• Users Online: 164
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Year : 2022  |  Volume : 12  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 131-136

Anesthetic gas consumption with target-controlled administration versus a semi-closed circle system with automatic end-tidal concentration control in an artificial lung model


1 Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, St. Josef Hospital, Katholisches Klinikum Bochum, University Hospital, Ruhr-University of Bochum, Bochum, Germany
2 Paediatric Intensive Care Unit – Evelina London Children’s Healthcare, Guy’s and St. Thomas, NHS, London, UK
3 Department of Anesthesiology, Intensive Care Medicine and Pain Medicine, Saarland University Medical Centre, University of Saarland, Homburg/Saar, Germany

Correspondence Address:
Martin Bellgardt
Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, St. Josef Hospital, Katholisches Klinikum Bochum, University Hospital, Ruhr-University of Bochum, Bochum
Germany
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/2045-9912.337991

Rights and Permissions

The use of volatile anesthetics as sedatives in the intensive care unit is relevant to the patient’s outcome. We compared anesthetic gas consumption of the conventional semi-closed Aisys CSTM with the MIRUSTM system, which is the first anesthetic gas reflector system that can administer desflurane in addition to isoflurane and sevoflurane. We connected an artificial lung model to either a MIRUSTM system and a Puritan BennettTM 840 ventilator or an Aisys CSTM anesthesia machine. We found that consumption of 0.5% isoflurane, which corresponds to the target concentration 0.5 MAC, was averaged to 2 mL/h in the MIRUSTM system, which is identical to the Aisys CSTM at a fresh gas flow (FGF) of 1.0 L/min. MIRUSTM consumption of 1% sevoflurane was averaged to 10 mL/h, which corresponds to 8.4 mL/h at FGF 2.5 L/min. The MIRUSTM system consumed 3% or 4% desflurane at an average of 13.0 mL/h or 21.3 mL/h, which is between the consumption at 1.0 L/min and 2.5 L/min FGF. Thus, the MIRUSTM system can effectively deliver volatile anesthetics in clinically relevant concentrations in a similar rate as a conventional circular breathing system at FGFs between 1.0 L/min and 2.5 L/min.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed673    
    Printed12    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded58    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal