Low and Minimal-flow Anesthesia in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Patients: Which One is Ideal?

Akdeniz Tıp Dergisi, vol.12, no.1, pp.1-8, 2026 (TRDizin)

Objective

Low and Minimal-flow Anesthesia, despite its advantages, including cost and pollu-

tion reduction and less heat/moisture loss, has limited prevalence due to concerns of

complications and the need for closer monitoring. The objective of this study was to

assess the benefits and risks of low- and minimal-flow anesthesia in patients undergo-

ing oral and maxillofacial surgery.

Material and Methods

Conducted at Akdeniz University, 149 ASA 1-2 class patients were categorized into

four Fresh Gas Flow (FGF) groups post-anesthesia induction. Data collected included

vital signs, complications, operation and awakening times, and gas use.

Results

There were no significant differences in demographics or ASA classification. How-

ever, variations in oxygen, air and sevoflurane use across the various FGF groups

were identified (p<0.05). Usage increased significantly from minimal to high-flow

groups. Sevoflurane use was lowest at minimal-flow, increasing through to high-flow.

The study found no significant difference in sevoflurane use between low and medi-

um-flow groups. A progressive increase in recovery times was observed from high to

minimal-flow groups, with no differences in operation times or hemodynamic parame-

ters and complications.

Conclusion

The study suggests that low- and minimal-flow anesthesia can be safely used in pa-

tients undergoing oral and maxillofacial surgery with detailed monitoring. With sim-

ilar gas usage and cost between low and medium-flow anesthesia, minimal-flow is

recommended as the more rational choice.