English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

In this study we sought to determine whether an absorbent in which little carbon monoxide (CO) forms has a correspondingly small capacity to absorb carbon dioxide (CO2). Completely dried samples (600 g) of Baralyme (A), Drägersorb 800 (B), Drägersorb 800 Plus (C), Intersorb (D), Spherasorb (E), LoFloSorb (F), Superia (G), and Amsorb (H) were exposed to a flow of 0.5% (A–H;n = 4–5) and 4% isoflurane (F–H;n = 3) in pure oxygen at 5 L/min for 60 min. Downstream CO concentration, temperature, and isoflurane concentration were recorded every 60 s to calculate CO formation and isoflurane loss. The CO2 absorption capacity of each brand was determined by passing 5.1% CO2 in oxygen (flow, 250 mL/min) through untreated samples (30 g;n = 5) until the outlet CO2 concentration reached 0.5%. CO formation was largest in absorbents containing potassium hydroxide (A and B) and negligible in absorbents not containing any alkali hydroxide (F–H). The outlet temperature correlated with CO formation, but the isoflurane loss did not. The duration of CO2 absorption also did not correlate with CO formation. We conclude that absorbents that allow only very little CO formation are not necessarily poor CO2 absorbents.

Small Carbon Monoxide Formation in Absorbents Does Not Correlate with Small Carbon Dioxide Absorption