May 1997
Volume 61 |
Number 5
|
| |
TO THE MEMBERSHIP
|
| Ecology and Trace
Gases |
The introduction of halothane into clinical practice resulted
in two significant events. The National Halothane Study, published
in 1969 by the National Institutes of Health, sought out any possible
casual relationship of halothane to hepatocellular damage. Secondly,
the use of halothane ended the era of closed-circuit, low-flow
techniques and ushered in an era of high-flow, nonrebreathing
or semirebreathing techniques.
The result of these changes had a beneficial effect on industry
as large volumes of oxygen and nitrous oxide were required as
diluents, in the days before the advent of devices capable of
monitoring the concentration of anesthetic agents accurately.
Worldwide consumption of oxygen and nitrous oxide exceeded the
wildest dreams of the manufacturers and suppliers.
During this period, the operating room soon contained higher
concentrations of anesthetic agents than patients and perhaps
led to the statement, "If the patient can keep awake, Mr.
Anesthetist, so can you!"
Suddenly, a boost to the world economy occurred as an entire
new industry of scavenging systems was created. Anesthesia machines
were reinvented to accommodate the new technology. Operating suites
soon were spared excess pollutants as exhaust gases were entrained
by the O.R. vacuum system and promptly dumped in the hospital
basement or vented to the outside environment where they could
join the host of other pollutants floating about.
Unfortunately, as Diana G. McGregor,
M.B., reports, we still lack reliable data to categorize our
anesthetic exhaust as hazardous to your health. One concern does
remain: do our exhaust fluorocarbons contribute to the depletion
of the ozone layer? In an effort to minimize this potential hazard,
perhaps there should be a ban on slow surgeons.
Erwin Lear, M.D.
Editor
return to top
|