Miles Berger1, Jacob W Nadler2, Allan Friedman3, David L McDonagh4, Ellen R Bennett5, Mary Cooter1, Wenjing Qi6, Daniel T Laskowitz1,5,7, Vikram Ponnusamy8, Mark F Newman1,9, Leslie M Shaw10, David S Warner1,3,7, Joseph P Mathew1, Michael L James1,5. 1. Department of Anesthesiology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA. 2. Division Chief, Neurosurgical Anesthesiology Medical Director, Postanesthesia Care Unit; Department of Anesthesiology, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY, USA. 3. Department of Neurosurgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA. 4. Department of Anesthesiology & Pain Management, Neurological Surgery, Neurology and Neurotherapeutics, University of Texas, Southwestern, Dallas, TX, USA. 5. Department of Neurology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA. 6. Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA. 7. Department of Neurobiology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA. 8. College of Arts and Sciences, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA. 9. Private Diagnostic Clinic, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA. 10. Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Preclinical studies have found differential effects of isoflurane and propofol on the Alzheimer's disease (AD)-associated markers tau, phosphorylated tau (p-tau) and amyloid-β (Aβ). OBJECTIVE: We asked whether isoflurane and propofol have differential effects on the tau/Aβ ratio (the primary outcome), and individual AD biomarkers. We also examined whether genetic/intraoperative factors influenced perioperative changes in AD biomarkers. METHODS:Patients undergoing neurosurgical/otolaryngology procedures requiring lumbar cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) drain placement were prospectively randomized to receive isoflurane (n = 21) or propofol (n = 18) for anesthetic maintenance. We measured perioperative CSF sample AD markers, performed genotyping assays, and examined intraoperative data from the electronic anesthesia record. A repeated measures ANOVA was used to examine changes in AD markers by anesthetic type over time. RESULTS: The CSF tau/Aβ ratio did not differ between isoflurane- versus propofol-treated patients (p = 1.000). CSF tau/Aβ ratio and tau levels increased 10 and 24 h after drain placement (p = 2.002×10-6 and p = 1.985×10-6, respectively), mean CSF p-tau levels decreased (p = 0.005), and Aβ levels did not change (p = 0.152). There was no interaction between anesthetic treatment and time for any of these biomarkers. None of the examined genetic polymorphisms, including ApoE4, were associated with tau increase (n = 9 polymorphisms, p > 0.05 for all associations). CONCLUSION: Neurosurgery/otolaryngology procedures are associated with an increase in the CSF tau/Aβ ratio, and this increase was not influenced by anesthetic type. The increased CSF tau/Aβ ratio was largely driven by increases in tau levels. Future work should determine the functional/prognostic significance of these perioperative CSF tau elevations.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Preclinical studies have found differential effects of isoflurane and propofol on the Alzheimer's disease (AD)-associated markers tau, phosphorylated tau (p-tau) and amyloid-β (Aβ). OBJECTIVE: We asked whether isoflurane and propofol have differential effects on the tau/Aβ ratio (the primary outcome), and individual AD biomarkers. We also examined whether genetic/intraoperative factors influenced perioperative changes in AD biomarkers. METHODS:Patients undergoing neurosurgical/otolaryngology procedures requiring lumbar cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) drain placement were prospectively randomized to receive isoflurane (n = 21) or propofol (n = 18) for anesthetic maintenance. We measured perioperative CSF sample AD markers, performed genotyping assays, and examined intraoperative data from the electronic anesthesia record. A repeated measures ANOVA was used to examine changes in AD markers by anesthetic type over time. RESULTS: The CSF tau/Aβ ratio did not differ between isoflurane- versus propofol-treated patients (p = 1.000). CSF tau/Aβ ratio and tau levels increased 10 and 24 h after drain placement (p = 2.002×10-6 and p = 1.985×10-6, respectively), mean CSF p-tau levels decreased (p = 0.005), and Aβ levels did not change (p = 0.152). There was no interaction between anesthetic treatment and time for any of these biomarkers. None of the examined genetic polymorphisms, including ApoE4, were associated with tau increase (n = 9 polymorphisms, p > 0.05 for all associations). CONCLUSION: Neurosurgery/otolaryngology procedures are associated with an increase in the CSF tau/Aβ ratio, and this increase was not influenced by anesthetic type. The increased CSF tau/Aβ ratio was largely driven by increases in tau levels. Future work should determine the functional/prognostic significance of these perioperative CSF tau elevations.
Entities:
Keywords:
Amyloid-beta; anesthesia; cerebrospinal fluid; isoflurane; propofol; surgery; tau protein
Authors: Niklas Mattsson; Ulf Andreasson; Staffan Persson; Maria C Carrillo; Steven Collins; Sonia Chalbot; Neal Cutler; Diane Dufour-Rainfray; Anne M Fagan; Niels H H Heegaard; Ging-Yuek Robin Hsiung; Bradley Hyman; Khalid Iqbal; Stephan A Kaeser; Stephan A Käser; D Richard Lachno; Alberto Lleó; Piotr Lewczuk; José L Molinuevo; Piero Parchi; Axel Regeniter; Robert A Rissman; Robert Rissman; Hanna Rosenmann; Giuseppe Sancesario; Johannes Schröder; Leslie M Shaw; Charlotte E Teunissen; John Q Trojanowski; Hugo Vanderstichele; Manu Vandijck; Marcel M Verbeek; Henrik Zetterberg; Kaj Blennow Journal: Alzheimers Dement Date: 2013-05 Impact factor: 21.566
Authors: Junxia X Tang; Dimitry Baranov; Mary Hammond; Leslie M Shaw; Maryellen F Eckenhoff; Roderic G Eckenhoff Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2011-10 Impact factor: 7.892
Authors: Björn Reinsfelt; Sven-Erik Ricksten; Henrik Zetterberg; Kaj Blennow; Johan Fredén-Lindqvist; Anne Westerlind Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2012-06-13 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Leslie M Shaw; Hugo Vanderstichele; Malgorzata Knapik-Czajka; Christopher M Clark; Paul S Aisen; Ronald C Petersen; Kaj Blennow; Holly Soares; Adam Simon; Piotr Lewczuk; Robert Dean; Eric Siemers; William Potter; Virginia M-Y Lee; John Q Trojanowski Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2009-04 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: Cees Mulder; Nicolaas A Verwey; Wiesje M van der Flier; Femke H Bouwman; Astrid Kok; Evert J van Elk; Philip Scheltens; Marinus A Blankenstein Journal: Clin Chem Date: 2009-10-15 Impact factor: 8.327
Authors: Sanna Neselius; Helena Brisby; Annette Theodorsson; Kaj Blennow; Henrik Zetterberg; Jan Marcusson Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-04-04 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Miles Berger; Deborah Oyeyemi; Mobolaji O Olurinde; Heather E Whitson; Kent J Weinhold; Marty G Woldorff; Lewis A Lipsitz; Eugene Moretti; Charles M Giattino; Kenneth C Roberts; Junhong Zhou; Thomas Bunning; Michael Ferrandino; Randall P Scheri; Mary Cooter; Cliburn Chan; Roberto Cabeza; Jeffrey N Browndyke; David M Murdoch; Michael J Devinney; Leslie M Shaw; Harvey Jay Cohen; Joseph P Mathew Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2019-01-23 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Miles Berger; Niccolò Terrando; S Kendall Smith; Jeffrey N Browndyke; Mark F Newman; Joseph P Mathew Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2018-10 Impact factor: 7.892
Authors: Elizabeth Mahanna-Gabrielli; Katie J Schenning; Lars I Eriksson; Jeffrey N Browndyke; Clinton B Wright; Deborah J Culley; Lis Evered; David A Scott; Nae Yah Wang; Charles H Brown; Esther Oh; Patrick Purdon; Sharon Inouye; Miles Berger; Robert A Whittington; Catherine C Price; Stacie Deiner Journal: Br J Anaesth Date: 2019-08-19 Impact factor: 9.166
Authors: Christopher R Carpenter; Frances McFarland; Michael Avidan; Miles Berger; Sharon K Inouye; Jason Karlawish; Frank R Lin; Edward Marcantonio; John C Morris; David B Reuben; Raj C Shah; Heather E Whitson; Sanjay Asthana; Joe Verghese Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2019-08-22 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Breton M Asken; Molly J Sullan; Aliyah R Snyder; Zachary M Houck; Vaughn E Bryant; Loren P Hizel; Molly E McLaren; Duane E Dede; Michael S Jaffee; Steven T DeKosky; Russell M Bauer Journal: Neuropsychol Rev Date: 2016-08-25 Impact factor: 7.444
Authors: Rebecca Y Klinger; Olga G James; Salvador Borges-Neto; Tiffany Bisanar; Yi-Ju Li; Wenjing Qi; Miles Berger; Niccolò Terrando; Mark F Newman; P Murali Doraiswamy; Joseph P Mathew Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2018-04 Impact factor: 7.892
Authors: Stacie Deiner; Mark G Baxter; Joshua S Mincer; Mary Sano; James Hall; Ismail Mohammed; Sid O'Bryant; Henrik Zetterberg; Kaj Blennow; Roderic Eckenhoff Journal: Br J Anaesth Date: 2020-06-11 Impact factor: 9.166
Authors: Keith W VanDusen; Sarada Eleswarpu; Eugene W Moretti; Michael J Devinney; Donna M Crabtree; Daniel T Laskowitz; Marty G Woldorff; Kenneth C Roberts; John Whittle; Jeffrey N Browndyke; Mary Cooter; Frank W Rockhold; Oke Anakwenze; Michael P Bolognesi; Mark E Easley; Michael N Ferrandino; William A Jiranek; Miles Berger Journal: J Alzheimers Dis Date: 2020 Impact factor: 4.472