Hayes J K, Westenskow D R, Jordan W S
Anesthesiology. 1983 Nov;59(5):435-9. doi: 10.1097/00000542-198311000-00013.
The Engstrom anesthetic gas analyzer (EMMA) was evaluated to determine the reproducibility, response time, gas interference, water vapor dependence, and sensitivity. The analyzer also was evaluated clinically in 20 children undergoing orthopedic surgery. Difference between the analyzer output and anesthetic gas standard (reproducibility) ranged from 0.013 +/- 0.008 vol % to 0.018 +/- 0.018 vol %. Response times decreased from 710 ms at 5 l X min-1 to 149 ms at 30 l X min-1. Nitrous oxide caused an offset of +0.11 +/- 0.007 vol %. Water vapor caused positive offsets of 0.25 +/- 0.044 vol %, 0.51 +/- 0.027 vol %, and 0.80 +/- 0.037 vol % at 25 degrees C, 30 degrees C, and 34 degrees C, respectively. The analyzer reproducibly measured dry gas concentrations, but compensation had to be made for water vapor when measuring wet gases. The analyzer's usefulness for end-tidal monitoring was questioned because of its slow response time and its sensitivity to water vapor.
对恩斯特龙麻醉气体分析仪(EMMA)进行了评估,以确定其重现性、响应时间、气体干扰、对水蒸气的依赖性和灵敏度。还对20名接受骨科手术的儿童进行了该分析仪的临床评估。分析仪输出与麻醉气体标准之间的差异(重现性)范围为0.013±0.008体积%至0.018±0.018体积%。响应时间从5升/分钟时的710毫秒降至30升/分钟时的149毫秒。氧化亚氮导致偏移量为+0.11±0.007体积%。在25℃、30℃和34℃时,水蒸气分别导致正偏移量为0.25±0.044体积%、0.51±0.027体积%和0.80±0.037体积%。该分析仪可重现地测量干气浓度,但在测量湿气时必须对水蒸气进行补偿。由于其响应时间较慢且对水蒸气敏感,该分析仪用于呼气末监测的实用性受到质疑。