This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a colleague Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Web of Science (7) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Higuchi, H. Articles by Satoh, T. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Higuchi, H. Articles by Satoh, T.

---

GENERAL ARTICLES

The Carbon Dioxide Absorption Capacity of Amsorb^® is Half That of Soda Lime

Hideyuki Higuchi, MD^*, Yushi Adachi, MD, Shinya Arimura, MD^*, Masuyuki Kanno, MD^*, and Tetsuo Satoh, MD

*Department of Anesthesia, Self Defense Force Central Hospital, Tokyo, Japan; and Department of Anesthesiology, National Defense Medical College, Saitama, Japan

Address correspondence and reprint requests to Hideyuki Higuchi, MD, Department of Anesthesia, Self Defense Force Hanshin Hospital, 4-1-50 Kushiro, Kawanishi, Hyogo 666-0024, Japan. Address e-mail to higu-chi{at}ka2.so-net.ne.jp

A new CO₂ absorbent, Amsorb^® (A), which does not contain monovalent bases, is ideal because it does not degrade volatile anesthetics to either Compound A (from sevoflurane) or carbon monoxide (from desflurane, enflurane, or isoflurane). The CO₂ absorption capacity of A, however, has not been investigated under clinical conditions. In this study, we compared the longevity (time to exhaustion) and CO₂ absorption capacity (the volume of CO₂ absorbed before CO₂ rebreathing occurs) of A under low-flow anesthesia (1 L/min) with those of two soda lime absorbents—Medisorb^® (M) and Sodasorb^® (S)—by using a 750-mL ADU canister and a 1350-mL Aestiva 3000 canister. In the study with the ADU canister, the longevity of A was 213 ± 71 min, significantly less than those of M (445 ± 125; P < 0.01) and S (503 ± 89; P < 0.001). The CO₂ absorption capacity (L/100 g absorbent) of A was 5.5 ± 1.2, significantly less than those of M (10.7 ± 1.7) and S (12.1 ± 1.8; P < 0.001). In the study with the Aestiva 3000 canister, the longevity of A was 218 ± 61 min, significantly less than those of M (538 ± 136) and S (528 ± 103; P < 0.001). The CO₂ absorption capacity (L/100 g absorbent) of A was 7.6 ± 1.6, significantly less than those of M (14.4 ± 1.8) and S (14.8 ± 2.3; P < 0.001). These results indicate that the CO₂ absorption capacity of A is half that of M or S and that the difference in the CO₂ absorption capacity between A and M or S is almost constant, regardless of the canister design.

Implications: The CO₂ absorption capacity of Amsorb^® is half that of Medisorb^® and Sodasorb^® under clinical low-flow (1 L/min) anesthesia with either a 750-mL Ohmeda ADU compact or a 1350-mL Ohmeda Aestiva 3000 canister.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				N. Gerstein and C. Rosenberg Exhausted Amsorb Plus CO2 Absorbent Recognized only by Inspired CO2 Anesth. Analg., January 1, 2007; 104(1): 237 - 238. [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. Knolle, G. Heinze, and H. Gilly Small Carbon Monoxide Formation in Absorbents Does Not Correlate with Small Carbon Dioxide Absorption Anesth. Analg., September 1, 2002; 95(3): 650 - 655. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]