Literature DB >> 12459667

Propofol and sevoflurane in subanesthetic concentrations act preferentially on the spinal cord: evidence from multimodal electrophysiological assessment.

Thomas Kammer1, Benno Rehberg, Dieter Menne, Hans-Christian Wartenberg, Ingobert Wenningmann, Bernd W Urban.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Animal experiments in recent years have shown that attenuation of motor responses by general anesthetics is mediated at least partly by spinal mechanisms. Less is known about the relative potency of anesthetic drugs in suppressing cortical and spinal electrophysiological responses in vivo in humans, particularly those, but not only those, connected with motor responses. Therefore, we studied the effects of sevoflurane and propofol in humans using multimodal electrophysiological assessment.
METHODS: We studied nine healthy volunteers in two sessions during steady state sedation with 0.5, 1.0, and 1.5 microg/l (targeted plasma concentration) propofol or 0.2 and 0.4 vol% (end-tidal) sevoflurane. Following a 15-min equilibration period, motor responses to transcranial magnetic stimulation and peripheral (H-reflex, F-wave) stimulation were recorded, while electroencephalography and auditory evoked responses were recorded in parallel.
RESULTS: At concentrations corresponding to two thirds of C(50 awake), motor responses to transcranial magnetic stimulation were reduced by approximately 50%, H-reflex amplitude was reduced by 22%, F-wave amplitude was reduced by 40%, and F-wave persistence was reduced by 25%. No significant differences between sevoflurane and propofol were found. At this concentration, the Bispectral Index was reduced by 7%, and the middle-latency auditory evoked responses were attenuated only mildly (N(b) latency increased by 11%, amplitude P(a)N(b) did not change). In contrast, the postauricular reflex was suppressed by 77%.
CONCLUSIONS: The large effect of both anesthetics on all spinal motor responses, compared with the small effect on electroencephalography and middle-latency auditory evoked responses, assuming that they represent cortical modulation, may suggest that the suppression of motor responses to transcranial magnetic stimulation is largely due to submesencephalic effects.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12459667     DOI: 10.1097/00000542-200212000-00013

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anesthesiology        ISSN: 0003-3022            Impact factor:   7.892


  6 in total

1.  H wave and spinal root potentials in neuromonitoring of S1 root function during evacuation of herniated disc: preliminary results.

Authors:  Matej Makovec; Mitja Benedicic; Roman Bosnjak
Journal:  Croat Med J       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 1.351

2.  Differential effect of halothane on motor evoked potentials elicited by transcranial electric or magnetic stimulation in the monkey.

Authors:  Tod Sloan; J Rogers
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2009-04-24       Impact factor: 2.502

3.  Tetanic stimulation of the peripheral nerve augments motor evoked potentials by re-exciting spinal anterior horn cells.

Authors:  Yusuke Yamamoto; Hideki Shigematsu; Masahiko Kawaguchi; Hironobu Hayashi; Tsunenori Takatani; Masato Tanaka; Akinori Okuda; Sachiko Kawasaki; Keisuke Masuda; Yuma Suga; Yasuhito Tanaka
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2021-01-09       Impact factor: 2.502

Review 4.  Effects of general anesthetics on visceral pain transmission in the spinal cord.

Authors:  Yun Wang; Jing Wu; Qing Lin; Hj Nauta; Yun Yue; Li Fang
Journal:  Mol Pain       Date:  2008-10-30       Impact factor: 3.395

Review 5.  Intraoperative Neurophysiological Monitoring for Endoscopic Endonasal Approaches to the Skull Base: A Technical Guide.

Authors:  Harminder Singh; Richard W Vogel; Robert M Lober; Adam T Doan; Craig I Matsumoto; Tyler J Kenning; James J Evans
Journal:  Scientifica (Cairo)       Date:  2016-05-16

6.  Effect of caudal ketamine on minimum local anesthetic concentration of ropivacaine in children: a prospective randomized trial.

Authors:  Huai-Zhen Wang; Ling-Yu Wang; Hui-Hong Liang; Yan-Ting Fan; Xing-Rong Song; Ying-Jun She
Journal:  BMC Anesthesiol       Date:  2020-06-08       Impact factor: 2.217

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.