Comparison of the Effects of Sevoflurane and Desflurane on Endothelial Glycocalyx in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Hysterectomy: A Randomized, Double-Blind Trial.

Objective: Various enzymes, reactive oxygen species, inflammatory conditions, and major surgeries cause endothelial glycocalyx breakdown. Inhalation of anaesthetic agents may have protective effects on the endothelium. This study compared syndecan-1 and heparan sulfate levels to evaluate the effects of sevoflurane and desflurane on the endothelial glycocalyx. Methods: This prospective randomized, double-blind study included 46 patients undergoing laparoscopic hysterectomy. The participants were allocated into sevoflurane and desflurane groups. Subsequently, blood samples were drawn at three time points: before anaesthesia induction for a baseline value (T0), after pneumoperitoneum (T1), and after extubation (T2). Heparan sulfate and syndecan-1 levels were measured. Results: There was no statistical difference between the sevoflurane and desflurane groups in terms of heparan sulfate and syndecan-1 levels at any time point. A significant difference was found only in the desflurane group in the intragroup comparisons of the measurements of heparan sulfate levels (χ2=29.826, P < 0.001). Matched pairs of the time points in the desflurane group showed that P=0.036 (Z=-2.099) for T1-T0, P < 0.001 (Z=-3.924) for T2-T0, and P < 0.001 (Z=-4.197) for T2-T1. The change in percentage between T2 and T1 of heparan sulfate in the desflurane group was found to be statistically significant (P=0.034). Conclusion: The damage caused by surgical stress on the endothelial glycocalyx can be reduced by both desflurane and sevoflurane. The protective effect of desflurane is more prominent than that of sevoflurane.

The effect of different flow levels and concentrations of sevoflurane during the wash-in phase on volatile agent consumption: a randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: The standard procedure for low-flow anesthesia usually incorporates a high fresh gas flow (FGF) of 4-6 L/minute during the wash-in phase. However, the administration of a high FGF (4-6 L/min) increases the inhaled anesthetic agent consumption. This study was designed to compare the sevoflurane consumption at 2 rates of flow and vaporizer concentration during the wash-in period. METHODS: Patients were randomly enrolled into high FGF (HFGF) (n = 30) and low FGF (LFGF) (n = 30) groups. During the wash-in, the HFGF group received 4 L/minute FGF with a sevoflurane vaporizer setting of 2.5%, and the LFGF group received 1 L/minute FGF with a vaporizer setting of 8%. Once the wash-in was complete, anesthesia maintenance was performed with 0.5 L/min FGF with a vaporizer setting of 2.5-4.5% in both groups. The patient demographic data, bispectral index values, hemodynamic variables, wash-in time, sevoflurane consumption during the wash-in phase, and total sevoflurane consumption were analyzed. RESULTS: The median sevoflurane consumption in the wash-in phase was 8.2 mL (7.1-9.3) in the HFGF group and 2.7 mL (2.2-3.1) in the LFGF group (p = 0.001). The mean total sevoflurane consumption was 17.41 ± 3.58 mL in the patients who received HFGF and 14.93 ± 3.57 mL in the LFGF group (p = 0.001). The mean wash-in completion time was 12.49 ± 2.79 min in the HFGF group and 3.35 ± 0.67 min in the LFGF group (p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The anesthetic agent consumption during the wash-in phase was approximately 3 times lower with the administration of sevoflurane at 1 L/minute FGF than the use of 4 L/minute FGF.