Anaesthesia Department, Langford Veterinary Referral Hospital, University of Bristol, Langford, UK.
Anaesthesia Department, Langford Veterinary Referral Hospital, University of Bristol, Langford, UK.
Vet Anaesth Analg. 2021 Jul;48(4):532-536. doi: 10.1016/j.vaa.2021.01.008. Epub 2021 Apr 1.
To measure the dead space of various syringe volumes and brands and a range of needles gauges commonly used in clinical practice, and to compare the results to the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) standard 7886-1:2018.
Prospective observational study.
Syringes of five brands and seven volumes: 1, 2.5, 5, 10, 20, 30, and 60 mL, 10 of each, 10 1 mL low dead space syringes and 10 23, 21 and 18 gauge needles were analysed. Syringe dead space was estimated by weighing each syringe, drawing up and expelling its rated volume of water for injection and re-weighing the syringe. The difference in mass between the two measurements was calculated and converted to a volume based on the density of water. The dead space of the needles was estimated using a similar technique: each needle was attached to a 1 mL syringe of known dead space. A Mettler electronic balance was used for the measurements. Mean dead space was calculated for each syringe volume and needle gauge. Data were compared to the ISO standard.
Syringe dead space for 1 and 2.5 mL was less than 0.07 mL. For 5 mL syringes four of five brands, and for 10 mL syringes one of five brands failed to comply with the ISO; the dead space was greater than 0.075 and 0.1 mL, respectively. For the 20, 30, 60 mL syringes the dead space was less than 0.2 mL. Needle dead space was 0.05 mL for 23 and 21 gauge, and 0.07 mL for 18 gauge, similar in order of magnitude to syringe dead space.
The dead space of syringes differs between brands, and some do not meet the ISO standard. When calculating the amount of drug lost due to dead space, both that of the syringe and needle used should be considered.
测量各种注射器体积和品牌以及临床实践中常用的一系列针头规格的死腔，并将结果与国际标准化组织（ISO）标准 ISO 7886-1:2018 进行比较。
前瞻性观察研究。
分析了五个品牌和七种体积的注射器：1、2.5、5、10、20、30 和 60 mL，每种各 10 个，10 个 1 mL 低死腔注射器和 10 个 23、21 和 18 号针头。通过称重每个注射器、抽取和排出其规定体积的注射用水以及重新称重注射器来估计注射器的死腔。两次测量之间的质量差计算并根据水的密度转换为体积。使用类似的技术估计针头的死腔：将每个针头连接到已知死腔的 1 mL 注射器上。使用梅特勒电子天平进行测量。为每个注射器体积和针头规格计算平均死腔。将数据与 ISO 标准进行比较。
1 和 2.5 mL 注射器的死腔小于 0.07 mL。对于 5 mL 注射器，五个品牌中有四个，对于 10 mL 注射器，五个品牌中有一个不符合 ISO；死腔分别大于 0.075 和 0.1 mL。对于 20、30 和 60 mL 注射器，死腔小于 0.2 mL。23 和 21 号针头的死腔为 0.05 mL，18 号针头的死腔为 0.07 mL，与注射器死腔的数量级相似。
注射器的死腔在品牌之间存在差异，有些不符合 ISO 标准。在计算由于死腔而损失的药物量时，应同时考虑注射器和使用的针头的死腔。
