Holton J, Webb A R
Department of Microbiology, University College London Medical School, UK.
Intensive Care Med. 1994;20(3):233-7. doi: 10.1007/BF01704708.
to determine and compare the microbial retention efficiency of 3 types of heat and moisture exchange (HME) filters.
randomised prospective study.
Intensive Care Unit at the Middlesex Hospital and the microbiology laboratory of the Department of Academic Microbiology, University College London Medical School.
An aerosol challenge to each filter using a suspension containing. S. marcescens and the bacteriophage MS2. In total 45 filters of 3 types were tested, 15 previously unused and 30 that had been used in ventilator circuits of 30 patients. The 3 types of filter generally had microbial retention efficiencies of > 99.99% for both S. marcescens and the bacteriophage MS2.
The 3 types of HME filter were effective microbial filters and comparable in their microbial retention.
确定并比较3种热湿交换（HME）过滤器的微生物截留效率。
随机前瞻性研究。
米德尔塞克斯医院重症监护病房以及伦敦大学学院医学院学术微生物学系微生物实验室。
使用含有粘质沙雷氏菌和噬菌体MS2的悬浮液对每个过滤器进行气溶胶挑战。共测试了3种类型的45个过滤器，其中15个为先前未使用过的，30个是在30名患者的呼吸机回路中使用过的。这3种类型的过滤器对粘质沙雷氏菌和噬菌体MS2的微生物截留效率通常均>99.99%。
这3种类型的HME过滤器均为有效的微生物过滤器，其微生物截留能力相当。
