Skip Navigation

British Journal of Anaesthesia 2005 94(5):687-688; doi:10.1093/bja/aei543
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow E-Letters: Submit a response to the article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
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 Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (1)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Peyton, P.
Right arrow Articles by Kruse, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Peyton, P.
Right arrow Articles by Kruse, J.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?


© The Board of Management and Trustees of the British Journal of Anaesthesia 2005. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journal.permissions@oupjournals.org

CORRESPONDENCE

Contamination of anaesthetic gases with nitric oxide and its influence on oxygenation

The first 10% of the full text of this article appears below.

Editor—I read with interest the article by Hess and colleagues1 and its accompanying editorial by Marczin2 on the effect of administration of compressed air (AIRc) or nitrous oxide on arterial in ventilated patients, in comparison with a control period where synthetic air (AIRs) was used. The authors attributed a higher to increased nitric oxide contaminating the former two mixtures.

The difference in when receiving AIRc vs AIRs (0.5 kPa) was not clinically significant, as might be expected given that the nitric oxide levels with AIRc were much smaller than those used therapeutically to improve oxygenation.

The increase in with nitrous oxide was much more significant (2.2 kPa or >15%). However, from the evidence available, it . . . [Full Text of this Article]

P. Peyton

Heidelberg, Victoria, Australia E-mail: phil.peyton@austin.org.au

E-mail: rikcarette@yahoo.com

R. M. Carette1,*, J. F. A. Hendrickx1 and A. M. De Wolf2

1 Aalst, Belgium
2 Chicago, IL, USA

* E-mail: hessana@g-email.de

W. Hess*, J. Kannmacher and J. Kruse

Hamburg, Germany


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?