PURPOSE: Assessing feasibility and physiological effects of sedation with 
sevoflurane, administered with the anesthetic conserving device (AnaConDa), in 
comparison with propofol and remifentanil.
METHODS: Seventeen patients undergoing mechanical ventilation underwent sedation 
with sevoflurane delivered with AnaConDa (phase SevAn), preceded and followed by 
sedation with propofol and remifentanil (phases ProRe(1), ProRe(2)), with the 
same sedation targets.
RESULTS: With both strategies it was possible to achieve the sedation targets. 
Time required to sedate and awake patients was greater during SevAn than 
ProRe(1): respectively, 3.3 +/- 3.0 versus 8.9 +/- 6.1 and 7.47 +/- 5.05 versus 
16.3 +/- 11.4 min. During SevAn the PaCO(2) and minute ventilation increased. 
Hemodynamics was stable between ProRe(1) and SevAn, except for an increase in 
heart rate in the SevAn phase. Environmental pollution from sevoflurane was 
within the safety limits.
CONCLUSIONS: Sevoflurane can be effectively and safely used for short-term 
sedation of ICU patients with stable hemodynamic conditions.