Accelerating the Washout of Inhalational Anesthetics from the Dräger Primus Anesthetic Workstation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To establish guidelines for the preparation of the Primus anesthetic workstation (Dräger, Lübeck, Germany) for malignant hyperthermia-susceptible patients, the authors evaluated the effect of replacing the workstation's exchangeable internal components on the washout of isoflurane. METHODS: Primus workstations were exposed to isoflurane, and contaminated internal components were replaced as follows: group 1, no replacement; group 2, new ventilator diaphragm; group 3, autoclaved ventilator diaphragm; group 4, autoclaved integrated breathing system; group 5, flushed integrated breathing system; group 6, autoclaved ventilator diaphragm and integrated breathing system. The fresh gas flow was set at 10 l/min, and subsequently reduced to 3 l/min when a concentration of 5 ppm was achieved. Isoflurane concentration was measured in the inspiratory limb of the circle circuit every minute. RESULTS: Washout times for isoflurane decreased in the following order: group 1 (67 +/- 6.5 min) > groups 2 and 3 (50 +/- 4.1 and 50 +/- 5.7 min, respectively) > group 5 (43 +/- 9.5 min) > group 4 (12 +/- 1.5 min) > group 6 (3.2 +/- 0.4 min). Isoflurane concentration increased approximately threefold when the fresh gas flow was reduced to 3 l/min. CONCLUSION: Washout of isoflurane increased 20-fold with the use of an autoclaved ventilator diaphragm and integrated breathing system. To prepare the Primus for malignant hyperthermia-susceptible patients, the authors recommend replacing the ventilator diaphragm and integrated breathing system with autoclaved components, flushing the workstation for 5 min at a fresh gas flow of 10 l/min, and maintaining this flow for the duration of anesthesia.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".