Ali K, Brock-Utne JG. Performance evaluation of a draw-over vaporizer with a nonbreathing circuit during simulated adverse conditions.
J Clin Anesth 1992;
4:468-71. [PMID:
1457114 DOI:
10.1016/0952-8180(92)90220-u]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/27/2022]
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVE
Performance evaluation of a draw-over vaporizer with a nonrebreathing circuit during simulated adverse conditions.
DESIGN
Open laboratory study.
SETTING
University hospital laboratory.
MATERIALS AND INTERVENTIONS
The output (%) of a temperature-compensated Ohmeda Cyprane PAC (portable anesthesia complete) draw-over vaporizer (Ohmeda, Madison, WI) using isoflurane attached to a nonrebreathing circuit was tested in the laboratory during manual ventilation under normal and simulated adverse conditions. The adverse conditions tested were high ambient temperature and static and dynamic positional variation.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS
The results show that the output bias of the PAC vaporizer has a generally consistent profile as tested, except when placed in the 180 degrees full-inversion or 90 degrees anterior-tilt position. We also conducted trials with the Penlon ventilator (Ohmeda, Abingdon, Oxford, U.K.) attached to the circuit at each of its input ports. Ventilation at one input port produced dangerously high airway pressures (within the circuit), thus supporting the manufacturer's recommendation against the use of this port for positive-pressure ventilation. Using the recommended port, the test lung was seen to inflate and deflate appropriately, but, surprisingly, no vapor output was detected by the agent monitor at any vaporizer setting when using the ventilator at the recommended port.
CONCLUSION
Anesthetists should be aware of the pitfalls and possible problems that may be associated with this type of anesthetic delivery system.
Collapse