Разработка автоматизированной системы блока эжектора установки комплексной подготовки газа

Описание технологического процесса. Выбор структуры АСУ. Подбор датчиков, контроллерного оборудования, исполнительных устройств. Раработка алгоритмов управления для блока подготовки газа УКПГDescription of the technological process. Selection of the structure of automatic control system. Selection of sensors, control equipment, executive devices. Development of control algorithms for gas preparation unit of installation of complex gas preparation

Myocardial blood flow during general anesthesia with xenon in humans: a positron emission tomography study

Contains fulltext : 97144.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)BACKGROUND: Xenon has only minimal hemodynamic side effects and induces pharmacologic preconditioning. Thus, the use of xenon could be an interesting option in patients at risk for perioperative myocardial ischemia. However, little is known about the effects of xenon anesthesia on myocardial blood flow (MBF) and coronary vascular resistance in humans. METHODS: Myocardial blood flow was noninvasively quantified by H(1)O positron emission tomography in six healthy volunteers (age: 38 +/- 8 yr). MBF was measured at baseline and during general anesthesia induced with propofol and maintained with xenon, 59 +/- 0%. Absolute quantification of MBF was started after the calculated plasma concentration of propofol had decreased to less than 1.5 mug . ml(1). RESULTS: Compared with baseline (MBFbaseline, 1.03 +/- 0.09 ml . min(1) . g(1); mean +/- SD), MBF was decreased insignificantly by xenon (MBFxenon, 0.80 +/- 0.22 ml . min(1) . g(1); -21%, P = 0.11). Xenon decreased the rate-pressure product (RPP; heart rate x systolic arterial pressure), an indicator of cardiac work and myocardial oxygen consumption (-15%, P < 0.04). When correcting for the RPP, the decrease in MBF observed during xenon anesthesia was reduced to -9% (MBFcorr-xenon, 1.42 +/- 0.28 ml . g(1) . mmHg(1) vs. MBFcorr-baseline, 1.60 +/- 0.28 ml . g(1) . mmHg(1), P = 0.32). Xenon did not affect the dependency of MBF on the RPP. Coronary vascular resistance did not significantly change (+15 +/- 23%, P = 0.18) during xenon anesthesia. CONCLUSIONS: In healthy subjects, xenon has only minimal effects on coronary flow dynamics. These effects are probably of indirect nature, reflecting the decrease in myocardial oxygen consumption induced by the effects of xenon anesthesia on cardiac work

Effect of xenon anesthesia compared to sevoflurane and total intravenous anesthesia for coronary artery bypass graft surgery on postoperative cardiac troponin release. an international, multicenter, phase 3, single-blinded, randomized noninferiority trial

Abstract BACKGROUND: Ischemic myocardial damage accompanying coronary artery bypass graft surgery remains a clinical challenge. We investigated whether xenon anesthesia could limit myocardial damage in coronary artery bypass graft surgery patients, as has been reported for animal ischemia models. METHODS: In 17 university hospitals in France, Germany, Italy, and The Netherlands, low-risk elective, on-pump coronary artery bypass graft surgery patients were randomized to receive xenon, sevoflurane, or propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia for anesthesia maintenance. The primary outcome was the cardiac troponin I concentration in the blood 24 h postsurgery. The noninferiority margin for the mean difference in cardiac troponin I release between the xenon and sevoflurane groups was less than 0.15 ng/ml. Secondary outcomes were the safety and feasibility of xenon anesthesia. RESULTS: The first patient included at each center received xenon anesthesia for practical reasons. For all other patients, anesthesia maintenance was randomized (intention-to-treat: n = 492; per-protocol/without major protocol deviation: n = 446). Median 24-h postoperative cardiac troponin I concentrations (ng/ml [interquartile range]) were 1.14 [0.76 to 2.10] with xenon, 1.30 [0.78 to 2.67] with sevoflurane, and 1.48 [0.94 to 2.78] with total intravenous anesthesia [per-protocol]). The mean difference in cardiac troponin I release between xenon and sevoflurane was -0.09 ng/ml (95% CI, -0.30 to 0.11; per-protocol: P = 0.02). Postoperative cardiac troponin I release was significantly less with xenon than with total intravenous anesthesia (intention-to-treat: P = 0.05; per-protocol: P = 0.02). Perioperative variables and postoperative outcomes were comparable across all groups, with no safety concerns. CONCLUSIONS: In postoperative cardiac troponin I release, xenon was noninferior to sevoflurane in low-risk, on-pump coronary artery bypass graft surgery patients. Only with xenon was cardiac troponin I release less than with total intravenous anesthesia. Xenon anesthesia appeared safe and feasible