International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2010
Performance of cryotherapy devices using nitrous oxide and carbon dioxide.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Winkler Jennifer L, Jeronimo Jose, Singleton Jered, Janmohamed Amynah, Santos Carlos
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To compare temperatures reached by 4 different cryotherapy devices commonly used to treat precancerous cervical lesions in low-resource countries using nitrous oxide (N(2)O) and carbon dioxide (CO(2)) as well as with and without a gas conditioner.
METHODS: Bench testing was conducted using 4 different cryotherapy devices and locally obtained N(2)O and medical- and industrial-grade CO(2) refrigerant with and without a gas conditioner. A thermocouple was used to continuously measure the temperature of the cryotherapy tip. Comparison across the cryotherapy devices was based on the mean and lowest temperatures.
RESULTS: Without the gas conditioner, all of the devices tested reached mean temperatures colder than -50°C with N(2)O, although 2 devices reached warmer temperatures in a proportion of N(2)O tests. Only 2 of the devices reached mean temperatures colder than -50°C with CO(2). One-way analysis of variance identified the device as the dominant factor for the temperature differences, while the gas was not a determinant of temperature variation. The gas conditioner hindered the performance of 2 of the devices, and only improved the performance of 1 device.
CONCLUSION: Both N(2)O and CO(2) reach appropriate freezing temperatures with some cryotherapy devices. Performance of some cryotherapy devices is suboptimal.
METHODS: Bench testing was conducted using 4 different cryotherapy devices and locally obtained N(2)O and medical- and industrial-grade CO(2) refrigerant with and without a gas conditioner. A thermocouple was used to continuously measure the temperature of the cryotherapy tip. Comparison across the cryotherapy devices was based on the mean and lowest temperatures.
RESULTS: Without the gas conditioner, all of the devices tested reached mean temperatures colder than -50°C with N(2)O, although 2 devices reached warmer temperatures in a proportion of N(2)O tests. Only 2 of the devices reached mean temperatures colder than -50°C with CO(2). One-way analysis of variance identified the device as the dominant factor for the temperature differences, while the gas was not a determinant of temperature variation. The gas conditioner hindered the performance of 2 of the devices, and only improved the performance of 1 device.
CONCLUSION: Both N(2)O and CO(2) reach appropriate freezing temperatures with some cryotherapy devices. Performance of some cryotherapy devices is suboptimal.