Joshua S Mincer1,2, Mark G Baxter1,3,4, Patrick J McCormick1, Mary Sano2,5, Arthur E Schwartz1, Jess W Brallier1, Heather G Allore6, Bradley N Delman7, Margaret C Sewell5, Prantik Kundu7,5, Cheuk Ying Tang7,5, Angela Sanchez1, Stacie G Deiner1,4,8. 1. From the Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative and Pain Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York. 2. James J. Peters VA Medical Center, Bronx, New York. 3. Department of Neuroscience. 4. Department of Geriatrics and Palliative Medicine. 5. Department of Psychiatry, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York. 6. Departments of Internal Medicine and Biostatistics, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut. 7. Department of Radiology. 8. Department of Neurosurgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mechanistic aspects of cognitive recovery after anesthesia and surgery are not yet well characterized, but may be vital to distinguishing the contributions of anesthesia and surgery in cognitive complications common in the elderly such as delirium and postoperative cognitive dysfunction. This article describes the aims and methodological approach to the ongoing study, Trajectory of Recovery in the Elderly (TORIE), which focuses on the trajectory of cognitive recovery from general anesthesia. METHODS: The study design employs cognitive testing coupled with neuroimaging techniques such as functional magnetic resonance imaging, diffusion tensor imaging, and arterial spin labeling to characterize cognitive recovery from anesthesia and its biological correlates. Applying these techniques to a cohort of age-specified healthy volunteers 40-80 years of age, who are exposed to general anesthesia alone, in the absence of surgery, will assess cognitive and functional neural network recovery after anesthesia. Imaging data are acquired before, during, and immediately after anesthesia, as well as 1 and 7 days after. Detailed cognitive data are captured at the same time points as well as 30 days after anesthesia, and brief cognitive assessments are repeated at 6 and 12 months after anesthesia. RESULTS: The study is underway. Our primary hypothesis is that older adults may require significantly longer to achieve cognitive recovery, measured by Postoperative Quality of Recovery Scale cognitive domain, than younger adults in the immediate postanesthesia period, but all will fully recover to baseline levels within 30 days of anesthesia exposure. Imaging data will address systems neuroscience correlates of cognitive recovery from general anesthesia. CONCLUSIONS: The data acquired in this project will have both clinical and theoretical relevance regardless of the outcome by delineating the mechanism behind short-term recovery across the adult age lifespan, which will have major implications for our understanding of the effects of anesthetic drugs.
BACKGROUND: Mechanistic aspects of cognitive recovery after anesthesia and surgery are not yet well characterized, but may be vital to distinguishing the contributions of anesthesia and surgery in cognitive complications common in the elderly such as delirium and postoperative cognitive dysfunction. This article describes the aims and methodological approach to the ongoing study, Trajectory of Recovery in the Elderly (TORIE), which focuses on the trajectory of cognitive recovery from general anesthesia. METHODS: The study design employs cognitive testing coupled with neuroimaging techniques such as functional magnetic resonance imaging, diffusion tensor imaging, and arterial spin labeling to characterize cognitive recovery from anesthesia and its biological correlates. Applying these techniques to a cohort of age-specified healthy volunteers 40-80 years of age, who are exposed to general anesthesia alone, in the absence of surgery, will assess cognitive and functional neural network recovery after anesthesia. Imaging data are acquired before, during, and immediately after anesthesia, as well as 1 and 7 days after. Detailed cognitive data are captured at the same time points as well as 30 days after anesthesia, and brief cognitive assessments are repeated at 6 and 12 months after anesthesia. RESULTS: The study is underway. Our primary hypothesis is that older adults may require significantly longer to achieve cognitive recovery, measured by Postoperative Quality of Recovery Scale cognitive domain, than younger adults in the immediate postanesthesia period, but all will fully recover to baseline levels within 30 days of anesthesia exposure. Imaging data will address systems neuroscience correlates of cognitive recovery from general anesthesia. CONCLUSIONS: The data acquired in this project will have both clinical and theoretical relevance regardless of the outcome by delineating the mechanism behind short-term recovery across the adult age lifespan, which will have major implications for our understanding of the effects of anesthetic drugs.
Authors: J A Detre; W Zhang; D A Roberts; A C Silva; D S Williams; D J Grandis; A P Koretsky; J S Leigh Journal: NMR Biomed Date: 1994-03 Impact factor: 4.044
Authors: Colin F Royse; Stanton Newman; Frances Chung; Jan Stygall; Rachel E McKay; Joachim Boldt; Frederique S Servin; Ignacio Hurtado; Raafat Hannallah; Buwei Yu; David J Wilkinson Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2010-10 Impact factor: 7.892
Authors: Sandra Weintraub; Sureyya S Dikmen; Robert K Heaton; David S Tulsky; Philip D Zelazo; Patricia J Bauer; Noelle E Carlozzi; Jerry Slotkin; David Blitz; Kathleen Wallner-Allen; Nathan A Fox; Jennifer L Beaumont; Dan Mungas; Cindy J Nowinski; Jennifer Richler; Joanne A Deocampo; Jacob E Anderson; Jennifer J Manly; Beth Borosh; Richard Havlik; Kevin Conway; Emmeline Edwards; Lisa Freund; Jonathan W King; Claudia Moy; Ellen Witt; Richard C Gershon Journal: Neurology Date: 2013-03-12 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Prantik Kundu; Valerie Voon; Priti Balchandani; Michael V Lombardo; Benedikt A Poser; Peter A Bandettini Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2017-03-29 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Oluwaseun Akeju; Marco L Loggia; Ciprian Catana; Kara J Pavone; Rafael Vazquez; James Rhee; Violeta Contreras Ramirez; Daniel B Chonde; David Izquierdo-Garcia; Grae Arabasz; Shirley Hsu; Kathleen Habeeb; Jacob M Hooker; Vitaly Napadow; Emery N Brown; Patrick L Purdon Journal: Elife Date: 2014-11-28 Impact factor: 8.140
Authors: Tommer Nir; Yael Jacob; Kuang-Han Huang; Arthur E Schwartz; Jess W Brallier; Helen Ahn; Prantik Kundu; Cheuk Y Tang; Bradley N Delman; Patrick J McCormick; Mary Sano; Stacie Deiner; Mark G Baxter; Joshua S Mincer Journal: Br J Anaesth Date: 2020-08-14 Impact factor: 9.166
Authors: Tommer Nir; Reut Raizman; Inbar Meningher; Yael Jacob; Kuang-Han Huang; Arthur E Schwartz; Jess W Brallier; Helen Ahn; Prantik Kundu; Cheuk Y Tang; Bradley N Delman; Patrick J McCormick; Julia Scarpa; Mary Sano; Stacie G Deiner; Abigail Livny; Mark G Baxter; Joshua S Mincer Journal: Br J Anaesth Date: 2021-11-19 Impact factor: 9.166
Authors: Mark G Baxter; Joshua S Mincer; Jess W Brallier; Arthur Schwartz; Helen Ahn; Tommer Nir; Patrick J McCormick; Mohammed Ismail; Margaret Sewell; Heather G Allore; Christine M Ramsey; Mary Sano; Stacie G Deiner Journal: Anesth Analg Date: 2022-02-01 Impact factor: 6.627
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: Cheuk Y Tang; Victoria X Wang; Min Yin Lun; Joshua S Mincer; Johnny C Ng; Jess W Brallier; Arthur E Schwartz; Helen Ahn; Patrick J McCormick; Tommer Nir; Bradley Delman; Mary Sano; Stacie G Deiner; Mark G Baxter Journal: PLoS One Date: 2021-03-26 Impact factor: 3.240