JOURNAL HOME CME HOME THIS MONTH PAST ISSUES ETOC COLLECTIONS
AUTHORS REVIEWERS EDITORIAL BOARD FEEDBACK RSS HELP
A&A International Anesthesia Research Society
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Anesth Analg 1984; 63:566-570
© 1984 International Anesthesia Research Society
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a colleague
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Chalon, J.
Right arrow Articles by Turndorf, H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Chalon, J.
Right arrow Articles by Turndorf, H.

The Pall Ultipor Breathing Circuit Filter—An Efficient Heat and Moisture Exchanger

Jack Chalon, MD, Joseph P. Markham, BA, Mahgul M. All, MD, Sivam Ramanathan, MD, and Herman Turndorf, MD

Received from The Department of Anesthesiology, New York University Medical Center, 550 First Avenue, New York, New York.

Abstract

The Pall bacterial filter was tested as a potential heat and moisture exchanger on a model patient, placed on a circle absorber system, and clinically. The laboratory study was conducted during mechanical ventilation at a V of 6 L/min with fresh gas inflows of 1,3 and 6 L/min. The model patient introduced carbon dioxide into the circuitry at a rate of 200 ml/min. The resistance of the filter was tested before and after each experiment. With all fresh gas inflows, absolute humidity increased from around 19 mg H2O/L at the start of experimentation to about 27 mg H2O/L within 30 mm. Maximum humidities reached were 28 ± 0.7 mg H2O/L, 27.6 ± 0.5 mg H2O/L, and 27.7 ± 0.5 mg H2O/L within 3 hr, with fresh gas inflows of 1, 3, and 6 L/min, respectively. Variations in inspired humidity were also assessed at minute volumes of 4 and 5 L/min with fresh gas inflows of 6 and 3 L/min. Increases in percent dead space were negligible when the filter was inserted between the model patients (assumed to weigh between 70–40 kg) and the circuit. There was no statistically significant increase in pressure with gas flows of 50 L/min when the instrument was dry (0.02 ± 0.001 cm H2O/L-min–1) or when it was wet (0.02 ± 0.002 cm HzO/L-min–1). The clinical study was conducted on ten adult anesthetized patients breathing through the bacterial filter and ten controls. The loss of body temperature was 0.2°C when the filter was used and 1.5°C when the filter was not used. Arterial blood gas tensions were within normal limits when the bacterial filter was used as a humidifier.

Key Words: HUMIDIFICATION—anesthesia circuits • EQUIPMENT, HUMIDIFICATION—Pall bacterial filter




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Br J AnaesthHome page
D. Turnbull, P. C. Fisher, G. H. Mills, and N. J. Morgan-Hughes
Performance of breathing filters under wet conditions: a laboratory evaluation
Br. J. Anaesth., May 1, 2005; 94(5): 675 - 682.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 ChestHome page
R. R. Demers
Bacterial/Viral Filtration : Let the Breather Beware!
Chest, October 1, 2001; 120(4): 1377 - 1389.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins Anesthesia & Analgesia® is published for the International Anesthesia Research Society® by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins with the assistance of Stanford University Libraries' HighWire Press®. Copyright 2006 by the International Anesthesia Research Society. Online ISSN: 1526-7598   Print ISSN: 0003-2999 HighWire Press
Copyright © 1984 by the International Anesthesia Research Society.