Effects of sevoflurane on sympathetic neurotransmission in human omental arteries and veins

K. Thorlacius, C. Zhoujun and M. Bodelsson

Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, University Hospital, SE-221 85 Lund, Sweden

Corresponding author. E-mail: mikael.bodelsson@anest.lu.se

Accepted for publication: February 19, 2003


    Abstract
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Background. Sevoflurane reduces blood pressure, the regulation of which requires an intact sympathetic neurotransmission. This study was designed to evaluate the effect of sevoflurane on the coupling between peripheral sympathetic neurones and vascular smooth muscle in isolated human omental vessels.

Methods. Segments of arteries and veins were exposed to sevoflurane 1%, 2% and 4% (corresponding to approximately 0.5, 1 and 2 MAC in humans, respectively). The vessels were studied in vitro to determine the effects on (i) isometric contraction during electrical field stimulation (EFS) or in the presence of exogenous norepinephrine (NE); (ii) electrical field stimulated release of [3H]-NE from vessel segments previously incubated with [3H]-NE; (iii) uptake of [3H]-NE.

Results. In artery segments, sevoflurane 4% attenuated the contraction induced by both EFS and exogenous NE. In vein segments, sevoflurane 4% attenuated only the EFS-induced contractions. Sevoflurane 1% and 2% had no effect. The release of [3H]-NE was inhibited by sevoflurane 2% and 4% in arteries and by sevoflurane 1%, 2% and 4% in veins. Sevoflurane had no effect on the uptake of [3H]-NE in either vessel.

Conclusions. Sevoflurane depresses sympathetic neuromuscular transmission in human omental vessels by reducing neuronal NE release and NE sensitivity in arteries and by reducing NE release in veins. This could contribute to the hypotension seen during sevoflurane anaesthesia, at least at concentrations above 1 MAC.

Br J Anaesth 2003; 90: 766–73

Keywords: anaesthetics volatile, sevoflurane; arteries, omental; nerve, transmission; sympathetic nervous system, norepinephrine; veins, omental


    Introduction
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Sevoflurane dose-dependently reduces mean arterial pressure via several effects on the cardiovascular system. These include peripheral vasodilatation,1 direct myocardial depression13 and decreased sympathetic nervous system activity.4 Sevoflurane affects blood vessel walls in vitro. It relaxes vascular smooth muscle in the presence of the sympathetic neurotransmitter norepinephrine (NE) in the mesenteric artery of the rabbit57 and the rat8 9 and inhibits endothelium-mediated relaxation in rabbit and rat mesenteric artery5 7 9 and in rat aorta.10 Thus, Izumi and colleagues8 reported endothelium-dependent vasoconstriction and endothelium-independent vasodilatation by sevoflurane, which resulted in sevoflurane-induced enhancement of the NE response in rat mesenteric arteries with an intact endothelium.

In dogs, isoflurane and desflurane depress sympathetic transmission in the stellate ganglion11 and the same has been demonstrated for halothane in guinea pigs.12 In particular, isoflurane, but also halothane and enflurane, reduce the contractile response to endogenous release of NE from sympathetic nerves by electrical field stimulation (EFS).13 As with other inhalation anaesthetic agents, sevoflurane diminishes baroreflex function.14 By measuring the transmembrane potential in vascular smooth muscle cells in situ in rat mesenteric artery and vein, Yamazaki and colleagues4 demonstrated that sevoflurane induces a hyperpolarization, which is attenuated by local sympathetic denervation. They concluded that sevoflurane inhibits both sympathetic neural and non-neural mechanisms involved in regulation of vessel tone. It has not yet been clarified how sevoflurane influences the sympathetic nervous system in the periphery. Furthermore, the effects of sevoflurane on vascular sympathetic activity in man are unknown.

The aim of the present study was to investigate the effects of sevoflurane on the function of perivascular sympathetic nerves in isolated human omental arteries and veins focusing on: (i) smooth muscle contraction in response to EFS and exogenous NE; (ii) electrical field stimulated release of neuronal NE; and (iii) effects on the neuronal reuptake of NE.


    Methods
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
The study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of Lund University Hospital. After obtaining written informed consent, macroscopically normal segments of human omental arteries and veins were obtained from 22 female and 29 male patients aged 19–93 yr (mean 68 yr) undergoing abdominal surgery. Exclusion criteria were patients with endocrine tumours, abdominal infections and/or previous abdominal radiotherapy. After being dissected free from fat and connective tissue, vessel segments were stored in aerated Krebs–Ringer solution (KRS) at 4 °C. Experiments were carried out within 0–4 h. Storage for up to 4 h affected neither the smooth muscle contractility nor the sympathetic nerve function compared with experiments performed immediately after vessel removal. The KRS always contained: Na+ 143 mM, K+ 4.6 mM, Cl 126 mM, Ca2+ 2.5 mM, HCO3 25 mM, Mg2+ 0.79 mM, SO42 0.79 mM, H2PO4 1.2 mM, glucose 5.5 mM and ethylenediamine tetra-acetic acid (EDTA) 0.024 mM.

Sevoflurane administration
Sevoflurane was vaporized by calibrated Sigma Elite vaporizers and administered via the carbon dioxide/oxygen mixture aerating the organ baths. The surface of the fluid in the organ baths was open to the atmosphere. The concentration of a gas dissolved in the fluid of such an organ bath depends on the solubility of the gas in the fluid (i.e. the fluid–gas partition coefficient) and the partial pressure of the dissolved gas. The latter factor is in turn dependent on the balance between the rate of bubbling of the gas through the organ bath and the rate of evaporation of the gas from the surface of the organ bath into the atmosphere. We found that the use of a gas mixture containing 8% carbon dioxide enabled us to easily adjust the rate of the bubbling to achieve a steady state carbon dioxide partial pressure (PCO2) of 5 kPa in the KRS. This results in a pH value of 7.4 in a solution with the composition used.

Sevoflurane was administered to the organ baths via the gas bubbling mixture. Thus, the constant bubbling rate gave a stable and predictable partial pressure of sevoflurane dissolved in the KRS affected only by the amount of sevoflurane in the carbon dioxide/oxygen mixture. In addition, the sevoflurane concentration was regularly confirmed with gas–liquid chromatography.

Gas–liquid chromatography
In brief, 1.5 ml KRS was transferred to 4.75 ml gas-tight vials with a gas-tight syringe. After 30 min equilibration at 37 °C, 50 µl headspace gas was injected into a Perkin-Elmer 3920 gas–liquid chromatograph.15 In initial experiments, 1 ml equilibrated KRS was transferred to a new 4.75 ml vial and after another 30 min the headspace was analysed. This enabled calculation of the gas–KRS partition coefficient, as described by Smith and colleagues.16 The mean gas–KRS partition coefficient was 0.38 (SD 0.04; n=23) and was unaffected by the sevoflurane concentration in the range 0.15–0.75 mM. This gas–KRS partition coefficient is similar to the previously reported mean water–gas (0.36 [0.01])17 and saline–gas (0.37[0.016])18 partition coefficients.

The content of sevoflurane in the carbon dioxide/oxygen mixture was analysed by direct injection into the gas–liquid chromatograph and adjusted to achieve a sevoflurane concentration in the KRS of 0.15, 0.30 or 0.60 mM. These concentrations correspond to equilibrated alveolar concentrations of 1%, 2% and 4%, respectively. For the sake of clarity and to make it easier to compare these in vitro concentrations with the in vivo situation, we hereafter express the organ bath concentrations as 1%, 2% or 4%. The minimum alveolar concentration (MAC) for sevoflurane in adults is 1.48–2.52%.19 The MAC value is age dependent, with lower values for elderly patients. Consequently, the sevoflurane concentrations used in the present study are equivalent to 0.4–0.7, 0.8–1.4 and 1.6–2.7 MAC, respectively. Considering that the mean age of the patients was 68 yr, the concentrations used correspond to MAC levels at the higher end of these ranges. The sevoflurane concentration in KRS reached steady state within 2 min of the start of sevoflurane administration.

Measurement of smooth muscle force
Vessel segments were cut into 2–4-mm long ring segments and placed into 2-ml tissue baths on two steel rods through the lumen. One of the rods was attached to a Grass FTO3C force–displacement transducer for measurement of isometric force. The force was recorded on a Grass polygraph model 7D (Grass Medical Instruments, Quincy, MA, USA). Six segments in separate organ baths were run in parallel. The temperature in the baths was thermostatically maintained at 37 °C and the KRS in the baths was continuously aerated with carbon dioxide/oxygen 8/92% at a rate giving PCO2 5 kPa and pH 7.4. The vessel segments were gradually stretched to a stable resting force of 6 mN during an equilibration period of 60–90 min to obtain the optimal tension.20 Then KCl 90 mM was added and the resulting contraction registered. The KCl was then washed out by repeated changes of the KRS, during which the contraction was allowed to return to baseline.

Electrical field stimulation (EFS)
Linear wire platinum electrodes were mounted on each side of the vessel segment with 4 mm between the electrodes.21 The electrodes were connected to a custom-made square-wave stimulator and the wave pattern and the amplitude was continuously monitored with an oscilloscope (Tektronix UK Ltd). Stimulation pulses were 0.1 ms long and 12 V for the artery segments and 8 V for the vein segments;21 30 s pulse trains were used and a 4.5 min resting period allowed between stimulations. One vessel segment treated with the neuronal blocker tetrodotoxin (TTX) 1 µM was always run in parallel to exclude the possibility that the resulting contraction was the result of direct smooth muscle stimulation.

First, EFS was performed at frequencies of 1, 2, 4, 8, 16 and 32 Hz. The resulting vessel contraction was registered and the greatest contraction achieved for each segment (always at 32 Hz) was used as a neurogenic reference response. After this frequency–response series, the KRS was changed and the endogenous NE stores were replenished by adding exogenous NE cumulatively in log10 units to achieve organ bath concentrations of 1 nM–100 µM.22 After the concentration–response series, which took 15 min to complete, the organ baths were washed several times until the tension returned to the baseline level. The segments were then randomized to be treated with sevoflurane 0, 1%, 2% or 4%. After 10 min pre-exposure to sevoflurane, frequency–response experiments with EFS were performed as above but in the presence of sevoflurane. The EFS-induced contractions are expressed as percentage of the neurogenic reference response in order to correct for differences in size and neuronal density between the specimens obtained from different patients.

Contraction in response to exogenous norepinephrine
In a second series of experiments performed on separate vessel segments, cocaine 100 µM was added to the organ baths. After 10 min, NE was added cumulatively in log10 units to achieve organ bath concentrations of 1 nM–100 µM. The greatest contraction elicited was used as an exogenous NE reference response for each segment. The segments were randomized to be treated with sevoflurane 0, 1%, 2% or 4%.

Following washout, sevoflurane and cocaine were administered and exogenous NE was added cumulatively after 10 min. The resulting contractions are expressed as percentage of the exogenous NE reference response. Cocaine was present during these experiments to prevent any possible influence of the neuronal uptake on the contraction induced by the exogenous NE. We chose not to use the neuronal uptake inhibitor desipramine because of its antagonistic effects on {alpha}-adrenoceptors.23

Measurement of [3H]-NE release
Artery and vein segments (1–2 cm in length) from each patient were pre-incubated in aerated KRS (at 37 °C, pH 7.4) with the extraneuronal amine uptake inhibitor normetanephrine 100 µM for 30 min.24 The vessel segments were then incubated with [3H]-NE 0.1 µM and normetanephrine for 40 min. They were rinsed four times over 50 min in KRS containing normetanephrine and the neuronal NE uptake inhibitor desipramine 0.6 µM.23 Each vessel segment was placed in an organ chamber (Ohmeda Comp Adapter Male/Male; volume 190 µl). Six organ chambers were run in parallel and the chambers were connected to a multichannel roller pump (PumpPro MPL Watson-Marlow WPI, Stevenage, UK), which continuously delivered aerated superfusion fluid (KRS with desipramine and normetanephrine) at a rate of 0.325 ml min–1. The chambers and the superfusate were thermostatically maintained at 37 °C. EFS was applied via spiral-wire platinum electrodes placed 10 mm apart on each side of the vessel segment. The stimulation pulses were 0.2 ms long and 15 V for both artery and vein segments, which in pilot experiments had been shown to give a submaximal release of [3H]-NE; 30 s pulse trains were used and an 11.5 min resting period was allowed between stimulations. Each segment was stimulated four times. The superfusate was collected as 4-min fractions into scintillation vials. The radioactivity was determined in a liquid scintillation counter after addition of 2.8 ml Optiphase 3 scintillation fluid. The background radioactivity was estimated in vials with 2.8 ml Optiphase 3 added to 1.3 ml KRS.

Experimental protocol
First, all segments were stimulated with EFS at 32 Hz. The resulting release of [3H]-NE was used as a reference for each segment. After randomization, sevoflurane 0, 1%, 2% or 4% or TTX 1 µM was administered to the superfusate and EFS was sequentially delivered at 2, 8 and 32 Hz. The resulting release of [3H]-NE is expressed as percentage of the reference release.

Measurement of [3H]-NE uptake
Artery and vein segments (0.5–1 cm in length) were mounted on stainless steel wires (0.4 mm cross-sectional diameter) and placed in aerated KRS at 37 °C for 30 min equilibration. They were then randomly exposed to sevoflurane 0, 1%, 2% or 4% or desipramine 0.6 µM during a 15 min pre-incubation period in KRS with normetanephrine 10 µM. The vessel segments were then incubated for 15 min in vials containing identical medium as during the pre-incubation with [3H]-NE 0.1 µM. After incubation, the uptake of [3H]-NE was stopped by placing the vessels in KRS at 4 °C for 5 min. Eventually, the segments were blotted onto filter paper, weighed on a piece of aluminium foil, placed into scintillation vials and hydrolysed in 0.25 ml Optisolve for 120 min at 50 °C; 2.5 ml Optiphase 2 scintillation fluid was then added for determination of the radioactivity taken up into each segment. The background radioactivity was estimated in vials containing 2.5 ml Optiphase 2 added to 0.25 ml Optisolve.

Drugs
The following compounds were used: sevoflurane (Abbott Scandinavia AB, Solna, Sweden), L(–)-norepinephrine bitartrate (RBI/Sigma, St Louis, MO, USA), L -[2,5,6-3H]-norepinephrine (DuPont NEN, Boston, MA, USA; activity: 2.1 TBq mmol–1), tetrodotoxin citrate, desipramine hydrochloride, DL-normetanephrine hydrochloride, disodium- calcium EDTA (all four from Sigma, St Louis, MO, USA) cocaine hydrochloride (Apoteket AB, Kungens Kurva, Sweden), Optisolve and Optiphase 2 and 3 (Wallac, Turku, Finland). All substances were dissolved and/or diluted in distilled water except L(–)-NE bitartrate and L-[2,5,6-3H]-NE, which was dissolved in NaCl 0.9 g litre–1 with EDTA 0.024 mM to minimize oxidation.

Statistical analysis
In experiments of the release and uptake of [3H]-NE, background radioactivity was subtracted before analysis and presentation. Values are expressed as mean (SD). When values from more than one similar experiment were obtained from the same individual, the mean was calculated before further analysis and presentation. Thus, the number of determinations (n) equals the number of individuals. In the preparation of the tables and figures, all available data from similar experiments were pooled. Therefore, n may vary between the groups in the tables and figures. The –log10 of the NE concentration required to elicit half-maximum response (pEC50) was determined by linear interpolation based on the concentration–response data. Concentration– response and frequency–response curves, as well as the data from the release experiments, were analysed with respect to the factors concentration/frequency and sevoflurane treatment using two-way repeated-measures ANOVA after logarithmic transformation of the data to correct for inequality of the variances. When appropriate, this was followed by Dunnett’s post hoc test comparing the different levels of sevoflurane with control. The uptake of [3H]-NE was analysed with one-way repeated-measures ANOVA, followed by Dunnett’s post hoc test. The pEC50 values were compared using Student’s two-tailed t-test for unpaired data. All statistical calculations were performed using SPSS Sigma Stat Version 2.03 (SPSS Science, Chicago, IL, USA). A P value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.


    Results
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Changes in isometric tension resulting from EFS and norephinephrine
EFS and exogenous NE induced frequency- and concentration-dependent contractions, respectively, in both arteries and veins. The pEC50 value for exogenous NE was 6.47 (SD 0.40, n=6) in arteries and 7.46 (0.69, n=6) in veins. The pEC50 value was significantly higher in veins than in arteries. In artery segments, contractions induced by EFS and exogenous NE were attenuated by sevoflurane 4% (Figs 1A and 2A). Sevoflurane 1% and 2% had no effect. In vein segments, the EFS-induced contractions were attenuated by sevoflurane 4% (Fig. 1B). Sevoflurane 1% and 2% had no effect. The NE-induced contractions in veins were not affected by sevoflurane 1–4% (Fig. 2B).



View larger version (22K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig 1 Frequency–response curves obtained by electrical field stimulation (EFS) of human omental artery (A) and vein (B) segments in the presence of sevoflurane 0, 1%, 2% or 4%. In both artery and vein segments, sevoflurane 4% attenuated EFS-induced contractions compared with control. *P<0.05, two-way repeated-measures ANOVA followed by Dunnett’s post hoc test. Values are expressed as percentage of the reference contractions, which for arteries were mean 2.2 (SD 1.8) mN (n=9), 2.7 (1.8) mN (n=6), 2.4 (1.8) (n=7) mN and 3.6 (2.7) mN (n=7), respectively, and for veins were 11.7 (9.2) mN (n=8), 10.5 (9.4) mN (n=7), 10.5 (4.7) mN (n=7) and 17.4 (10.3) mN (n=7), respectively.

 


View larger version (22K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig 2 Concentration–response curves obtained with exogenous norepinephrine (NE) in human omental artery (A) and vein (B) segments in the presence of sevoflurane 0, 1%, 2% or 4%. In the artery, but not the vein segments, sevoflurane 4% attenuated the NE-induced contractions compared with control. *P<0.05, two-way repeated-measures ANOVA followed by Dunnett’s post hoc test. Values are expressed as percentage of the reference contractions, which for arteries were: mean 25.3 (SD 7.7) mN, 25.2 (12.4) mN, 28.9 (13.4) mN and 24.1 (9.3) mN, respectively, and for veins 14.9 (3.7) mN, 13.4 (4.0) mN, 13.6 (3.3) mN and 12.5 (4.0), respectively (all n=6).

 
Release of [3H]-NE
EFS induced a frequency-dependent release of [3H]-NE in both arteries and veins. The release of [3H]-NE was reduced by sevoflurane 2% and 4% but was unaffected by sevoflurane 1% in the artery segments (Fig. 3A). In the vein segments, sevoflurane 1%, 2% and 4% reduced the release of [3H]-NE (Fig. 3B). TTX totally inhibited the release of [3H]-NE by EFS in both artery and vein segments (data not shown).



View larger version (19K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig 3 Release of [3H]-NE induced by electrical field stimulation (EFS) from human omental artery (A) and vein (B) segments pre-incubated with [3H]-NE. EFS was applied in the presence of sevoflurane 0, 1%, 2% or 4%. NE release was reduced in arteries in the presence of sevoflurane 2% and 4% and veins in the presence of sevoflurane 1%, 2% and 4%, respectively, compared with control. *P<0.05, two-way repeated-measures ANOVA. Values are expressed as percentage of the initial reference release (at 32 Hz) which for arteries were: mean 0.85 (SD 0.78) pmol (n=12), 0.56 (0.75) pmol (n=7), 0.70 (0.92) pmol (n=8) and 0.60 (0.71) pmol (n=9), respectively, and for veins were: 0.55 (0.62) pmol (n=13), 0.34 (0.19) pmol (n=6), 0.34 (0.16) pmol (n=6) and 0.48 (0.54) pmol (n=6), respectively.

 
Uptake of [3H]-NE
Desipramine reduced the uptake of [3H]-NE in both artery and vein segments. In contrast, sevoflurane 1%, 2% and 4% did not affect uptake (Fig. 4). These results are summarized in Table 1.



View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig 4 Uptake of tritium into human omental artery (filled bars) and vein (open bars) segments incubated with [3H]-NE in the presence of 0 (control) or sevoflurane 1%, 2% or 4% or in the presence of desipramine. Desipramine reduced uptake in the artery and vein segments. Sevoflurane did not affect uptake. *P<0.05, one-way repeated-measures ANOVA followed by Dunnett’s post hoc test. Values are mean (SD); n=7 and 6 for arteries and veins, respectively.

 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table 1 Summary of the effects of sevoflurane on smooth muscle contraction induced by electrical field stimulation (EFS) or exogenous norepinephrine (NE), release of [3H]-NE induced by EFS and uptake of [3H]-NE into human omental arteries and veins. n values are number of experiments
 

    Discussion
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Sevoflurane 4% depressed vascular smooth muscle contraction in response to EFS in both arteries and veins. To our knowledge, this is the first study demonstrating an effect of sevoflurane on the human vascular sympathetic neuromuscular function. Yamazaki and colleagues4 demonstrated indirectly that sympathetic nerves influence sevoflurane-induced reduction in vascular tone in rat mesenteric arteries and veins in situ. However, because of the design of their study, the site(s) of action of sevoflurane could be anywhere from the central nervous system to the neuromuscular junction. The present results suggest that vascular sympathetic transmission is one such site. Previous papers have reported a depressant action of isoflurane, halothane and enflurane on EFS-induced contractions in rabbit mesenteric veins13 and of propofol in rat femoral arteries.25 Our group has earlier found a more complex concentration-dependent pattern in the presence of propofol in isolated human omental arteries, with an enhancement of sympathetic transmission at low, clinically relevant propofol concentrations, and a depression at higher concentrations.21

The action of sevoflurane found in the present study could be mediated via an influence on several mechanisms. The efficiency of EFS to elicit vascular constriction depends on three main factors: (i) the sensitivity of the smooth muscle cells to NE; (ii) the amount of NE released from the vascular sympathetic nerves upon stimulation; (iii) the rate of NE reuptake into the nerves. The balance between release and reuptake of NE determines the level of NE present in the neuromuscular cleft.

In the present study, arterial smooth muscle contraction in response to exogenously added NE was lower in the presence of sevoflurane 4% compared with control. This is consistent with results from previous studies in resistance arteries in rabbit57 and rat,8 9 which have also revealed a weaker contraction in response to NE in the presence of sevoflurane. In rat mesenteric artery the inhibitory effects of sevoflurane on NE contractions seems to be the result of an inhibition of voltage-gated calcium influx and inhibition of the myofilament calcium sensitivity.9 Our results suggest that sevoflurane-induced depression of EFS contraction in arteries is at least in part the result of a decreased NE sensitivity of the smooth muscle cells. However, this mechanism cannot explain sevoflurane-induced depression of the response to EFS in veins because the contraction in response to exogenous NE was not affected by sevoflurane in these vessels.

Differences in adrenergic mechanisms in arteries and veins could explain their different sensitivities of NE-induced contractions to sevoflurane in the present study. A mixture of post-junctional {alpha}1- and {alpha}2-adrenoceptors mediates smooth muscle contraction in human omental arteries and veins.26 Alpha1-adrenoceptors predominate in the arteries and {alpha}2-adrenoceptors in veins. The present results could indicate that {alpha}1-adrenoceptor-mediated contraction is more susceptible to the inhibitory action of sevoflurane, but this remains to be confirmed. We found a significantly higher pEC50 value for NE in the veins than in the arteries, as demonstrated previously.26 This could indicate a receptor reserve for NE in the veins.27 A depressant action of sevoflurane on the contractile machinery may well be overcome by the excess contractile stimulus produced by a venous receptor reserve. However, confirming the existence of a venous receptor reserve requires experiments with irreversible adrenoceptor antagonists such as phenoxybenzamine, which were not used in the present study.

The depolarization of a sympathetic nerve opens voltage-dependent calcium channels in the neuronal varicosities, which triggers the exocytosis of transmitter-containing vesicles.28 In order to determine the effect of sevoflurane on this process, we loaded the nerves with radioactive NE and measured the release of radioactivity upon EFS. We found a frequency-dependent release that was depressed by sevoflurane 2% and 4% in the artery segments and sevoflurane 1%, 2% and 4% in the vein segments. This indicates that sevoflurane blocks the depolarization of the nerves and/or the process of NE exocytosis. We have previously reported that propofol has a similar effect.21 Venous sympathetic nerves seem to be more sensitive to sevoflurane than those of the arteries. The exact site of action of sevoflurane in the release process remains to be investigated further and might also elucidate the mechanism of some of the central effects of this anaesthetic.29

Reuptake of NE into sympathetic nerve endings is an active process mediated by a specific transporter protein driven by the simultaneous cellular influx of sodium ions along their concentration gradient.30 31 In the present study we did not find any significant effect of sevoflurane on the uptake of [3H]-NE. This contrasts to the inhibitory action of propofol on neuronal NE uptake in human omental arteries21 and rat femoral arteries.32 Tas and colleagues33 reported profound effects of volatile anaesthetics on neuronal uptake processes but the present results suggest that sevoflurane does not possess such properties, at least not in human omental arteries and veins.

Collectively, in human omental vessels sevoflurane will decrease the concentration of NE in the neuromuscular cleft since it reduces NE release without affecting reuptake. This explains the reduced smooth muscle contraction in response to EFS in veins. Furthermore, depressed NE release could contribute to reduced contractile responses to EFS in arteries, but in these vessels the decreased smooth muscle NE sensitivity also observed seems to be important as well. Significant reductions of NE release were found with sevoflurane 2% and 4% in arteries and sevoflurane 1%, 2% and 4% in veins. However, the reduction had an impact on the EFS-induced contraction only with sevoflurane 4%. The present results do not provide any explanation for this discrepancy. Perhaps reduced NE release is not sufficient to reduce contraction upon EFS and an additional decrease in NE-induced contraction is also required, though not significant for the veins in the present study.

The net effect of sevoflurane anaesthesia on arterial pressure depends on the sum of the simultaneous actions of the anaesthetic on, for example, central cardiovascular regulatory mechanisms, sympathetic neuromuscular transmission, vascular smooth muscle and endothelium, as well as direct actions on myocardial contractility. The present results suggest that a partial impairment of sympathetic neuromuscular transmission in blood vessels could contribute, at least at sevoflurane concentrations above 1 MAC.

In conclusion, we have demonstrated that sevoflurane depresses the sympathetic neuromuscular transmission in human omental vessels by lowering neuronal NE release and the magnitude of the NE-induced contractions in arteries and by lowering NE release in veins.


    Acknowledgements
 
This study was supported by the Michaelsen, Golje, Gorthon, Zoéga and Crafoord Foundations, the Swedish Society of Medicine and the Medical Faculty of Lund University. The authors are grateful to Christina Rausér MD for assistance during the development of the method for measurement of neuronal norepinephrine release and to Abbott Scandinavia AB for providing the sevoflurane vaporizers. We also thank our statistical consultant, Anna Lindgren PhD.


    References
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
1 Malan TP Jr, DiNardo JA, Isner RJ, et al. Cardiovascular effects of sevoflurane compared with those of isoflurane in volunteers. Anesthesiology 1995; 83: 918–28[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]

2 Kikura M, Ikeda K. Comparison of effects of sevoflurane/nitrous oxide and enflurane/nitrous oxide on myocardial contractility in humans. Load-independent and noninvasive assessment with transesophageal echocardiography. Anesthesiology 1993; 79: 235–43[ISI][Medline]

3 Harkin CP, Pagel PS, Kersten JR, Hettrick DA, Warltier DC. Direct negative inotropic and lusitropic effects of sevoflurane. Anesthesiology 1994; 81: 156–67[ISI][Medline]

4 Yamazaki M, Stekiel TA, Bosnjak ZJ, Kampine JP, Stekiel WJ. Effects of volatile anesthetic agents on in situ vascular smooth muscle transmembrane potential in resistance- and capacitance-regulating blood vessels. Anesthesiology 1998; 88: 1085–95[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]

5 Yamaguchi A, Okabe E. Effect of sevoflurane on the vascular reactivity of rabbit mesenteric artery. Br J Anaesth 1995; 74: 576–82[Abstract/Free Full Text]

6 Akata T, Kodama K, Takahashi S. Volatile anaesthetic actions on norepinephrine-induced contraction of small splanchnic resistance arteries. Can J Anaesth 1995; 42: 1040–50[Abstract]

7 Akata T, Nakashima M, Kodama K, Boyle WA 3rd, Takahashi S. Effects of volatile anesthetics on acetylcholine-induced relaxation in the rabbit mesenteric resistance artery. Anesthesiology 1995; 82: 188–204[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]

8 Izumi K, Akata T, Takahashi S. The action of sevoflurane on vascular smooth muscle of isolated mesenteric resistance arteries (part 1): role of endothelium. Anesthesiology 2000; 92: 1426–40[ISI][Medline]

9 Akata T, Izumi K, Nakashima M. The action of sevoflurane on vascular smooth muscle of isolated mesenteric resistance arteries (part 2): mechanisms of endothelium-independent vasorelaxation. Anesthesiology 2000; 92: 1441–53[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]

10 Nakamura K, Terasako K, Toda H, et al. Mechanisms of inhibition of endothelium-dependent relaxation by halothane, isoflurane, and sevoflurane. Can J Anaesth 1994; 41: 340–6[Abstract]

11 Boban N, McCallum JB, Schedewie HK, et al. Direct comparative effects of isoflurane and desflurane on sympathetic ganglionic transmission. Anesth Analg 1995; 80: 127–34[Abstract]

12 Bosnjak ZJ, Seagard JL, Wu A, Kampine JP. The effects of halothane on sympathetic ganglionic transmission. Anesthesiology 1982; 57: 473–9[ISI][Medline]

13 Stadnicka A, Flynn NM, Bosnjak ZJ, Kampine JP. Enflurane, halothane, and isoflurane attenuate contractile responses to exogenous and endogenous norepinephrine in isolated small mesenteric veins of the rabbit. Anesthesiology 1993; 78: 326–34[ISI][Medline]

14 Ebert TJ, Harkin CP, Muzi M. Cardiovascular responses to sevoflurane: a review. Anesth Analg 1995; 81: S11–22[ISI][Medline]

15 Zbinden AM, Frei FJ, Funk B, Thomson DA, Westenskow D. Determination of the partial pressure of halothane (or isoflurane) in blood. Br J Anaesth 1985; 57: 796–802[Abstract]

16 Smith MA, Sapsed-Byrne SM, Lockwood GG. A new method for measurement of anaesthetic partial pressure in blood. Br J Anaesth 1997; 78: 449–52[Abstract/Free Full Text]

17 Wallin RF, Regan BM, Napoli MD, Stern IJ. Sevoflurane: a new inhalational anesthetic agent. Anesth Analg 1975; 54: 758–66[Abstract]

18 Strum DP, Eger EI 2nd. Partition coefficients for sevoflurane in human blood, saline, and olive oil. Anesth Analg 1987; 66: 654–6[Abstract]

19 Patel SS, Goa KL. Sevoflurane. A review of its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties and its clinical use in general anaesthesia. Drugs 1996; 51: 658–700[ISI][Medline]

20 Wallerstedt SM, Bodelsson M. Endothelium-dependent relaxation by substance P in human isolated omental arteries and veins: relative contribution of prostanoids, nitric oxide and hyperpolarization. Br J Pharmacol 1997; 120: 25–30[Abstract]

21 Wallerstedt SM, Bodelsson M. Differential effect of propofol on sympathetic neurotransmission in isolated human omental arteries and veins. Br J Pharmacol 1998; 125: 120–6[Abstract]

22 Urabe M, Kawasaki H, Takasaki K. Effect of endothelium removal on the vasoconstrictor response to neuronally released 5-hydroxytryptamine and noradrenaline in the rat isolated mesenteric and femoral arteries. Br J Pharmacol 1991; 102: 85–90[Abstract]

23 Byg AM, Bund S, Mulvany MJ, Aalkjaer C. The effect of cocaine and desipramine on neuronal uptake of [3H]-noradrenaline and sensitivity to noradrenaline of rat mesenteric resistance arteries. Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol 1994; 21: 623–30[ISI][Medline]

24 Burgen ASV, Iversen LL. The inhibition of noradrenaline uptake by sympathomimetic amines in the rat isolated heart. Br J Pharmacol 1965; 25: 34–49

25 Biddle NL, Gelb AW, Hamilton JT. Propofol differentially attenuates the responses to exogenous and endogenous norepinephrine in the isolated rat femoral artery in vitro. Anesth Analg 1995; 80: 793–9[Abstract]

26 Steen S, Skärby TV, Norgren L, Andersson KE. Pharmacological characterization of postjunctional alpha-adrenoceptors in isolated human omental arteries and veins. Acta Physiol Scand 1984; 120: 109–16[ISI][Medline]

27 Kenakin T. Stimulus-response mechanisms. In: Pharmacologic analysis of drug–receptor interaction, 3rd Edn. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven Publishers, 1997

28 Zygmunt PM, Högestätt ED. Calcium channels at the adrenergic neuroeffector junction in the rabbit ear artery. Naunyn Schmiedebergs Arch Pharmacol 1993; 347: 617–23[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]

29 Griffiths R, Norman RI. Effects of anaesthetics on uptake, synthesis and release of transmitters. Br J Anaesth 1993; 71: 96–107[ISI][Medline]

30 Trendelenburg U. The TiPS lecture: functional aspects of the neuronal uptake of noradrenaline. Trends Pharmacol Sci 1991; 12: 334–7

31 Bönisch H, Brüss M. The noradrenaline transporter of the neuronal plasma membrane. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1994; 733: 193–202[ISI][Medline]

32 Sandström K, Wallerstedt SM, Törnebrandt K, Bodelsson M. Effects of propofol on desipramine-sensitive [3H]-noradrenaline uptake kinetics in rat femoral artery. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2000; 44: 1011–16[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]

33 Tas PW, Kress HG, Koschel K. Volatile Anaesthetika und n-Alkanole hemmen die Aufnahme von Noradrenalin in Phäochromozytom-Zellen. Anaesthesist 1987; 36: 340–4[ISI][Medline]