Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Patient Safety in Surgery 1/2018

Open Access 01-12-2018 | Research

Comparison of flow pressures in different 3-way infusion devices: an in-vitro study

Authors: Jonathan Chua, Arun Ratnavadivel

Published in: Patient Safety in Surgery | Issue 1/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The use of multiple infusions through one cannula is an increasingly common practice in anaesthesia. High pressures in the line often lead to occlusion alarms and pump disconnection. In this study, we aim to determine the pressures generated in common 3-way infusion devices, using simple low-cost equipment available and currently in use in the operating theatre environment.

Methods

We compared three different common and commercially available 3-way infusion devices that allowed multiple infusions through one cannula in vitro. One with anti-siphon valves, one without valves, and serial extension sets with side ports connected in series. An invasive blood pressure transducer was used to monitor line pressure. Seven different infusion rates were used to simulate different infusions.

Results

3-way infusion devices with anti-siphon valves have 5.5 times the infusion pressures compared to devices without valves (P < 0.001). The highest pressures obtained across all devices were at the highest flow rate studied (400 ml/hr); this was 243 mmHg in the 3-way device with anti-siphon valves, compared to only 44 mmHg in the 3-way device without valves and 36 mmHg in the serial extension sets. Serial extension sets have the lowest pressures across all flow rates when compared to 3-way devices without valves. (P = 0.0001).

Conclusions

The presence of anti-siphon valves generate very high pressures in infusion lines that can contribute to occlusion alarm disconnection of a pump. However, when measured alone and in-vitro, these pressures are not sufficient to trigger occlusion alarms. There are 3-way infusion devices without anti-siphon valves that have lower line pressures, but clinicians should be aware of negative pressure scenarios which can lead to siphoning when using them.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Lerman J, Jöhr M. Inhalational anesthesia vs total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) for pediatric anesthesia. Pediatr Anesth. 2009;19(5):521–34.CrossRef Lerman J, Jöhr M. Inhalational anesthesia vs total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) for pediatric anesthesia. Pediatr Anesth. 2009;19(5):521–34.CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Chandler JR, Myers D, Mehta D, Whyte E, Groberman MK, Montgomery CJ, Ansermino JM. Emergence delirium in children: a randomized trial to compare total intravenous anesthesia with propofol and remifentanil to inhalational sevoflurane anesthesia. Pediatr Anesth. 2013;23(4):309–15.CrossRef Chandler JR, Myers D, Mehta D, Whyte E, Groberman MK, Montgomery CJ, Ansermino JM. Emergence delirium in children: a randomized trial to compare total intravenous anesthesia with propofol and remifentanil to inhalational sevoflurane anesthesia. Pediatr Anesth. 2013;23(4):309–15.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Kumar G, Stendall C, Mistry R, Gurusamy K, Walker D. A comparison of total intravenous anaesthesia using propofol with sevoflurane or desflurane in ambulatory surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis. Anaesthesia. 2014;69(10):1138–50.CrossRefPubMed Kumar G, Stendall C, Mistry R, Gurusamy K, Walker D. A comparison of total intravenous anaesthesia using propofol with sevoflurane or desflurane in ambulatory surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis. Anaesthesia. 2014;69(10):1138–50.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Sundaram R, Dell AE. Interaction between infusion equipment resulting in drug overdose in a critically ill patient. Anaesthesia. 2005;60(1):88–91.CrossRefPubMed Sundaram R, Dell AE. Interaction between infusion equipment resulting in drug overdose in a critically ill patient. Anaesthesia. 2005;60(1):88–91.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Décaudin B, Dewulf S, Lannoy D, Simon N, Secq A, Barthélémy C, Debaene B, Odou P. Impact of multiaccess infusion devices on in vitro drug delivery during multi-infusion therapy. Anesth Analg. 2009;109(4):1147–55.CrossRefPubMed Décaudin B, Dewulf S, Lannoy D, Simon N, Secq A, Barthélémy C, Debaene B, Odou P. Impact of multiaccess infusion devices on in vitro drug delivery during multi-infusion therapy. Anesth Analg. 2009;109(4):1147–55.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Lovich MA, Kinnealley ME, Sims NM, Peterfreund RA. The delivery of drugs to patients by continuous intravenous infusion: modeling predicts potential dose fluctuations depending on flow rates and infusion system dead volume. Anesth Analg. 2006;102(4):1147–53.CrossRefPubMed Lovich MA, Kinnealley ME, Sims NM, Peterfreund RA. The delivery of drugs to patients by continuous intravenous infusion: modeling predicts potential dose fluctuations depending on flow rates and infusion system dead volume. Anesth Analg. 2006;102(4):1147–53.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Lannoy D, Décaudin B, Dewulf S, Simon N, Secq A, Barthélémy C, Debaene B, Odou P. Infusion set characteristics such as antireflux valve and dead-space volume affect drug delivery: an experimental study designed to enhance infusion sets. Anesth Analg. 2010;111(6):1427–31.CrossRefPubMed Lannoy D, Décaudin B, Dewulf S, Simon N, Secq A, Barthélémy C, Debaene B, Odou P. Infusion set characteristics such as antireflux valve and dead-space volume affect drug delivery: an experimental study designed to enhance infusion sets. Anesth Analg. 2010;111(6):1427–31.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Comparison of flow pressures in different 3-way infusion devices: an in-vitro study
Authors
Jonathan Chua
Arun Ratnavadivel
Publication date
01-12-2018
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Patient Safety in Surgery / Issue 1/2018
Electronic ISSN: 1754-9493
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13037-018-0165-1

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

Patient Safety in Surgery 1/2018 Go to the issue