Why the study?
The study aimed to compare minimal flow sevoflurane and desflurane anaesthesia regarding hemodynamic parameters, body temperature, anaesthetic gas consumption, and cost.
Does minimal flow desflurane compared to sevoflurane improve recovery time and reduce anaesthetic consumption in patients undergoing anaesthesia?
Does minimal flow desflurane compared to sevoflurane improve recovery time and reduce anaesthetic consumption in patients undergoing anaesthesia?
Desflurane offers faster anaesthetic induction and recovery times with lower gas consumption compared to sevoflurane in minimal flow anaesthesia.
Desflurane may speed recovery in minimal-flow cases; leaves open whether differences affect outcomes or costs in trials.
OBJECTIVE: We aimed to compare minimal flow sevoflurane and desflurane anaesthesia in terms of hemodynamic parameters, body temperature, anaesthetic gas consumption and cost. METHODS: 100%). When the train-of-four (TOF) ratio was 100%, extubation was carried out. RESULTS: 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.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Taşkın et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: