Recovery and pharmacokinetic parameters of desflurane, sevoflurane, and isoflurane in patients undergoing urologic procedures.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare the pharmacokinetics and the speed of recovery after inhalation anesthesia with desflurane, sevoflurane, and isoflurane in elective surgery. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized study. SETTING: University medical center. PATIENTS: 30 ASA physical status I and II adults presenting for elective surgery. INTERVENTIONS: Anesthesia was induced with etomidate and maintained with desflurane (n = 10), sevoflurane (n = 10), or isoflurane (n = 10) and nitrous oxide. The inhalation drugs were titrated until an adequate clinical depth of anesthesia was reached. At the end of anesthesia, the patients breathed oxygen via the endotracheal tube and after extubation via a face mask. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The groups were similar with respect to age, weight, duration of anesthesia, and mean arterial pressure. Mean end-tidal concentration (FA = FA0) at the end of anesthesia was 6.34 +/- 1.15% after desflurane, 1.85 +/- 0.42% after sevoflurane, and 1.10 +/- 0.24% after isoflurane. FA/FA0 decreased significantly faster with desflurane than with isoflurane, while there was little difference between desflurane and sevoflurane. As for the terminal half-life (t1/2), there were no differences among the groups (8.16 +/- 3.15 min after desflurane, 9.47 +/- 4.46 min after sevoflurane, and 10.0 +/- 5.57 min after isoflurane). The time until a command was followed for the first time was the same in all three groups (13.0 +/- 4.7 min after desflurane, 13.4 +/- 4.4 min after sevoflurane, and 13.6 +/- 3.4 min after isoflurane). There was no significant correlation between duration of anesthesia and the time until recovery. CONCLUSIONS: There are only minor differences with regard to the recovery phase in premedicated patients who receive clinically titrated inhalation anesthesia with desflurane, sevoflurane, or isoflurane.     

Pharmacokinetics of desflurane, sevoflurane, isoflurane, and halothane in pigs

We tested the prediction that the alveolar washin and washout, tissue time constants, and pulmonary recovery (volume of agent recovered during washout relative to the volume taken up during washin) of desflurane, sevoflurane, isoflurane, and halothane would be defined primarily by their respective solubilities in blood, by their solubilities in tissues, and by their metabolism. We concurrently administered approximately one-third the MAC of each of these anesthetics to five young female swine and determined (separately) their solubilities in pig blood and tissues. The blood/gas partition coefficient of desflurane (0.35 +/- 0.02) was significantly smaller (P less than 0.01) than that of sevoflurane (0.45 +/- 0.02), isoflurane (0.94 +/- 0.05), and halothane (2.54 +/- 0.21). Tissue/blood partition coefficients of desflurane and halothane were smaller than those for the other two anesthetics (P less than 0.05) for all tissue groups. As predicted from their blood solubilities, the order of washin and washout was desflurane, sevoflurane, isoflurane, and halothane (most to least rapid). As predicted from tissue solubilities, the tissue time constants for desflurane were smaller than those for sevoflurane, isoflurane, and halothane. Recovery (normalized to that of isoflurane) of the volume of anesthetic taken up was significantly greater (P less than 0.05) for desflurane (93% +/- 7% [mean +/- SD]) than for halothane (77% +/- 6%), was not different from that of isoflurane (100%), but was less than that for sevoflurane (111% +/- 17%). The lower value for halothane is consistent with its known metabolism, but the lower (than sevoflurane) value for desflurane is at variance with other presently available data for their respective biodegradations.     

Immediate anesthesia recovery and psychomotor function of patient after prolonged anesthesia with desflurane, sevoflurane or isoflurane

OBJECTIVE: To compare the anesthetic maintenance and early postoperative recovery and psychomotor function in patients who have been anesthestized with desflurane, sevoflurane or isoflurane during prolonged open urological surgery. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seventy-five patients were randomly assigned to receive desflurane, sevoflurane or isoflurane with N2O 60% for anesthetic maintenance. The concentration of each drug was adjusted to maintain arterial pressure and heart rate +/- 20% of baseline. After the operation the anesthetics were discontinued and times until eye opening, spontaneous breathing, extubation and orientation were recorded. In the post-anesthesia recovery ward we applied the Newman-Trieger and Aldrete tests and recorded instances of nausea and vomiting and need for analgesia during the first 24 hours after surgery. RESULTS: The groups were similar with regard to demographic features, anesthetic maintenance, duration of anesthesia and relative doses of the anesthetics used. Recovery times in the operating room were significantly shorter (p < 0.05) after anesthesia with desflurane and sevoflurane than with isoflurane, with no significant differences between the desflurane and sevoflurane groups (duration of anesthesia 198 +/- 90, 171 +/- 67 and 191 +/- 79; eye opening 7.6 +/- 3.7, 7.8 +/- 3.0 and 11.9 +/- 4.5; time until extubation 7.8 +/- 3.0, 8.3 +/- 3.0 and 11.0 +/- 3.5 for desflurane, sevoflurane and isoflurane, respectively; all data in minutes). Recovery in the post-anesthetic recovery ward was similar for all three groups. CONCLUSIONS: Anesthetic maintenance was comparable with all three drugs. Desflurane and sevoflurane demonstrated advantages over isoflurane during recovery from anesthesia in the operating theater. No significant differences were found in psychomotor recovery, nausea and/or vomiting or requirements for postoperative analgesia.     

The effect of anesthetic technique on recovery from neuromuscular blockade with cisatracurium

OBJECTIVES: To assess the effect of four anesthetic techniques on recovery after a single dose of 0.2 mg/kg of cisatracurium. PATIENTS AND METHOD: After giving informed consent, 96 patients of both sexes, ASA I-III, were enrolled. Anesthesia was induced with fentanyl, propofol O2-N2O (FiO2 40%) after which the patients were randomly assigned to four groups according to maintenance technique: propofol by infusion, sevoflurane, desflurane or isoflurane at 1.3 MAC. Neuromuscular block was monitored (electromyographic recording of the pollicis adductor). Variables recorded were time of maximum block, duration of action of 1% and 25%, and recovery indices at T0-TR75 andT25%-T75%. ANOVA was performed ( = 0.05 and beta = 0.1). RESULTS: The groups were homogeneous. Time until recovery of 25% of baseline amplitude of the first response to a train of four (TOF) (T1) was longer in the desflurane group (68.4 +/- 11.1 min) than in the propofol group (60.2 +/- 9.4 min; p < 0.05). Time until recovery of 75% of the TOF-ratio was longer in the sevoflurane (96.8 +/- 13.1 min), desflurane (101.5 +/- 14.4 min) and isoflurane (94.1 +/- 13.9 min) groups than in the propofol group (83.7 +/- 1.3 min) (p < 0.0001).Times until recovery of T1 up to 1% were not statistically different: 45.8 +/- 10.7 (propofol), 50.6 +/- 11.0 (sevoflurane), 51.3 +/- 11.5 (desflurane) and 46.5 +/- 11.2 min (isoflurane). The 25% - 75% recovery index was also similar at 19.0 +/- 9.3 (propofol), 20.0 +/- 5.1 (sevoflurane), 25.7 +/- 12.4 (desflurane) and 20.9 +/- 7.9 (isoflurane). CONCLUSIONS: The inhaled anesthetics studied prolong the duration of clinical effect of cisatracurium more than does propofol.     

Postoperative recovery after desflurane, propofol, or isoflurane anesthesia among morbidly obese patients: a prospective, randomized study

Recovery from anesthesia might be compromised in obese patients. Because of its pharmacological properties, desflurane might allow rapid postoperative recovery for these patients. We compared postoperative recovery for 36 obese patients randomized to receive either desflurane, propofol, or isoflurane to maintain anesthesia during laparoscopic gastroplasties. Anesthesia was induced with propofol and succinylcholine IV and was maintained with rocuronium, alfentanil, inhaled nitrous oxide, and the study drug. Immediate recovery (i.e., times from the discontinuation of anesthesia to tracheal extubation, eye opening, and the ability to state one's name) was measured. At the time of postanesthesia care unit (PACU) admission, arterial saturation and the ability of patients to move were recorded. In the PACU, intermediate recovery was measured by using sedation and psychometric evaluations, 30, 60, and 120 min postoperatively. Data were compared between groups by using the Kruskal-Wallis and chi(2) tests. Results were reported as means +/- SD. P: < 0.05, compared with desflurane, was considered significant. Immediate recovery occurred faster, and was more consistent, after desflurane than after propofol or isoflurane (times to extubation were 6 +/- 1 min, 13 +/- 8 min [P: < 0.05, compared with desflurane], and 12 +/- 6 min [P: < 0.05, compared with desflurane], respectively). At PACU admission, SpO(2) values were significantly higher and patient mobility was significantly better after desflurane than after isoflurane or propofol. Sedation was significantly less pronounced with desflurane at 30 and 120 min postoperatively. In morbidly obese patients, postoperative immediate and intermediate recoveries are more rapid after desflurane than after propofol or isoflurane anesthesia. This advantage of desflurane persists at least for 2 h after surgery and is associated with both an improvement in patient mobility and a reduced incidence of postoperative desaturation. Implications: In morbidly obese patients, postoperative immediate and intermediate recoveries are more rapid and consistent after desflurane than after propofol or isoflurane anesthesia.     

Solubility of desflurane (I-653), sevoflurane, isoflurane, and halothane in human blood

The blood/gas partition coefficients for the new volatile anesthetic agent desflurane (I-653), sevoflurane, isoflurane, and halothane were determined, simultaneously, in 8 human volunteers to compare the solubilities of these agents in blood. The blood/gas partition coefficient for desflurane [0.49 +/- 0.03 (mean +/- SD)] was smallest, followed by sevoflurane (0.62 +/- 0.04), isoflurane (1.27 +/- 0.06), and halothane (2.46 +/- 0.09). Differences among the anesthetic agents were significant (P less than 0.001). The results of this study confirm that among these agents the solubility of desflurane in human blood is the smallest. The results suggest that the washin and washout of desflurane will be more rapid than that of sevoflurane, isoflurane, and halothane, and the washin and washout of sevoflurane will be more rapid than that of isoflurane and halothane.     

Emergence and recovery characteristics of desflurane versus sevoflurane in morbidly obese adult surgical patients: a prospective, randomized study

We compared postoperative recovery after desflurane (n = 25) versus sevoflurane (n = 25) anesthesia in morbidly obese adults (body mass index >/=35) who underwent gastrointestinal bypass surgery via an open laparotomy. After premedication with midazolam and metoclopramide 1 h before surgery, epidural catheter placement, induction of anesthesia with fentanyl and propofol, and tracheal intubation facilitated with succinylcholine, anesthesia was maintained with age-adjusted 1 minimum alveolar concentration (MAC) desflurane or sevoflurane. Fentanyl IV, morphine or local anesthetics epidurally, and vasoactive drugs as needed were used to maintain arterial blood pressure at +/-20% of baseline value and to keep bispectral index of the electroencephalogram values between 40 to 60 U. Although patients were anesthetized with desflurane for a longer time (261 +/- 50 min versus 234 +/- 37 min, mean +/- sd; P < 0.05, desflurane versus sevoflurane, respectively) and for more MAC-hours (4.2 +/- 0.9 h versus 3.7 +/- 0.8 h; P < 0.05), significantly earlier recovery of response to command and tracheal extubation occurred in patients given desflurane than in patients given sevoflurane. The modified Aldrete score was greater in desflurane-anesthetized patients on admission to the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) (P = 0.01) but not at discharge (P = 0.47). On admission to PACU, patients given desflurane had higher oxygen saturations (97.0% +/- 2.4%) than patients given sevoflurane (94.8% +/- 4.4%, P = 0.035). Overall, the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting and the use of antiemetics did not differ between the two anesthetic groups. We conclude that morbidly obese adult patients who underwent major abdominal surgery in a prospective, randomized study awoke significantly faster after desflurane than after sevoflurane anesthesia and the patients anesthetized with desflurane had higher oxygen saturation on entry to the PACU.     

Clinical comparison of sevoflurane and isoflurane in healthy patients.

We compared blood pressure and heart rate changes in healthy patients during anesthesia with sevoflurane (n = 50) versus isoflurane (n = 25) and the rate of recovery after such anesthesia. After premedication with intravenous administration of midazolam, induction of anesthesia with thiopental, and intubation of the trachea facilitated with succinylcholine or vecuronium, anesthesia was maintained with approximately 1 MAC (sevoflurane, 2.05%; isoflurane, 1.15%) of the volatile anesthetic in oxygen for the duration of the operation. Anesthetic concentration was varied as indicated to maintain arterial blood pressure at +/- 20% of baseline values. Sevoflurane and isoflurane produced similar systolic and diastolic arterial blood pressures, but heart rate after incision was faster in patients given isoflurane. Recovery of response to command was shorter in patients given sevoflurane than that in patients given isoflurane (7.5 +/- 0.5 min versus 18.6 +/- 2.0 min). Consistent with this finding, venous blood drawn after anesthesia showed a more rapid initial decay with sevoflurane. Nausea and vomiting were comparable in both groups. We conclude that sevoflurane anesthesia, as compared with isoflurane, is associated with possible advantageous effects on heart rate and recovery.     

The recovery of cognitive function after general anesthesia in elderly patients: a comparison of desflurane and sevoflurane.

We evaluated the cognitive recovery profiles in elderly patients after general anesthesia with desflurane or sevoflurane. After IRB approval, 70 ASA physical status I-III consenting elderly patients (> or =65 yr old) undergoing total knee or hip replacement procedures were randomly assigned to one of two general anesthetic groups. Propofol and fentanyl were administered for induction of anesthesia, followed by either desflurane 2%-4% or sevoflurane 1%-1.5% with nitrous oxide 65% in oxygen. The desflurane (2.5 +/- 0.6 MAC. h) and sevoflurane (2.7 +/- 0.5 MAC. h) concentrations were adjusted to maintain comparable depths of hypnosis using the electroencephalogram bispectral index monitor. The Mini-Mental State (MMS) test was used to assess cognitive function preoperatively and postoperatively at 1, 3, 6, and 24-h intervals. The use of desflurane was associated with a more rapid emergence from anesthesia (6.3 +/- 2.4 min versus 8.0 +/- 2.8 min) and a shorter length of stay in the postanesthesia care unit (213 +/- 66 min versus 241 +/- 87 min). However, there were no significant differences between the Desflurane and the Sevoflurane groups when the MMS scores were compared preoperatively, and postoperatively at 1, 3, 6, and 24 h. Compared with the preoperative (baseline) MMS scores, the values were significantly decreased at 1 h postoperatively (27.8 +/- 1.7 versus 29.5 +/- 0.5 in the Desflurane group, and 27.4 +/- 1.7 versus 29.2 +/- 1.0 in the Sevoflurane group, respectively). However, the MMS scores returned to preoperative baseline levels within 6 h after surgery. At 1 h and 3 h after surgery, 51% and 11% (versus 57% and 9%) of patients in the Desflurane (versus Sevoflurane) Group experienced cognitive impairment. In conclusion, desflurane is associated with a faster early recovery than sevoflurane after general anesthesia in elderly patients. However, recovery of cognitive function was similar after desflurane and sevoflurane-based anesthesia. IMPLICATIONS: Desflurane was associated with a faster early recovery than sevoflurane after general anesthesia in elderly patients. However, recovery of cognitive function was similar with both volatile anesthetics.     

A comparison of desflurane and isoflurane in patients undergoing coronary artery surgery

Animal studies indicate that desflurane and isoflurane have similar hemodynamic effects when administered in equipotent anesthetic concentrations. The authors compared desflurane and isoflurane, used as primary anesthetics for patients undergoing elective coronary artery bypass surgery whose left ventricular ejection fractions were greater than 0.34. After induction of anesthesia with thiopental (dose 180 +/- 45 mg [mean +/- standard deviation]) and fentanyl, 10 micrograms.kg-1, either desflurane or isoflurane was administered to maintain systolic blood pressure within 70-120% of, and heart rates less than 120% of, the patients' average preoperative values. If adjusting the end-tidal anesthetic concentration within the range of 0-2.0 MAC could not maintain these predefined hemodynamic limits, additional fentanyl or vasoactive drugs were used. Induction and maintenance of anesthesia was accompanied by a significant decrease in mean arterial pressure in both groups (desflurane 97 +/- 12 mmHg at control, decreasing to 71 +/- 5 mmHg during skin preparation; isoflurane 95 +/- 9 mmHg at control, 74 +/- 9 mmHg during skin preparation). One minute after sternotomy, mean arterial pressure in the isoflurane group had returned to control, 97 +/- 9 mmHg, which was significantly greater than in the desflurane group, 87 +/- 12 mmHg. Systolic arterial pressure was also significantly greater in the isoflurane group 1 min after intubation, during skin preparation, and 1 min after sternotomy. Otherwise, the hemodynamic effects of these volatile agents were similar. There were no differences between groups in the incidence of ECG changes indicative of myocardial ischemia prior to cardiopulmonary bypass, perioperative myocardial infarction, or perioperative mortality.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Desflurane and isoflurane in surgical patients: comparison of emergence time

In order to examine the clinical potential of desflurane (difluoromethyl-1-fluoro-2,2,2-trifluoroethyl ether) in humans, a randomized, controlled study was designed to compare time of emergence from anesthesia in patients undergoing elective surgery under desflurane anesthesia to that of patients under isoflurane anesthesia. Twenty-eight patients were randomly divided into four groups. Group 1 received isoflurane 0.65 MAC; group 2, desflurane 0.65 MAC; group 3, isoflurane 1.25 MAC; and group 4, desflurane 1.25 MAC. Anesthesia was induced with sodium thiopental, and N2O 60% was added to the volatile agent. Mean anesthetic exposure times (min [mean +/- SD]) were 108 +/- 49 in group 1, 132 +/- 46 in group 2, 147 +/- 74 in group 3, and 166 +/- 71 in group 4, with no significant differences between groups. The times from discontinuation of anesthetic gases until patients opened their eyes and squeezed the investigator's hand in response to a command were averaged and recorded as "emergence time." Emergence time was significantly less with desflurane than with isoflurane given at the same MAC. Patients receiving isoflurane 0.65 MAC responded to commands 15.6 +/- 4.3 min after discontinuation of the anesthetic; patients in the desflurane 0.65 MAC group responded in 8.8 +/- 2.7 min (P less than 0.01). Emergence time for isoflurane 1.25 MAC was 30.0 +/- 11.0 min; for desflurane 1.25 MAC it was 16.1 +/- 6.0 min (P less than 0.05). Our results confirm that emergence from desflurane anesthesia is more rapid than from isoflurane.     

Comparison of recovery after intermediate duration of anaesthesia with sevoflurane and isoflurane

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare recovery from anaesthesia after sevoflurane and isoflurane were administered to children for more than 90 min. METHODS: After parental informed consent and ethical committee approval, children aged between 2 months and 6 years, ASA I or II, were randomly allocated to sevoflurane (n=20) or isoflurane (n=20) groups. Halogenated agents were discontinued following skin closure and patients were ventilated mechanically with 100% oxygen until minimum alveolar concentration (MAC) values awake were obtained (endtidal concentrations 0.6 MAC for sevoflurane and 0.4 MAC for isoflurane). Effective perioperative analgesia was provided by a caudal block. RESULTS: The mean (+/- SD) duration of anaesthesia was 132 +/- 38 min and 139 +/- 49 min for sevoflurane and isoflurane, respectively. Early recovery occurred sooner in the isoflurane group (time to extubation was 16 +/- 7 min and 11 +/- 5 min, P<0.01; Aldrete's score at 0 min was 5.5 +/- 1.5 and 7.4 +/- 1.8, P<0.001, respectively). But the time to be fit for discharge from recovery room was similar at 136 +/- 18 min and 140 +/- 20 min, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: After intermediate duration of anaesthesia administered to children for up to 90 min, isoflurane and sevoflurane allow recovery after approximatively the same lapse of time.     

Recovery of cognitive function after remifentanil-propofol anesthesia: a comparison with desflurane and sevoflurane anesthesia

We compared the recovery characteristics of remifentanil, desflurane, and sevoflurane when used for anesthesia in elective operative procedures. Sixty ASA physical status I and II patients, aged 18-65 yr, were randomly assigned to receive remifentanil-propofol, desflurane-N2O, or sevoflurane-N2O anesthesia. Before the induction of anesthesia, the patients of the desflurane and sevoflurane groups received fentanyl 2 microg/kg. In all groups, anesthesia was induced with propofol and maintained either with remifentanil 0.25 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1), desflurane, or sevoflurane 0.85 MAC with 65% nitrous oxide in oxygen. Anesthetics were titrated to achieve an adequate level of surgical anesthesia and to maintain mean arterial pressure within 20% of baseline values. Early recovery times and a modified Aldrete Recovery Score > 9 were recorded. Trieger Dot Test and Digit Substitution Test (DSST) were performed the day before surgery and in the postanesthesia care unit to evaluate intermediate recovery. The remifentanil-propofol group had a significantly faster emergence than desflurane or sevoflurane, with no difference between both inhaled anesthetics. Thirty min after anesthesia administration, patients in the remifentanil-propofol and in the desflurane groups gave significantly more correct responses in the DSST compared with sevoflurane (remifentanil 87%, desflurane 83%, sevoflurane 56%), the impairment in the sevoflurane patients corresponding to the effects of a blood alcohol level of approximately 0.1% and, thus, being of clinical importance. Ninety minutes after anesthesia administration, no significant difference could be demonstrated among the groups in the DSST scores. Emergence and return of cognitive function was significantly faster after remifentanil-propofol compared with desflurane and sevoflurane up to 60 min after anesthesia administration. IMPLICATIONS: We compared awakening and intermediate recovery times after remifentanil-propofol anesthesia to desflurane-N2O and sevoflurane-N2O anesthesia. Emergence and return of cognitive function was significantly faster after remifentanil-propofol compared with desflurane and sevoflurane up to 60 min after anesthesia administration.     

Recovery from Sevoflurane Anesthesia: A Comparison to Isoflurane and Propofol Anesthesia

Backgroud: Sevoflurane has a lower blood:gas partition coefficient than isoflurane, which may cause a more rapid recovery from anesthesia; it also might cause faster emergence times than for propofol-based anesthesia. We evaluated a database that included recovery endpoints from controlled, randomized, prospective studies sponsored by Abbott Laboratories that compared sevoflurane to isoflurane or propofol when extubation was planned immediately after completion of elective surgery in adult patients.

Methods: Sevoflurane was compared to isoflurane in eight studies (N = 2,008) and to propofol in three studies (N = 436). Analysis of variance was applied using least squares method mean values to calculate the pooled mean difference in recovery endpoints between primary anesthetics. The effects of patient age and case duration also were determined.

Results: Sevoflurane resulted in statistically significant shorter times to emergence (-3.3 min), response to command (-3.1 min), orientation (-4.0 min) and first analgesic (-8.9 min) but not time to eligibility for discharge (-1.7 min) compared to isoflurane (mean difference). Times to recovery endpoints increased with increasing case duration with isoflurane but not with sevoflurane (patients receiving isoflurane took 4-5 min more to emerge and respond to commands and 8.6 min more to achieve orientation during cases longer than 3 hr in duration than those receiving sevoflurane). Patients older than 65 yr had longer times to orientation, but within any age group, orientation was always faster after sevoflurane. There were no differences in recovery times between sevoflurane and propofol.     

Comparison of induction, maintenance, and recovery characteristics of sevoflurane-N2O and propofol-sevoflurane-N2O with propofol-isoflurane-N2O anesthesia.

Induction of, maintenance of, and recovery from sevoflurane anesthesia were compared with propofol and isoflurane anesthesia when administered with nitrous oxide to patients undergoing gynecologic surgery. Seventy-five healthy (ASA I or II), consenting patients were randomly assigned to receive either (I) propofol for induction of anesthesia and isoflurane-nitrous oxide for maintenance (control), (II) propofol for induction and sevoflurane-nitrous oxide for maintenance, or (III) sevoflurane-nitrous oxide for induction and maintenance of anesthesia. Inhaled induction of anesthesia with sevoflurane-nitrous oxide was rapid (109 +/- 25 s to loss of consciousness) and without any untoward hemodynamic changes or episodes of coughing and laryngospasm. Mean arterial blood pressure after induction of anesthesia with propofol (71 +/- 11, 73 +/- 12 mm Hg for groups I and II, respectively) was lower than when sevoflurane (80 +/- 14 mm Hg) was used. The emergence time after discontinuation of isoflurane-nitrous oxide (6.7 +/- 2.2 min) was significantly longer than after propofol-sevoflurane-nitrous oxide or sevoflurane-nitrous oxide alone (4.1 +/- 2.2 and 4.0 +/- 2.0 min for groups II and III, respectively). However, later recovery events did not differ between groups. Serum fluoride levels increased after administration of sevoflurane but not isoflurane. The levels of fluoride ions correlated with the degree of exposure to sevoflurane in MAC-hours. In conclusion, induction of anesthesia with either propofol or sevoflurane-nitrous oxide was rapid and without significant side effects. Emergence and early recovery after maintenance of anesthesia with sevoflurane-nitrous oxide was significantly faster than that after an isoflurane-nitrous oxide combination.     

Sevoflurane speeds recovery of baroreflex control of heart rate after minor surgical procedures compared with isoflurane.

Volatile anesthetics attenuate arterial baroreflex functions, whereas noxious stimuli may modify baroreflex-induced circulatory responses during anesthesia. We designed the present study to compare baroreflex control of heart rate during sevoflurane and isoflurane anesthesia in young healthy surgical patients. Baroreflex sensitivity was assessed in 24 patients randomized to receive either sevoflurane (n = 12) or isoflurane (n = 12) for general anesthesia. After an 8- to 10-h fast and no premedication, measurements of RR intervals obtained from electrocardiography and systolic blood pressure (SBP) measured through a radial artery catheter were made at conscious baseline (Awake), during end-tidal sevoflurane 2% or isoflurane 1.2% plus 67% nitrous oxide before incision (Anesth), during surgery at end-tidal sevoflurane 2% or isoflurane 1.2% plus 67% nitrous oxide (Surg), and 20 min after tracheal extubation (Recov). Baroreflex responses were triggered by bolus i.v. injections of phenylephrine (100-150 micrograms) and nitroprusside (100-150 micrograms) to increase and decrease SBP by 15-30 mm Hg, respectively. The linear portions of the baroreflex curves relating RR intervals and SBP were determined to obtain baroreflex sensitivities. Baroreflex sensitivities to both pressor and depressor tests were significantly depressed during Anesth and Surg periods compared with Awake values in both anesthetic techniques. The pressor test sensitivity during the Recov period returned to the Awake value after sevoflurane (12.9 +/- 3.7 vs 11.0 +/- 8.7 ms/mm Hg [mean +/- SD]) but was still depressed after isoflurane anesthesia (13.9 +/- 8.0 vs 4.8 +/- 3.2 ms/mm Hg; P < 0.05). The depressor test sensitivities during the Recov period remained depressed after both anesthetic techniques. We conclude that both sevoflurane and isoflurane depress arterial baroreflex function during anesthesia and surgery, but the pressor test sensitivity was restored more quickly after sevoflurane than after isoflurane anesthesia. Implications: Arterial baroreflex function is an important neural control system for maintaining cardiovascular stability. We found that baroreflex control of heart rate due to hypertensive perturbation returned to the preanesthetic level more quickly after sevoflurane than after isoflurane anesthesia.     

Desflurane reduces the effective therapeutic infusion rate (ETI) of cisatracurium more than isoflurane, sevoflurane, or propofol

PURPOSE: The present study investigated the interaction between the cumulative dose requirements of cisatracurium and anesthesia with isoflurane, sevoflurane, desflurane or propofol using closed-loop feedback control. METHODS: Fifty-six patients (18-85 yr, vitrectomies of more than one hour) were studied. In the volatile anesthetics groups, anesthesia was maintained by 1.3 MAC of isoflurane, sevoflurane or desflurane; in the propofol group, anesthesia was maintained by a continuous infusion of 6-8 mg.kg(-1).hr(-1) propofol. After bolus application of 0.1 mg.kg(-1) cisatracurium, a T1%-level of 10% of control level (train-of-four stimulation every 20 sec) was maintained using closed-loop feedback controlled infusion of cisatracurium. The effective therapeutic infusion rate (ETI) was estimated from the asymptotic steady-state infusion rate Iss. The Iss was derived from fitting an asymptotic line to the measured cumulative dose requirement curve. The ETI of the different groups was compared using Kruskal-Wallis- test, followed by rank sum test, corrected for the number of comparisons, P <0.05 was regarded as showing significant difference. RESULTS: ETI in the isoflurane group was 35.6 +/- 8.6 microg.m(-2).min(-1), in the sevoflurane group 36.4+/- 11.9 microg m(-2).min(-1), in the desflurane group 23.8 +/- 6.3 microg.m(-2).min(-1). The ETI of the volatile anesthetic groups were all significantly lower than the ETI in the propofol group at 61.7 +/- 25.3 microg.m(-2).min(-1) (P <0.002). The ETI in the desflurane group was significantly lower than in all other groups (P <0.02). CONCLUSION: In comparison to propofol, isoflurane, sevoflurane and desflurane reduce the cumulative dose requirements of cisatracurium to maintain a 90% neuromuscular blockade by 42%, 41% and 60%, respectively.     

Comparative Pharmacodynamic Modeling of the Electroencephalography-slowing Effect of Isoflurane, Sevoflurane, and Desflurane

Background: The most common measure to compare potencies of volatile anesthetics is minimum alveolar concentration (MAC), although this value describes only a single point on a quantal concentration-response curve and most likely reflects more the effects on the spinal cord rather than on the brain. To obtain more complete concentration-response curves for the cerebral effects of isoflurane, sevoflurane, and desflurane, the authors used the spectral edge frequency at the 95th percentile of the power spectrum (SEF95) as a measure of cerebral effect.

Methods: Thirty-nine patients were randomized to isoflurane, sevoflurane, or desflurane groups. After induction with propofol, intubation, and a waiting period, end-tidal anesthetic concentrations were randomly varied between 0.6 and 1.3 MAC, and the EEG was recorded continuously. Population pharmacodynamic modeling was performed using the software package NONMEM.

Results: The population mean EC50 values of the final model for SEF (95) suppression were 0.66 +/- 0.08 (+/- SE of estimate) vol% for isoflurane, 1.18 +/- 0.10 vol% for sevoflurane, and 3.48 +/- 0.66 vol% for desflurane. The slopes of the concentration-response curves were not significantly different; the common value was [Greek small letter lambda] = 0.86 +/- 0.06. The Ke0 value was significantly higher for desflurane (0.61 +/- 0.11 min-1), whereas separate values for isoflurane and sevoflurane yielded no better fit than the common value of 0.29 +/- 0.04 min (-1). When concentration data were converted into fractions of the respective MAC values, no significant difference of the C50 values for the three anesthetic agents was found.     

Changing from Isoflurane to Desflurane toward the End of Anesthesia Does Not Accelerate Recovery in Humans

Background: In an attempt to combine the advantage of the lower solubilities of new inhaled anesthetics with the lesser cost of older anesthetics, some clinicians substitute the former for the latter toward the end of anesthesia. The authors tried to determine whether substituting desflurane for isoflurane in the last 30 min of a 120-min anesthetic would accelerate recovery.

Methods: Five volunteers were anesthetized three times for 2 h using a fresh gas inflow of 2 l/min: 1.25 minimum alveolar concentration (MAC) desflurane, 1.25 MAC isoflurane, and 1.25 MAC isoflurane for 90 min followed by 30 min of desflurane concentrations sufficient to achieve a total of 1.25 MAC equivalent ("crossover"). Recovery from anesthesia was assessed by the time to respond to commands, by orientation, and by tests of cognitive function.

Results: Compared with isoflurane, the crossover technique did not accelerate early or late recovery (P > 0.05). Recovery from isoflurane or the crossover anesthetic was significantly longer than after desflurane (P < 0.05). Times to response to commands for isoflurane, the crossover anesthetic, and desflurane were 23 +/- 5 min (mean +/- SD), 21 +/- 5 min, and 11 +/- 1 min, respectively, and to orientation the times were 27 +/- 7 min, 25 +/- 5 min, and 13 +/- 2 min, respectively. Cognitive test performance returned to reference values 15-30 min sooner after desflurane than after isoflurane or the crossover anesthetic. Isoflurane cognitive test performance did not differ from that with the crossover anesthetic at any time.     

The effects of sevoflurane, isoflurane and desflurane on QT interval of the ECG

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: To determine if there is any significant difference between the effects of desflurane, isoflurane and sevoflurane on the QT interval, QT dispersion, heart rate corrected QT interval and QTc dispersion of the electrocardiogram. METHODS: The study was conducted in a prospective, double blind and randomized manner in a teaching hospital. Ninety ASA I patients, aged 16-50 yr, undergoing general anaesthesia for noncardiac surgery were studied. RESULTS: There was no significant change in QT intervals during the study in any group (P > 0.05). QT dispersion in the sevoflurane group 49+/-14 ms vs. 37+/-10 ms; in the desflurane group 55+/-16 and 62+/-21 ms vs. 35+/-14 ms and in the isoflurane group 54+/-26 and 59+/-24 ms vs. 42+/-19 ms were significantly increased at 3 and 10 min after 1 MAC of steady end-tidal anaesthetic concentration compared with baseline values (P < 0.05). QTc values in the sevoflurane group were 444+/-24 and 435+/-2 1ms vs. 413+/-19 ms (P < 0.05), in the isoflurane group were 450+/-26 and 455+/-34 ms vs. 416+/-34 ms (P < 0.05), in the desflurane group were 450+/-26 and 455+/-34 ms vs. 416+/-34 ms (P < 0.05) at 3 and 10 min after reaching 1 MAC of anaesthetic concentration and significantly increased compared with baseline values. QTc dispersion increased significantly with sevoflurane 62+/-14 ms vs. 45+/-16 ms (P < 0.05); isoflurane 70+/-36 ms at 3 min and 75+/-36 ms at 10 min after reaching 1 MAC of anaesthetic concentration vs. 50+/-24 ms (P < 0.05); desflurane 67+/-25 ms at 3 min and 74+/-27 ms at 10 min after 1 MAC concentration vs. 41+/-22 ms (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Sevoflurane, isoflurane and desflurane all prolonged QTd, QTc and QTcd but there were no significant intergroup differences.