Propofol-based anaesthesia versus sevoflurane-based anaesthesia for living donor kidney transplantation: results of the VAPOR-1 randomized controlled trial
Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 2, 2026

Halogenated Agent Delivery in Porcine Model of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome via an Intensive Care Unit Type Device
Published on: September 24, 2020
G J Nieuwenhuijs-Moeke1, V B Nieuwenhuijs2,3, M A J Seelen4
1Department of Anaesthesiology.
Background:
Kidney transplantation is associated with harmful processes affecting the viability of the graft. One of these processes is associated with the phenomenon of ischaemia-reperfusion injury. Anaesthetic conditioning is a widely described strategy to attenuate ischaemia-reperfusion injury. We therefore conducted the Volatile Anaesthetic Protection of Renal Transplants-1 trial, a pilot project evaluating the influence of two anaesthetic regimens, propofol- vs sevoflurane-based anaesthesia, on biochemical and clinical outcomes in living donor kidney transplantation.
Methods:
Sixty couples were randomly assigned to the following three groups: PROP (donor and recipient propofol), SEVO (donor and recipient sevoflurane), and PROSE (donor propofol and recipient sevoflurane). The primary outcome was renal injury reflected by urinary biomarkers. The follow-up period was 2 yr.
Results:
Three couples were excluded, leaving 57 couples for analysis. Concentrations of kidney injury molecule-1 (KIM-1), N -acetyl-β- d -glucosaminidase (NAG), and heart-type fatty acid binding protein (H-FABP) in the first urine upon reperfusion showed no differences. On day 2, KIM-1 concentrations were higher in SEVO [952.8 (interquartile range 311.8-1893.0) pg mmol -1 ] compared with PROP [301.2 (202.0-504.7) pg mmol -1 ]. This was the same for NAG: SEVO, 1.835 (1.162-2.457) IU mmol -1 vs PROP, 1.078 (0.819-1.713) IU mmol -1 . Concentrations of H-FABP showed no differences. Measured glomerular filtration rate at 3, 6, and 12 months showed no difference. After 2 yr, there was a difference in the acute rejection rate ( P =0.039). Post hoc testing revealed a difference between PROP (35%) and PROSE (5%; P =0.020). The difference between PROP and SEVO (11%) was not significant ( P =0.110).
Conclusions:
The SEVO group showed higher urinary KIM-1 and NAG concentrations in living donor kidney transplantation on the second day after transplantation. This was not reflected in inferior graft outcome.
Clinical Trial Registration:
NCT01248871.
More Related Videos
03:02Application of Dixon's Up-and-Down Design to Estimate the Minimum Alveolar Concentration of Sevoflurane in Rats with Refined Movement Classification
Published on: July 25, 2025
06:40An In Vivo Mouse Model of Total Intravenous Anesthesia During Cancer Resection Surgery
Published on: June 8, 2021
Related Concept Videos
Parenteral Anesthetics: Overview
General Anesthesia: Overview
General anesthesia induces unconsciousness in the whole body, while the others target specific areas or sensations. It is administered to minimize adverse effects, maintain...
Kidney Transplant I: Introduction
Stages of General Anesthesia
Kidney Transplant II: Surgical Procedure
Local Anesthetics: Clinical Application as Intravenous Regional Anesthesia
One of the advantages of...