电化学一氧化氮和二氧化氮分析仪在机械通气过程中适用性的评价。

E P Purtz, D Hess, R M Kacmarek
{"title":"电化学一氧化氮和二氧化氮分析仪在机械通气过程中适用性的评价。","authors":"E P Purtz,&nbsp;D Hess,&nbsp;R M Kacmarek","doi":"10.1023/a:1007301912697","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Inhaled nitric oxide (NO) is increasingly being used in the treatment of diseases characterized by hypoxemia and pulmonary hypertension. To avoid complications, accurate quantitative analysis of NO and NO2 is necessary during this therapy. We evaluated the accuracy of electrochemical NO and nitrogen dioxide (NO2) analyzers suitable for use during mechanical ventilation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We evaluated six electrochemical NO analyzer brands (Bedfont, B & W, Dräger, EIT, Pulmonox, Saan). All were calibrated and used per manufacturer's specifications. An adult mechanical ventilator was used to produce serial dilutions of NO with O2 for [NO] of 0-80 ppm. F1O2 settings of 0.90, 0.70, 0.50, 0.30, and 0.21 were used. Settings of low, moderate, and high ventilation pressures were evaluated. Gas was sampled from the inspiratory limb of the ventilator circuit using either a sidestream or mainstream technique. [NO] was also measured using a calibrated chemiluminescence analyzer. For the analyzers that measured NO2, serial dilutions of 8.5 ppm NO2 with O2 were analyzed using chemiluminescence and the electrochemical analyzers.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Bias +/- precision for [NO] by individual devices ranged from 1.8 +/- 1.9 ppm to -1.0 +/- 0.7 ppm. There were significant differences in the bias between analyzers (P < 0.001), pressure settings (P < 0.001), and NO level (P < 0.017). The difference in bias between levels of F1O2 was not significant (P = 0.062). Bias +/- precision for NO2 ranged from 0.18 +/- 0.12 ppm to -0.14 +/- 0.13 ppm, with a significant difference between analyzers (P < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The bias and precision of these analyzers was acceptable for clinical use. The devices tended to be most accurate at [NO] < or = 20 ppm-the clinical conditions at which NO is most commonly used.</p>","PeriodicalId":77199,"journal":{"name":"Journal of clinical monitoring","volume":"13 1","pages":"25-34"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1997-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1023/a:1007301912697","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of electrochemical nitric oxide and nitrogen dioxide analyzers suitable for use during mechanical ventilation.\",\"authors\":\"E P Purtz,&nbsp;D Hess,&nbsp;R M Kacmarek\",\"doi\":\"10.1023/a:1007301912697\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Inhaled nitric oxide (NO) is increasingly being used in the treatment of diseases characterized by hypoxemia and pulmonary hypertension. To avoid complications, accurate quantitative analysis of NO and NO2 is necessary during this therapy. We evaluated the accuracy of electrochemical NO and nitrogen dioxide (NO2) analyzers suitable for use during mechanical ventilation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We evaluated six electrochemical NO analyzer brands (Bedfont, B & W, Dräger, EIT, Pulmonox, Saan). All were calibrated and used per manufacturer's specifications. An adult mechanical ventilator was used to produce serial dilutions of NO with O2 for [NO] of 0-80 ppm. F1O2 settings of 0.90, 0.70, 0.50, 0.30, and 0.21 were used. Settings of low, moderate, and high ventilation pressures were evaluated. Gas was sampled from the inspiratory limb of the ventilator circuit using either a sidestream or mainstream technique. [NO] was also measured using a calibrated chemiluminescence analyzer. For the analyzers that measured NO2, serial dilutions of 8.5 ppm NO2 with O2 were analyzed using chemiluminescence and the electrochemical analyzers.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Bias +/- precision for [NO] by individual devices ranged from 1.8 +/- 1.9 ppm to -1.0 +/- 0.7 ppm. There were significant differences in the bias between analyzers (P < 0.001), pressure settings (P < 0.001), and NO level (P < 0.017). The difference in bias between levels of F1O2 was not significant (P = 0.062). Bias +/- precision for NO2 ranged from 0.18 +/- 0.12 ppm to -0.14 +/- 0.13 ppm, with a significant difference between analyzers (P < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The bias and precision of these analyzers was acceptable for clinical use. The devices tended to be most accurate at [NO] < or = 20 ppm-the clinical conditions at which NO is most commonly used.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":77199,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of clinical monitoring\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"25-34\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1997-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1023/a:1007301912697\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of clinical monitoring\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1007301912697\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of clinical monitoring","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1007301912697","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

目的:吸入性一氧化氮(NO)越来越多地用于低氧血症和肺动脉高压等疾病的治疗。为了避免并发症,在治疗过程中需要准确定量分析NO和NO2。我们评估了电化学NO和二氧化氮(NO2)分析仪的准确性,适合在机械通气期间使用。方法对6个电化学NO分析仪品牌(Bedfont、b&w、Dräger、EIT、Pulmonox、Saan)进行评价。所有都是根据制造商的规格进行校准和使用的。采用成人机械呼吸机,在0 ~ 80 ppm的条件下,用O2连续稀释NO。f10o2设置为0.90、0.70、0.50、0.30和0.21。评估低、中、高通气压力的设置。使用侧流或主流技术从呼吸机回路的吸气肢取样气体。使用校准的化学发光分析仪测量[NO]。对于测量NO2的分析仪,使用化学发光和电化学分析仪分析了8.5 ppm NO2与O2的连续稀释。结果:单个设备对[NO]的偏置+/-精度范围为1.8 +/- 1.9 ppm至-1.0 +/- 0.7 ppm。分析仪之间的偏差(P < 0.001)、压力设置(P < 0.001)和NO水平(P < 0.017)存在显著差异。F1O2水平间的偏倚差异无统计学意义(P = 0.062)。NO2的偏置+/-精度范围为0.18 +/- 0.12 ppm至-0.14 +/- 0.13 ppm,各分析仪之间差异显著(P < 0.001)。结论:这些分析仪的偏倚和精密度在临床应用中是可以接受的。该装置在[NO] <或= 20 ppm时最准确,这是NO最常用的临床条件。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evaluation of electrochemical nitric oxide and nitrogen dioxide analyzers suitable for use during mechanical ventilation.

Objective: Inhaled nitric oxide (NO) is increasingly being used in the treatment of diseases characterized by hypoxemia and pulmonary hypertension. To avoid complications, accurate quantitative analysis of NO and NO2 is necessary during this therapy. We evaluated the accuracy of electrochemical NO and nitrogen dioxide (NO2) analyzers suitable for use during mechanical ventilation.

Methods: We evaluated six electrochemical NO analyzer brands (Bedfont, B & W, Dräger, EIT, Pulmonox, Saan). All were calibrated and used per manufacturer's specifications. An adult mechanical ventilator was used to produce serial dilutions of NO with O2 for [NO] of 0-80 ppm. F1O2 settings of 0.90, 0.70, 0.50, 0.30, and 0.21 were used. Settings of low, moderate, and high ventilation pressures were evaluated. Gas was sampled from the inspiratory limb of the ventilator circuit using either a sidestream or mainstream technique. [NO] was also measured using a calibrated chemiluminescence analyzer. For the analyzers that measured NO2, serial dilutions of 8.5 ppm NO2 with O2 were analyzed using chemiluminescence and the electrochemical analyzers.

Results: Bias +/- precision for [NO] by individual devices ranged from 1.8 +/- 1.9 ppm to -1.0 +/- 0.7 ppm. There were significant differences in the bias between analyzers (P < 0.001), pressure settings (P < 0.001), and NO level (P < 0.017). The difference in bias between levels of F1O2 was not significant (P = 0.062). Bias +/- precision for NO2 ranged from 0.18 +/- 0.12 ppm to -0.14 +/- 0.13 ppm, with a significant difference between analyzers (P < 0.001).

Conclusions: The bias and precision of these analyzers was acceptable for clinical use. The devices tended to be most accurate at [NO] < or = 20 ppm-the clinical conditions at which NO is most commonly used.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信