Choi Yoon Ji, Min Sam Hong, Park Jeong Jun, Cho Jang Eun, Yoon Seung Zhoo, Yoon Suk Min
Department of Anesthesia and Pain Medicine, Pusan National University Yangsan Hospital, Yangsan, Gyeongsangnam-do TnTn Hospital Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, College of Medicine, Korea University, Seoul, Korea.
Medicine (Baltimore). 2017 Jun;96(25):e7239. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000007239.
For patients undergoing general anesthesia, adequate warming and humidification of the inspired gases is very important. The aim of this study was to evaluate the differences in the heat and moisture content of the inspired gases with low-flow anesthesia using 4 different anesthesia machines.
The patients were divided into 11 groups according to the anesthesia machine used (Ohmeda, Excel; Avance; Dräger, Cato; and Primus) and the fresh gas flow (FGF) rate (0.5, 1, and 4 L/min). The temperature and absolute humidity of the inspired gas in the inspiratory limbs were measured at 5, 10, 15, 30, 45, 60, 75, 90, 105, and 120 minutes in 9 patients scheduled for total thyroidectomy or cervical spine operation in each group.
The anesthesia machines of Excel, Avance, Cato, and Primus did not show statistically significant changes in the inspired gas temperatures over time within each group with various FGFs. They, however, showed statistically significant changes in the absolute humidity of the inspired gas over time within each group with low FGF anesthesia (P < .05). The anesthesia machines of Cato and Primus showed statistically significant changes in the absolute humidity of the inspired gas over time within each group with an FGF of 4 L/min (P < .05). However, even with low-flow anesthesia, the temperatures and absolute humidities of the inspired gas for all anesthesia machines were lower than the recommended values.
There were statistical differences in the provision of humidity among different anesthesia workstations. The Cato and Primus workstations were superior to Excel and Avance. However, even these were unsatisfactory in humans. Therefore, additional devices that provide inspired gases with adequate heat and humidity are needed for those undergoing general anesthetic procedures.
对于接受全身麻醉的患者，对吸入气体进行充分的加热和加湿非常重要。本研究的目的是评估使用4种不同麻醉机进行低流量麻醉时吸入气体的热量和水分含量差异。
根据所使用的麻醉机（Ohmeda，Excel；Avance；Dräger，Cato；和Primus）以及新鲜气体流量（FGF）速率（0.5、1和4 L/min）将患者分为11组。在每组9例计划行全甲状腺切除术或颈椎手术的患者中，于吸气支的吸入气体温度和绝对湿度在5、10、15、30、45、60、75、90、105和120分钟时进行测量。
Excel、Avance、Cato和Primus麻醉机在不同FGF条件下，每组内吸入气体温度随时间未显示出统计学上的显著变化。然而，在低FGF麻醉时，每组内吸入气体的绝对湿度随时间显示出统计学上的显著变化（P < 0.05）。Cato和Primus麻醉机在FGF为4 L/min时，每组内吸入气体的绝对湿度随时间显示出统计学上的显著变化（P < 0.05）。然而，即使是低流量麻醉，所有麻醉机的吸入气体温度和绝对湿度均低于推荐值。
不同麻醉工作站在提供湿度方面存在统计学差异。Cato和Primus工作站优于Excel和Avance。然而，即使是这些工作站在人体中也不能令人满意。因此，对于接受全身麻醉手术的患者，需要额外的设备为吸入气体提供足够的热量和湿度。
