Sofnolime with different water content causes different effects in two sevoflurane inhalational induction techniques with respect to the output of compound-A.

OBJECTIVE: During sevoflurane anesthesia with Sofnolime for CO(2) absorption, the factors affecting the production of compound A (a chemical is nepherotoxic) are still not clear. This study is designed to investigate the effects of different fresh gas flow during induction, the vital capacity induction (VCI) vs. the tidal volume breath induction (TBI) on the compound-A production with a fresh Sofnolime or a dehydrated Sofnolime using a simulated lung model. METHOD: The experiments were randomly divided into four groups: group one, VCIf, vital capacity fresh gas inflow with fresh Sofnolime; group two, TBIf, tidal volume breath fresh gas inflow with fresh Sofnolime; group three, VCId, vital capacity fresh gas inflow with dehydrated Sofnolime, and group four, TBId, tidal volume breath fresh gas inflow with dehydrated Sofnolime. The inspired sevoflurane was maintained at 8%, the concentrations of compound-A were assayed using Gas-spectrum technique, and Sofnolime temperatures were monitored at 1-min intervals throughout the experiment. RESULTS: The mean and maximum concentrations of compound A were significantly higher in the vital capacity group than the tidal volume breath group (P<0.01). At the beginning of anesthesia maintenance, the compound-A concentration in group VCIf was 36.28±6.13 ppm, which was significantly higher than the 27.32±4.21 ppm observed in group TBIf (P<0.01). However, these values decreased to approximately 2 ppm in the dehydrated Sofnolime groups. Sofnolime temperatures increased rapidly in the dehydrated Sofnolime groups but slowly in the fresh Sofnolime groups. CONCLUSION: With fresh Sofnolime, vital capacity induction increased compound-A production in the circuit system compared with tidal volume breath induction. However, with dehydrated Sofnolime, the effects of the two inhalation induction techniques on compound-A output were not significantly different.

Degradation products of different water content sevoflurane in carbon dioxide absorbents by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry analysis.

BACKGROUND: Sevoflurane is currently used as a volatile inhalation anesthetic with many clinical advantages. A representative degradation product, compound A, was quantitatively measured to investigate whether there are different reactions between two kinds of water content sevoflurane formulations with different carbon dioxide (CO2) absorbents. METHODS: A closed-circle breathe bag with the Dräger Fabius GS anesthesia apparatus was used as an artificial rubber lung. The experiments were grouped according to different sevoflurane formulations: group A: higher-water sevoflurane (Ultane); group B: lower-water sevoflurane (Sevoness). During the experiment, CO2 (200 ml/min) was continually perfused to keep the end-tidal pressure of CO2 (P(ET)CO2) at 35 - 45 mmHg. The artificial ventilation was set to 6 L/min, and the breathing rate at 12 breaths/min. The circuit was operated with constant fresh gas flow rate (1 L/min) and the sevoflurane concentration was kept at 1.0 minimum alveolar concentration (MAC) for 240 minutes. At 0, 10, 20, 30, 60, 90, 120, 180 and 240 minutes, gas was collected from the Y-piece. Gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS) was used to quantify the major degradation product, compound A, with different water content sevoflurane. PETCO2 and sevoflurane concentration, and the temperature of the canister were continuously monitored during the experiment. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in P(ET)CO2 and sevoflurane concentrations between the two groups. Drägersorb 800 plus produced the highest concentrations of compound A compared with other sodalimes, and Sevoness in Drägersorb 800 plus generated more compound A than Ultane (P < 0.05). There were significant differences in the peak and average compound A concentrations between Ultane and Sevoness with Drägersorb 800 plus (P < 0.05), while the compound A concentration produced by Sodasorb grase and sofonolime in the two groups showed no significant difference (P > 0.05). In the same group, the peak and average of compound A concentration produced by Sodasorb grase and sofonolime showed significant difference with Drägersorb 800 plus (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The water content of sevoflurane and potassium hydroxide in CO2 absorbent can influence compound A production.

A comparison between vital capacity induction and tidal breathing induction techniques for the induction of anesthesia and compound A production.

BACKGROUND: Vital capacity induction and tidal breathing induction are currently administered for inhalation induction of anesthesia with sevoflurane. The aim of this study was to compare them using sevoflurane with respect to induction time, complications of inhalation induction, and compound A production in adult patients. METHODS: Fifty-one women with American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I-II undergoing mammary gland tumorectomy were randomly assigned to receive either vital capacity induction or tidal breathing induction with 8% sevoflurane at 6 L/min followed by laryngeal mask airway insertion. Induction times, complications of inhalation induction, and vital signs were recorded. Inspired concentrations of compound A were assayed and sofnolime temperatures were monitored at one-minute intervals after sevoflurane administration. RESULTS: The time to loss of eyelash reflex was significantly shorter with the vital capacity induction technique than with the tidal breathing induction technique ((43.8 ± 13.4) seconds vs. (70.8 ± 16.4) seconds, respectively; P < 0.01). Cardiovascular stability was similar in both groups. The incidence of complications was significantly less with the vital capacity induction technique than with the tidal breathing induction technique (7.7% vs. 32%, respectively; P < 0.01). However, the mean and maximum concentrations of compound A during induction were significantly higher in the vital capacity group than those in the tidal breathing group (P < 0.05); compound A concentration at the beginning of anesthesia maintenance was (40.73 ± 10.83) ppm in the vital capacity group and (29.45 ± 7.51) ppm in tidal breathing group (P = 0.019). CONCLUSION: For inhalation induction of anesthesia, the vital capacity induction was faster and produced fewer complications than that for tidal breathing induction, but increased compound A production in the circuit system.