Objective:

We aimed to compare minimal flow sevoflurane and desflurane anaesthesia in terms of hemodynamic parameters, body temperature, anaesthetic gas consumption and cost.

Methods:

120 patients with ASA I-II (>18yo) who underwent elective surgery for longer than 60 min after general anaesthesia were randomized into two groups. The Dräger Perseus® A500 workstation was used. Pre-oxygenation was performed for 3 min with 6 L min-1 to 100% oxygen. Fractional inspirium oxygen concentration (FiO2) was reduced to 40%, fresh gas flow was 4 L min-1 after intubation. Sevoflurane or desflurane was started at 1.5 minimal alveolar concentration (MAC). When the MAC value reached 0.9, fresh gas flow was reduced to 0.5 L min-1, FiO2 was increased to 68%. At the end of the surgery, the vaporizer was switched off, the fresh gas flow was increased (4 L min-1, FiO2 100%). When the train-of-four (TOF) ratio was 100%, extubation was carried out.

Results:

There were no differences in patient characteristics and initial hemodynamic parameters of the groups. There were statistically significant differences between the times to reach 0.9 MAC, extubation and eye opening; anaesthetic, O2 and air consumption in both groups.

Conclusion:

With minimal flow, the time to reach target MAC, time to extubation and eye opening were significantly faster for desflurane and anaesthetic, oxygen and air consumption in desflurane anaesthesia were less than sevoflurane. Thus, we can say that desflurane has faster anaesthetic induction and recovery time with lower anaesthetic consumption than sevoflurane.

Keywords: Consumption, desflurane, minimal flow anaesthesia, sevoflurane