Comparisons of the effects of the sevoflurane and propofol on acute ischemia reperfusion and DNA damages in rabbits / Comparações dos efeitos de sevoflurano e propofol sobre isquemia-reperfusão aguda e danos ao DNA em coelhos

Abstract Background and objectives: The aim of this study was to compare the effects of sevoflurane and propofol anesthesia on oxidative DNA damage that occurs in low-extremity ischemia and is caused by tourniquet application. Methods: Fourteen New Zealand rabbits were randomly allocated into two equal groups. Group S (n = 7) received sevoflurane (2.5-4 percent) inhalation and Group P (n = 7) received a propofol infusion (1-2 mg·kg-1·min-1), after which a pneumatic tourniquet was placed on the right lower extremity. Blood samples were collected prior to tourniquet placement (baseline), 120 min after ischemia, 15 min after ischemia and 120 minutes (min) after ischemia. Malondialdehyde (MDA) levels were analyzed to determine lipid peroxidation, and single cell gel electrophoresis (SCGE) was used to determine DNA damage. Results: At 15 min after ischemia, the MDA levels in Group P (8.15 ± 2.61 µM) were higher than baseline (6.26 ± 3.19 µM, p = 0.026) and Group S (4.98 ± 0.77 µM, p = 0.01). DNA damage was similar in both groups, although DNA damage was higher than baseline (tail moment 0.63 ± 0.27, tail intensity 3.76 ± 1.26) in Group P at the 15th minute of reperfusion (tail moment 1.05 ± 0.45, p = 0.06; tail intensity 5.33 ± 1.56, p = 0.01). The increase in tail moment and tail intensity returned to normal levels in both groups 2 hours after the termination of ischemia. Conclusion: Given that oxidative stress and genotoxic effect disappear in the late stages of reperfusion, we conclude that neither sevoflurane nor propofol can be considered superior to the other in anesthesia practices for extremity surgeries involving the use of a tourniquet.

Resumo Justificativa e objetivos: Comparar os efeitos da anestesia com sevoflurano e propofol sobre o dano oxidativo ao DNA que ocorre na isquemia de extremidade inferior e é causada pela aplicação de torniquete. Métodos: Foram alocados aleatoriamente em dois grupos iguais 14 coelhos da raça Nova Zelândia. Grupo S (n = 7) recebeu inalação de sevoflurano (2,5-4%) e Grupo P (n = 7) recebeu perfusão de propofol (1-2 mg·kg-1·min-1), logo após um torniquete pneumático foi colocado na extremidade inferior direita. Amostras de sangue foram coletadas antes da colocação do torniquete (fase basal), após 120 minutos de isquemia, 15 minutos após a isquemia e 120 minutos após a isquemia. Os níveis de malondialdeído (MDA) foram analisados para determinar a peroxidação de lipídios e eletroforese em gel de célula única (EGCU) foi usada para determinar o dano ao DNA. Resultados: Aos 15 minutos após a isquemia, os níveis de MDA no Grupo P (8,15 ± 2,61 µM) foram superiores aos da fase basal (6,26 ± 3,19 µM, p = 0,026) e dp Grupo S (4,98 ± 0,77 µM, p = 0,01). O dano causado ao DNA foi semelhante nos dois grupos, embora tenha sido maior do que na fase basal (momento da cauda 0,63 ± 0,27, intensidade da cauda 3,76 ± 1,26) no Grupo P no 15 minutos de reperfusão (momento da cauda 1,05 ± 0,45, p = 0,06; intensidade da cauda 5,33 ± 1,56, p = 0,01). O aumento no momento da cauda e a intensidade da cauda voltaram aos níveis normais nos dois grupos duas horas após o término da isquemia. Conclusão: Como o estresse oxidativo e o efeito genotóxico desaparecem nos estágios finais da reperfusão, concluímos que não há superioridade tanto de sevoflurano quanto de propofol em práticas de anestesia para procedimentos cirúrgicos de extremidades que envolvem o uso de torniquete.

[Comparisons of the effects of the sevoflurane and propofol on acute ischemia reperfusion and DNA damages in rabbits]. / Comparações dos efeitos de sevoflurano e propofol sobre isquemia­reperfusão aguda e danos ao DNA em coelhos.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the effects of sevoflurane and propofol anesthesia on oxidative DNA damage that occurs in low-extremity ischemia and is caused by tourniquet application. METHODS: Fourteen New Zealand rabbits were randomly allocated into two equal groups. Group S (n=7) received sevoflurane (2.5-4 percent) inhalation and Group P (n=7) received a propofol infusion (1-2mg·kg-1·min-1), after which a pneumatic tourniquet was placed on the right lower extremity. Blood samples were collected prior to tourniquet placement (baseline), 120min after ischemia, 15min after ischemia and 120minutes (min) after ischemia. Malondialdehyde (MDA) levels were analyzed to determine lipid peroxidation, and single cell gel electrophoresis (SCGE) was used to determine DNA damage. RESULTS: At 15min after ischemia, the MDA levels in Group P (8.15±2.61µM) were higher than baseline (6.26±3.19µM, p=0.026) and Group S (4.98±0.77µM, p=0.01). DNA damage was similar in both groups, although DNA damage was higher than baseline (tail moment 0.63±0.27, tail intensity 3.76±1.26) in Group P at the 15th minute of reperfusion (tail moment 1.05±0.45, p=0.06; tail intensity 5.33±1.56, p=0.01). The increase in tail moment and tail intensity returned to normal levels in both groups 2hours after the termination of ischemia. CONCLUSION: Given that oxidative stress and genotoxic effect disappear in the late stages of reperfusion, we conclude that neither sevoflurane nor propofol can be considered superior to the other in anesthesia practices for extremity surgeries involving the use of a tourniquet.

Comparisons of the effects of the sevoflurane and propofol on acute ischemia reperfusion and DNA damages in rabbits.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the effects of sevoflurane and propofol anesthesia on oxidative DNA damage that occurs in low-extremity ischemia and is caused by tourniquet application. METHODS: Fourteen New Zealand rabbits were randomly allocated into two equal groups. Group S (n=7) received sevoflurane (2.5-4 percent) inhalation and Group P (n=7) received a propofol infusion (1-2mg·kg-1·min-1), after which a pneumatic tourniquet was placed on the right lower extremity. Blood samples were collected prior to tourniquet placement (baseline), 120min after ischemia, 15min after ischemia and 120minutes (min) after ischemia. Malondialdehyde (MDA) levels were analyzed to determine lipid peroxidation, and single cell gel electrophoresis (SCGE) was used to determine DNA damage. RESULTS: At 15min after ischemia, the MDA levels in Group P (8.15±2.61µM) were higher than baseline (6.26±3.19µM, p=0.026) and Group S (4.98±0.77µM, p=0.01). DNA damage was similar in both groups, although DNA damage was higher than baseline (tail moment 0.63±0.27, tail intensity 3.76±1.26) in Group P at the 15th minute of reperfusion (tail moment 1.05±0.45, p=0.06; tail intensity 5.33±1.56, p=0.01). The increase in tail moment and tail intensity returned to normal levels in both groups 2hours after the termination of ischemia. CONCLUSION: Given that oxidative stress and genotoxic effect disappear in the late stages of reperfusion, we conclude that neither sevoflurane nor propofol can be considered superior to the other in anesthesia practices for extremity surgeries involving the use of a tourniquet.