• J F Hendrickx, S De Cooman, T Deloof, D Vandeput, J Coddens, and A M De Wolf.
• Department of Anesthesiology, Intensive Care and Pain Therapy, Onze Lieve Vrouwziekenhuis, Aalst, Belgium.
• Anesth. Analg. 2001 Aug 1;93(2):391-5 , 3rd contents page.

UnlabelledWe determined the performance of the vaporizer of the ADU machine (Anesthesia Delivery Unit; Datex-Ohmeda, Helsinki, Finland). The effects of carrier gas composition (oxygen, oxygen/N(2)O mixture, and air) and fresh gas flow (0.2 to 10 L/min) on vaporizer performance were examined with variable concentrations of isoflurane, sevoflurane, and desflurane across the whole range of each vaporizer's output. In addition, the effects of sudden changes in fresh gas flow and carrier gas composition, back pressure, flushing, and tipping were assessed. Vaporizer output depended on fresh gas flow, carrier gas composition, dial settings, and the drug used. Vaporizer output remained within 10% of dial setting with fresh gas flows of 0.3-10 L/min for isoflurane, within 10% of dial setting with fresh gas flows of 0.5-5 L/min for sevoflurane, and within 13% of dial setting with fresh gas flows of 0.5 to 1 L/min for desflurane. Outside these fresh gas flow ranges, output deviated more. The effect of sudden changes in fresh gas flow or carrier gas composition, back pressure, flushing, and tipping was minimal. We conclude that the ADU vaporizer performs well under most clinical conditions. Despite a different design and the use of complex algorithms to improve accuracy, the same physical factors affecting the performance of conventional vaporizers also affect the ADU vaporizer.ImplicationsThe ADU vaporizer performs well under most clinical conditions. Despite a different design and the use of complex algorithms to improve accuracy, the same physical factors affecting the performance of conventional vaporizers also affect the ADU vaporizer.

9 keywords...

hide…