Airway irritation produced by volatile anaesthetics during brief inhalation: comparison of halothane, enflurane, isoflurane and sevoflurane

Doi, Matsuyuki; Ikeda, Kazuyuki

doi:10.1007/bf03011308

Cited by 211 publications

(97 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, propofol has its own side-effects such as pain on injection [8,9] and greater respiratory depression [10]. Sevoflurane is suitable for quick inhalational induction technique even in high concentrations because of its low blood gas solubility (0.69) [11] and minimal respiratory irritant effect [12]. The vitalcapacity induction technique with sevoflurane was used to make the technique similar to that of intravenous bolus injection of propofol.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conditions for laryngeal mask insertionA comparison of propofol versus sevoflurane with or without alfentanil

et al. 1999

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One hundred unpremedicated ASA 1 or 2 patients scheduled for elective surgery were divided equally into four groups and recruited into this prospective, randomised parallel groups study. Induction was with propofol 2.5 mgkg−1 or vital‐capacity breath induction with sevoflurane (> 7% in the inspiratory gas) in 65% nitrous oxide and oxygen, or gaseous induction with sevoflurane plus alfentanil 5 μgkg−1 or propofol 2.5 mgkg−1 and alfentanil 5 μgkg−1. The conditions for laryngeal mask insertion were assessed and graded on a three‐point scale using six variables. The overall condition for laryngeal mask insertion was assessed as excellent, satisfactory or poor on the basis of total score in each group. Excellent or satisfactory conditions were observed in 25 (100%) patients in the sevoflurane–alfentanil group, 22 (88%) in the propofol–alfentanil group and 16 (64%) patients each in the propofol and sevoflurane groups (p < 0.001). A sevoflurane–alfentanil combination provides better conditions for laryngeal mask insertion when compared with sevoflurane alone, or a propofol–alfentanil combination.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conditions for laryngeal mask insertionA comparison of propofol versus sevoflurane with or without alfentanil

et al. 1999

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Theoretically, rapid adjustment to the anesthetic plane, should allow more rapid recovery, which would decrease the time a wild animal is kept in captivity. In humans, sevoflurane is popular for anesthetizing children because it causes less respiratory irritation than halothane, enflurane, or isoflurane (Doi and Ikeda, 1993).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Isoflurane and Sevoflurane for Anesthesia in Beaver

Breck

Gaynor

2003

Journal of Wildlife Diseases

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We compared the hemodynamic and respiratory effects, recovery time, and cost of two gas inhalants (isoflurane and sevoflurane) for anesthetic induction and maintenance of beaver (Castor canadensis) during surgery to implant radio transmitters in the peritoneal cavity. Heart rate, respiratory rate, relative hemoglobin saturation with oxygen (SpO 2 ), and body temperature were measured every 5 min for the first 45 min, and arterial blood gas was measured once, 25 min into the anesthetic procedure. Induction for either agent was smooth and rapid. Heart rate and respiratory rate both decreased during the procedure though neither was lower than baseline values reported in the literature for beaver. Relative hemoglobin saturation with oxygen, body temperature, and blood gas variables did not differ between each anesthetic regime. Both inhalants caused slight respiratory acidosis. Recovery time from anesthesia was highly variable (1-178 min) but did not differ statistically between drugs. Sevoflurane costs ($22.30/60 min) were much higher than isoflurane costs ($3.50/60 min). We recommend isoflurane or sevoflurane for anesthetic induction and maintenance of beaver because of the lack of physiologic differences.

show abstract

“…Possible disadvantages of sevoflurane over isoflurane include the possibility of nephrotoxicity and higher cost. Sevoflurane has also been reported to cause less airway mucosa irritation than isoflurane in humans, particularly if mask induction is used (Doi and Ikeda, 1993).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…At 1 Minimum Alveolar Concentration (MAC), both sevoflurane and isoflurane cause a dose dependent decrease in respiratory rate and an increase in end-tidal partial pressures of carbon dioxide (PETCO2) in dogs, sheep and goats (Galloway et al, 2004;Hikasa et al, 1998;Johnson et al, 1998;Mutoh et al, 1997). Sevoflurane has the advantage of causing less airway mucosa irritation than isoflurane in humans, particularly during mask induction (Doi and Ikeda, 1993).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Isoflurane and Sevoflurane Anesthesia in Holstein Calves for Placement of Portal and Jugular Vein Cannulas

Sellers

Lin

Chamorro

et al. 2013

American Journal of Animal and Veterinary Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Isoflurane and sevoflurane are the two most commonly used inhalation anesthetics in veterinary medicine today. This study compared the anesthetic effects between isoflurane and sevoflurane in 17 calves undergoing surgery for placement of portal and jugular vein cannulas. Using a randomized control trial, calves were assigned to receive sevoflurane or isoflurane. Anesthesia was induced with xylazine and ketamine then maintained with the assigned inhalation anesthetic. Parameters for heart rate, respiratory rate, indirect blood pressures, oxygen hemoglobin saturation and end-tidal carbon dioxide were monitored and recorded during surgery. The anesthetic concentrations of the vaporizers were adjusted according to the calves' responses, e.g., blood pressure, eye position, respiratory and heart rate, to surgical stimulation. Upon discontinuation of the inhalation anesthetic, calves were placed in sternal recumbency and recovery variables including time to extubation, time to first movement, attempts to stand and time to standing were observed and recorded. Statistical analysis was performed using a two-sample t-test on the recorded variables. There were no statistical differences between isoflurane and sevoflurane for any of the parameters recorded during anesthetic maintenance or recovery. The results of this study showed a faster time to first movement and extubation, 3.38±1.85 min and 11.75±3.73 min for sevoflurane compared to 7.56±5.34 min and 15.56±8.69 min for isoflurane, respectively. Attempts to stand were 3.00±2.14 for sevoflurane and 3.22±1.79 for isoflurane. Though the time to standing during recovery was not statistically different between anesthetics, the values did indicate a quicker trend of recovery from sevoflurane. Both inhalation anesthetics produced comparable anesthetic qualities and there were no statistical differences between the parameters recorded during maintenance of anesthesia. On the basis of the reported results, sevoflurane and isoflurane are suitable inhalation anesthetics for use in calves. However, present cost of sevoflurane is a limiting factor for its use in food animals.

show abstract

Airway irritation produced by volatile anaesthetics during brief inhalation: comparison of halothane, enflurane, isoflurane and sevoflurane

Cited by 211 publications

References 16 publications

Conditions for laryngeal mask insertionA comparison of propofol versus sevoflurane with or without alfentanil

Conditions for laryngeal mask insertionA comparison of propofol versus sevoflurane with or without alfentanil

Comparison of Isoflurane and Sevoflurane for Anesthesia in Beaver

Comparison of Isoflurane and Sevoflurane Anesthesia in Holstein Calves for Placement of Portal and Jugular Vein Cannulas

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About