne Neyrinck; Marc Van de Velde; Geert Vandenbroucke; Rik Carette; Jeffrey Feldman; Jan F A Hendrickx
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2022-01-28       Impact factor: 1.977

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.