Browsing by Author "Erol D."

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    A view on pediatric airway management: a cross sectional survey study
    (Edizioni Minerva Medica, 2022) Saracoglu A.; Saracoglu K.T.; Sorbello M.; Kurdi R.; Greif R.; Abitagaoglu S.; Akin M.; Aksu A.; Aladag E.; Alagoz A.; Alanoglu Z.; Alicikus Tuncel Z.; Altinisik H.B.; Ambrosoli A.L.; Amella S.; Andrašovský A.; Andreotti A.; Arici A.G.; Armstrong J.; Arslan B.; Ávila E.; Aydogmus I.; Ayhan A.; Ayoglu H.; Ayvat P.; Bakis M.; Basaran B.; Baytar C.; Begec Z.; Belete A.; Belludi R.; Bianco M.C.; Bilgin M.U.; Biricik E.; Brueggeney M.K.; Bunjaku D.; Buyukkocak U.; Catineau J.; Cebrián C.G.; Chinnappa S.M.; Cicekci A.; Corte-Ballester J.; Cuéllar Martínez A.B.; Caglar T.; Calisir F.; Cokay Abut Y.; Delen L.A.; Deligoz O.; Demirgan S.; Distefano R.; Dmytriiev D.; Duarte L.; Ece C.; El-Tahan M.; El-Hatib M.; Erdogan Ari D.; Erkalp K.; Erol D.; Erturk E.; Frada R.; Fuchs A.; Garini E.; Gecici M.E.; Giallongo M.; Gomes C.; Gurbuz H.; Has Selmi N.; Hasani A.; Hernandez Cera C.; Hilker T.; Horatanaruang D.; Huitink J.; Karaaslan P.; Karaveli A.; Karisik M.; Kavas A.D.; Kaya A.; Kendigelen P.; Kilinc G.; Koc S.; Dilmen O.; Kozanhan B.; Kupeli I.; Kuyrukluyildiz U.; Lleshi A.; Loizou M.; Luanpholcharoenchai J.; Martinez V.; Matoshi D.; Maurya I.; Meco B.C.; Michalek P.; Milic M.; Mitre I.; Montealegre F.; Nair A.; Nallbani R.; Ng A.; Oc B.; Ok G.; Olguner C.; Ozkan D.; Oksuz G.; Ozcan M.S.; Ozden E.S.; Ozden Omaygenc D.; Ozer Y.; Ozmenoglu Turker H.; Ozmert S.; Rai E.; Rangappa D.; Roca De Togores A.; Salgado H.; Santos P.; Sari S.; Saritas A.; Saygi Emir N.; Sen B.; Shallik N.; Shamim F.; Shirgoska B.; Silay E.; Sinha T.; Srimueang T.; Sudarshan P.; Sugur T.; Sumer I.; Szucs Z.; Sahin T.; Sanal Bas S.; Tan J.; Tawfik L.; Topal S.; Toy E.; Turan Civraz A.Z.; Unal D.; Ural S.G.; Ustalar Ozgen S.Z.; Uysal H.; Yesildal H.; Yilmaz C.; Yuen V.; Yurt E.; Yuzkat N.; Zdravkovic M.; Isohanni M.
    BACKGROUND: This survey aimed to investigate routine practices and approaches of clinicians on pediatric airway in anesthesia and intensive care medicine. METHODS: A 20-question multiple-choice questionnaire with the possibility to provide open text answers was developed and sent. The survey was sent to the members of European Airway Management Society via a web-based platform. Responses were analyzed thematically. Only the answers from one representative of the pediatric service of each hospital was included into the analysis. RESULTS: Among the members, 143 physicians responded the survey, being anesthesiologists (83.2%), intensivists (11.9%), emergency medicine physicians (2.1%), and (2.8%) pain medicine practitioners. Astraight blade was preferred by 115 participants (80.4%) in newborns, whereas in infants 86 (60.1%) indicated a curved blade and 55 (38.5%) a straight blade. Uncuffed tracheal tube were preferred by 115 participants (80.4%) in newborns, whereas 24 (16.8%) used cuffed tubes. Approximately 2/3 of the participants (89, 62.2%) reported not to use routinely a cuff manometer in their clinical practice, whereas 54 participants (37.8%) use it routinely in pediatric patients. Direct laryngoscopy for routine pediatric tracheal intubation was reported by 127 participants (88.8%), while 16 (11.2%) reported using videolaryngoscopes routinely. Interestingly, 39 (27.3%) had never performed neither videolaryngoscopy nor flexible bronchoscopy in children. These results were significantly less in hospitals with a dedicated pediatric anesthesiologist. CONCLUSIONS: This survey on airway management in pediatric anesthesia revealed that the use of cuffed tubes and the routine monitoring of cuff pressure are rare. In addition, the rate of videolaryngoscopy or flexible optical intubation was low for expected difficult intubation. Our survey highlights the need for properly trained pediatric anesthesiologists working in-line with updated scientific evidence. © 2022 Edizioni Minerva Medica. All rights reserved.
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    The investigation of environmental behaviors by energy and exergy analyses using gasoline/ethanol fuel blends
    (Springer Science and Business Media B.V., 2023) Doğan B.; Erol D.; Üstün S.
    This study aims to evaluate the use of ethanol/gasoline fuel blends in a single-cylinder spark-ignition engine with energy, exergy, exergoeconomic and exergoenvironmental analysis. Test fuels (G100, E10, E20, E30, E40, E50, and E100) prepared by adding ethanol obtained from agricultural products to gasoline at different ratios were utilized in experimental studies. Thermodynamic analyses were carried out using the performance and emission data obtained from the engine tests. Thermal efficiency and exergy efficiencies were computed with energy and exergy analyses. The highest efficiencies were acquired at 2500 rpm for all fuels. The exergy efficiency of G100, E20 and E40 fuels at this engine speed is 17.13%, 15.81% and 14.62%, respectively. Furthermore, cost of engine shaft work in exergoeconomic analysis and environmental cost of shaft work in exergoenvironmental analysis were found in study. When an engine speed was 2500 rpm in E50 fuel, the cost of shaft work was 74.21 $ MJ−1, and the environmental cost of shaft work was 59.07 $ GJ−1. Moreover, exergoeconomic factor and exergoenvironmental factor values of fuel blends were computed. It was revealed that increased ethanol ratio in fuel blends increased economic and environmental costs. In terms of economy and environment, it can be considered appropriate that the ethanol ratio in fuel blends is between 30 and 40%. If ethanol is used higher than these rates, costs increase and fuels become uneconomical. © 2023, Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary.
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    Exergy analysis of fusel oil as an alternative fuel additive for spark ignition engines
    (Taylor and Francis Ltd., 2023) Üstün S.; Doğan B.; Erol D.
    The present study conducted performance and exhaust emission tests of fuel blends prepared using gasoline and waste fusel oil at full load and different engine speeds in a spark-ignition engine. Additionally, energy, exergy, and exergoeconomic analyses were carried out using engine performance and exhaust emission values. In engine tests, the highest brake specific fuel consumption obtained was 433.12 g/kWh in F50 fuel at an engine speed of 3500 rpm. The brake specific fuel consumption of G100 fuel was 364.46 g/kWh at the same engine speed. Adding waste fusel oil into fuel blends was observed to reduce carbon monoxide, unburned hydrocarbon, and nitrogen oxide emissions. According to the thermodynamic analysis results, an increase in the ratio of fusel oil in fuel blends reduces thermal efficiency and exergy efficiency. The ratio of fusel oil in fuel blends positively affects exergy destruction. The lowest exergy destruction was calculated as 16.47 kW in F50 fuel at an engine speed of 1500 rpm. As the fusel oil ratio in fuel blends increases, the unit cost of exergy of useful work of the fuel blends decreases. The lowest cost is 6.195 $/GJ at 1500 rpm in F50 fuel. The low pump price of waste fusel oil indicates its advantages over gasoline in exergoeconomic analysis results. © 2022 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.