Wash-in and wash-out of sevoflurane in a test-lung model: A comparison between Aisys and FLOW-i

Jakobsson, Petter; Lindgren, Madleine; Jakobsson, Jan

doi:10.12688/f1000research.11255.2

Cited by 12 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Data showed that the time to reach the target concentration did not depend on the FGF in the circle breathing system. At first instance, this observation seems unusual because flow-dependent wash-in times have been described for different anaesthetic machines by prior researchers and this further corresponds to the perception of anaesthetists in clinical practice [5,6]. However, it is known that the Aisys CS™ anaesthesia ventilator with the VA-specific Aladin™ cassette controls the VA output independent of the manually adjusted FGF.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 80%

See 1 more Smart Citation

In vitro performance evaluation of AnaConDaTM-100 and AnaConDaTM-50 compared to a circle breathing system for control and consumption of volatile anaesthetics

Bellgardt

Drees

Vinnikov

et al. 2020

J Clin Monit Comput

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To identify the better volatile anaesthetic delivery system in an intensive care setting, we compared the circle breathing system and two models of reflection systems (AnaConDa™ with a dead space of 100 ml (ACD-100) or 50 ml (ACD-50)). These systems were analysed for the parameters like wash-in, consumption, and wash-out of isoflurane and sevoflurane utilising a test lung model. The test lung was connected to a respirator (circle breathing system: Aisys CS™; ACD-100/50: Puriton Bennett 840). Set parameters were volume-controlled mode, tidal volume-500 ml, respiratory rate-10/min, inspiration time-2 sec, PEEP-5 mbar, and oxygen-21%. Wash-in, consumption, and wash-out were investigated at fresh gas flows of 0.5, 1.0, 2.5, and 5.0 l/min. Anaesthetic target concentrations were 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, and 2.5%. Wash-in was slower in ACD-100/-50 compared to the circle breathing system, except for fresh gas flows of 0.5 and 1.0 l/min. The consumption of isoflurane and sevoflurane in ACD-100 and ACD-50 corresponded to the fresh gas flow of 0.5-1.0 l/min in the circle breathing system. Consumption with ACD-50 was higher in comparison to ACD-100, especially at gas concentrations > 1.5%. Wash-out was quicker in ACD-100/-50 than in the circle breathing system at a fresh gas flow of 0.5 l/min, however, it was longer at all the other flow rates. Wash-out was comparable in ACD-100 and ACD-50. Wash-in and wash-out were generally quicker with the circle breathing system than in ACD-100/-50. However, consumption at 0.5 minimum alveolar concentration was comparable at flows of 0.5 and 1.0 l/min.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 80%

“…An anaesthesia gas scavenging system is connected (5). The circle breathing system is connected via a heat moisture exchanger (6) to the test lung box with two bag-valve units (BV) with a volume of 2 l each. b ACD.…”

Section: Experimental Settingmentioning

confidence: 99%

In vitro performance evaluation of AnaConDaTM-100 and AnaConDaTM-50 compared to a circle breathing system for control and consumption of volatile anaesthetics

Bellgardt

Drees

Vinnikov

et al. 2020

J Clin Monit Comput

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…and a F V S of 8%. They found that the F A S reached 1 MAC (2.1%) at 547 ± 83 and 38 ± 6 sec, respectively [5]. Leijonhufvud [12].…”

Section: Jakobsson Et Al Reported a Wash-in In A Test-lung Model Witmentioning

confidence: 98%

1-1-8 one-step sevoflurane wash-in scheme for low-flow anesthesia: simple, rapid, and predictable induction

Tribuddharat

Sathitkarnmanee

Vattanasiriporn

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Sevoflurane is suitable for low-flow anesthesia (LFA). LFA needs a wash-in phase. The reported sevoflurane wash-in schemes lack simplicity, target coverage, and applicability. We proposed a one-step 1-1-8 wash-in scheme for sevoflurane LFA to be used with both N 2 O and Air. The objective of our study was to identify time for achieving each level of alveolar concentration of sevoflurane (F A S) from 1% to 3.5% in both contexts.Methods We recruited 199 adults requiring general anesthesia with endotracheal intubation and controlled ventilation—102 in group N 2 O and 97 in group Air. After induction and intubation, a wash-in was started using a fresh gas flow of O 2 :N 2 O or O 2 :Air at 1:1 L·min -1 plus sevoflurane 8%. The ventilation was controlled to maintain end-tidal CO 2 of 30-35 mmHg.Results The rising patterns of F A S and inspired concentration of sevoflurane (F I S) are similar, running parallel between the groups. The F A S/F I S ratio increased from 0.46 to 0.72 within 260 sec in group N 2 O and from 0.42 to 0.69 within 286 sec in group Air. The respective time to achieve an F A S of 1%, 1.5%, 2%, 2.5%, 3%, and 3.5% was 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 3.5, and 4.5 min in group N 2 O and 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, and 5 min in group Air. The heart rate and blood pressure of both groups significantly increased initially then gradually decreased as F A S increased.Conclusions The 1-1-8 wash-in scheme for sevoflurane LFA has many advantages, including simplicity, coverage, swiftness, safety, economy, and that it can be used with both N 2 O and Air. A respective F A S of 1%, 1.5%, 2%, 2.5%, 3%, and 3.5% when used with N 2 O and Air can be expected at 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 3.5, and 4.5 min and 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, and 5 min. This scheme may be applied for sevoflurane LFA in situations where an anesthetic gas analyzer is unavailable.

show abstract

“…Thus, the target of F A S during anesthesia in daily practice varies between 1 to 3.5%, depending on the adjuvant drugs used. A good wash-in scheme should be able to precisely and promptly achieve every target of F A S. There are a few reports regarding wash-in schemes of sevoflurane LFA but those studies achieved only one or two targets of F A S [3][4][5]. In highly developed healthcare areas-where an anesthetic gas monitor is placed in every operating theatre-a wash-in scheme would be unnecessary.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

1-1-8 one-step sevoflurane wash-in scheme for low-flow anesthesia: simple, rapid, and predictable induction

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Sevoflurane is suitable for low-flow anesthesia (LFA). LFA needs a wash-in phase. The reported sevoflurane wash-in schemes lack simplicity, target coverage, and applicability. We proposed a one-step 1-1-8 washin scheme for sevoflurane LFA to be used with both N 2 O and Air. The objective of our study was to identify time for achieving each level of alveolar concentration of sevoflurane (F A S) from 1 to 3.5% in both contexts. Methods: We recruited 199 adults requiring general anesthesia with endotracheal intubation and controlled ventilation-102 in group N 2 O and 97 in group Air. After induction and intubation, a wash-in was started using a fresh gas flow of O 2 :N 2 O or O 2 :Air at 1:1 L•min − 1 plus sevoflurane 8%. The ventilation was controlled to maintain end-tidal CO 2 of 30-35 mmHg. Results: The rising patterns of F A S and inspired concentration of sevoflurane (F I S) are similar, running parallel between the groups. The F A S/F I S ratio increased from 0.46 to 0.72 within 260 s in group N 2 O and from 0.42 to 0.69 within 286 s in group Air. The respective time to achieve an F A S of 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, and 3.5% was 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 3.5, and 4.5 min in group N 2 O and 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, and 5 min in group Air. The heart rate and blood pressure of both groups significantly increased initially then gradually decreased as F A S increased. Conclusions: The 1-1-8 wash-in scheme for sevoflurane LFA has many advantages, including simplicity, coverage, swiftness, safety, economy, and that it can be used with both N 2 O and Air.

show abstract

Wash-in and wash-out of sevoflurane in a test-lung model: A comparison between Aisys and FLOW-i

Cited by 12 publications

References 10 publications

In vitro performance evaluation of AnaConDaTM-100 and AnaConDaTM-50 compared to a circle breathing system for control and consumption of volatile anaesthetics

In vitro performance evaluation of AnaConDaTM-100 and AnaConDaTM-50 compared to a circle breathing system for control and consumption of volatile anaesthetics

1-1-8 one-step sevoflurane wash-in scheme for low-flow anesthesia: simple, rapid, and predictable induction

1-1-8 one-step sevoflurane wash-in scheme for low-flow anesthesia: simple, rapid, and predictable induction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About