Hendrik J Vreman, John J Mahoney, David K Stevenson
{"title":"呼吸中一氧化碳的电化学测量:氢的干扰","authors":"Hendrik J Vreman, John J Mahoney, David K Stevenson","doi":"10.1016/0960-1686(93)90049-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The purpose of this study was to determine the concentration of carbon monoxide (CO) in blood (COHb) and breath to demonstrate that breath hydrogen (H<sub>2</sub>) can be a significant interferant. For this purpose, we measured blood COHb with CO-oximetry and breath CO with an electrochemical analyzer. In addition, the samples were analyzed by gas chromatography (GC). The concentration of CO in breath, collected with a Priestley tube after a 20 s breath hold, from healthy, nonsmoking adult males (<em>n</em> = 20) and females (<em>n</em> = 10) had a mean ± SD (range) of 2.6 ± 0.4 ppm (2.0–3.9), respectively, when measured by GC. However, these same samples when measured with an electrochemical (EC) analyzer showed elevated CO values of 4.7 ± 2.9 ppm (2.6–17.6). The concentration of H<sub>2</sub>, a prominent trace gas in breath known to interfere with EC analyzers, correlated strongly with the observed EC analyzer response [EC (ppm CO) = 0.336 H<sub>2</sub> (ppm) + 1.93, <em>r</em><sup>2</sup> = 0.98]. The EC analyzer was linear for H<sub>2</sub> concentrations up to 40 ppm, with a sensitivity of 0.035 V ppm<sup>−1</sup>. The analyzer sensitivity to CO was 0.10 V ppm <sup>−1</sup>. Blood from this population showed COHb concentrations of 0.56 ± 0.11% (0.40–0.97), as measured by GC, but elevated values were found when measured by CO-oximeter (Ciba Corning Diagnostics Corp., Models 2500 and 270), 1.3 ± 0.2% (1.1–1.6) and 1.0 ± 0.3% (0.1–1.6), respectively. When breath CO was compared to blood COHb, only measurements by GC significantly correlated [COHb% = 0.241 CO(ppm) — 0.076, <em>r</em><sup>2</sup> = 0.78]. We conclude that, relative to quantitative analysis by GC, (1) EC analyzers are susceptible to H<sub>2</sub> interference that cause falsely elevated CO measurements, and (2) CO-oximeters overestimate COHb concentrations in the range typical for healthy nonsmokers.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100139,"journal":{"name":"Atmospheric Environment. Part A. General Topics","volume":"27 14","pages":"Pages 2193-2198"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1993-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/0960-1686(93)90049-5","citationCount":"22","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Electrochemical measurement of carbon monoxide in breath: Interference by hydrogen\",\"authors\":\"Hendrik J Vreman, John J Mahoney, David K Stevenson\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/0960-1686(93)90049-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>The purpose of this study was to determine the concentration of carbon monoxide (CO) in blood (COHb) and breath to demonstrate that breath hydrogen (H<sub>2</sub>) can be a significant interferant. For this purpose, we measured blood COHb with CO-oximetry and breath CO with an electrochemical analyzer. In addition, the samples were analyzed by gas chromatography (GC). The concentration of CO in breath, collected with a Priestley tube after a 20 s breath hold, from healthy, nonsmoking adult males (<em>n</em> = 20) and females (<em>n</em> = 10) had a mean ± SD (range) of 2.6 ± 0.4 ppm (2.0–3.9), respectively, when measured by GC. However, these same samples when measured with an electrochemical (EC) analyzer showed elevated CO values of 4.7 ± 2.9 ppm (2.6–17.6). The concentration of H<sub>2</sub>, a prominent trace gas in breath known to interfere with EC analyzers, correlated strongly with the observed EC analyzer response [EC (ppm CO) = 0.336 H<sub>2</sub> (ppm) + 1.93, <em>r</em><sup>2</sup> = 0.98]. The EC analyzer was linear for H<sub>2</sub> concentrations up to 40 ppm, with a sensitivity of 0.035 V ppm<sup>−1</sup>. The analyzer sensitivity to CO was 0.10 V ppm <sup>−1</sup>. Blood from this population showed COHb concentrations of 0.56 ± 0.11% (0.40–0.97), as measured by GC, but elevated values were found when measured by CO-oximeter (Ciba Corning Diagnostics Corp., Models 2500 and 270), 1.3 ± 0.2% (1.1–1.6) and 1.0 ± 0.3% (0.1–1.6), respectively. When breath CO was compared to blood COHb, only measurements by GC significantly correlated [COHb% = 0.241 CO(ppm) — 0.076, <em>r</em><sup>2</sup> = 0.78]. We conclude that, relative to quantitative analysis by GC, (1) EC analyzers are susceptible to H<sub>2</sub> interference that cause falsely elevated CO measurements, and (2) CO-oximeters overestimate COHb concentrations in the range typical for healthy nonsmokers.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100139,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Atmospheric Environment. Part A. General Topics\",\"volume\":\"27 14\",\"pages\":\"Pages 2193-2198\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1993-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/0960-1686(93)90049-5\",\"citationCount\":\"22\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Atmospheric Environment. Part A. General Topics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0960168693900495\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Atmospheric Environment. Part A. General Topics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0960168693900495","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Electrochemical measurement of carbon monoxide in breath: Interference by hydrogen
The purpose of this study was to determine the concentration of carbon monoxide (CO) in blood (COHb) and breath to demonstrate that breath hydrogen (H2) can be a significant interferant. For this purpose, we measured blood COHb with CO-oximetry and breath CO with an electrochemical analyzer. In addition, the samples were analyzed by gas chromatography (GC). The concentration of CO in breath, collected with a Priestley tube after a 20 s breath hold, from healthy, nonsmoking adult males (n = 20) and females (n = 10) had a mean ± SD (range) of 2.6 ± 0.4 ppm (2.0–3.9), respectively, when measured by GC. However, these same samples when measured with an electrochemical (EC) analyzer showed elevated CO values of 4.7 ± 2.9 ppm (2.6–17.6). The concentration of H2, a prominent trace gas in breath known to interfere with EC analyzers, correlated strongly with the observed EC analyzer response [EC (ppm CO) = 0.336 H2 (ppm) + 1.93, r2 = 0.98]. The EC analyzer was linear for H2 concentrations up to 40 ppm, with a sensitivity of 0.035 V ppm−1. The analyzer sensitivity to CO was 0.10 V ppm −1. Blood from this population showed COHb concentrations of 0.56 ± 0.11% (0.40–0.97), as measured by GC, but elevated values were found when measured by CO-oximeter (Ciba Corning Diagnostics Corp., Models 2500 and 270), 1.3 ± 0.2% (1.1–1.6) and 1.0 ± 0.3% (0.1–1.6), respectively. When breath CO was compared to blood COHb, only measurements by GC significantly correlated [COHb% = 0.241 CO(ppm) — 0.076, r2 = 0.78]. We conclude that, relative to quantitative analysis by GC, (1) EC analyzers are susceptible to H2 interference that cause falsely elevated CO measurements, and (2) CO-oximeters overestimate COHb concentrations in the range typical for healthy nonsmokers.