| Literature DB >> 29884896 |
Andrew J Whalen1,2, Ying Xiao3,4,5, Herve Kadji3,4, Markus A Dahlem6, Bruce J Gluckman3,4,7, Steven J Schiff8,3,4,7,9.
Abstract
Spreading depression or depolarization is a large-scale pathological brain phenomenon related to migraine, stroke, hemorrhage and traumatic brain injury. Once initiated, spreading depression propagates across gray matter extruding potassium and other active molecules, collapsing the resting membrane electro-chemical gradient of cells leading to spike inactivation and cellular swelling, and propagates independently of synaptic transmission. We demonstrate the modulation, suppression and prevention of spreading depression utilizing applied transcortical DC electric fields in brain slices, measured with intrinsic optical imaging and potassium dye epifluorescence. We experimentally observe a surface-positive electric field induced forcing of spreading depression propagation to locations in cortex deeper than the unmodulated propagation path, whereby further propagation is confined and arrested even after field termination. The opposite surface-negative electric field polarity produces an increase in propagation velocity and a confinement of the wave to more superficial layers of cortex than the unmodulated propagation path. These field polarities are of opposite sign to the polarity that blocks neuronal spiking and seizures, and are consistent with biophysical models of spreading depression. The results demonstrate the potential feasibility of electrical control and prevention of spreading depression.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29884896 PMCID: PMC5993812 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-26986-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Experimental methods. (a) Schematic of the feedback-controlled electric field modified perfusion chamber and coronal slice somatodendtiric axis alignment with the applied transcortical field. Local high K+ is injected from the top pipette (purple) to initiate SD. (b) Example control output of the PID feedback field controller, commanding a 116 mV/mm field in the tissue. Inset depicts the performance upon field step on. (c) Schematic of a series of 3-epoch experiments consisting of control, field applied, followed by repeat control runs, so that the effect of recovery and time following induction of multiple SDs and the effect of stimulation are accounted for. Also in (c) is shown the orientation of the applied surface-positive field with respect to the somatodendritic axis of principal cells in cortex. In (d) is shown a schematic of the simultaneous intrinsic optical signal and potassium epifluorescence imaging configuration, utilizing a Dual View multi-channel imaging system (Photometrics, Tucson, AZ), and an example imaging output in (e), along with the associated extracellular voltage deflection measured between the two micropipettes from a in (f). Simultaneous IOS (red) and APG-2 intracellular potassium dye epi-fluorescence (blue) signals are shown individually, and with overlap (bright pink overlay in (g)) indicating that the intracellular K+ decrease during the SD wave is along the leading edge of the IOS signal.
Figure 2Examples of modulation experiments. (a) Electric field effects (116 mV/mm) on the propagation and invasion of SD into the various layers of coronal slices imaged via IOS. Normal SD propagation through all cortical layers during a control trial (left). SD propagation under applied surface-negative DC field confines the spread to the superficial cortical layers (middle), while SD propagation was forced into the deeper layers of cortex and arrested by applied surface-positive DC field (right). (b) Corresponding timing of SD signal as a function of cortical depth and time, the color bar representing light intensity changes as percent of baseline for the line of pixels indicated in red in upper plots (lower row in (a)). Note that the pixel cross-section for the positive field trial was taken nearer to the injection area due to the spatial arrest of SD.
Figure 3Summary of modulation experiments. (a) Summary of SD propagation velocity differences as a percentage of the averaged control trials for ±116 mV/mm electric field strengths as a function of field polarity. The significant differences (p < 0.01, n = 104 slices) between groups are marked by asterisks. (b) SD propagation velocity as a function of each type of 3-epoch experiment (control with either positive or negative fields) for ±116 mV/mm electric field strength. The flanking control trials for each polarization are shown here separately, while the gray dividing line indicates the independence between positive and negative experimental trials. The significant differences (p < 0.01, n = 104 slices) between groups are marked by asterisks, outliers are open circles. (c) Dose response of field strength efficacy (left), and stimulus timing from initiation of injection (right) in arresting SD propagation (arrest rate plotted above as the percentage of arrests out of 32 slices for each tested condition). Each distribution plotted for a different field strength (for the 10 second polarization time delay) and a different stimulus timing (for the 116 mV/mm field), compares the area of cortical tissue invaded by SD expressed as a percentage of the control trial SD invasion area. Red dashed boxes identitfy the same dataset represented in each plot. Black dots in the distribution indicate trials where the horizontal SD propagation was arrested by the applied field, gray dots indicate trials where the wave did not stop. Stronger fields and earlier applied fields are more effective in minimizing the tissue area affected by SD. Control trial plotted separately for comparison (lower far right). (d) Dose response of field strength (left) and stimulus delay time (right) efficacy in arresting SD propagation (as the percentage of arrests out of 32 slices for each commanded field or polarization time delay). Curves plotted for different stimulation delay times with respect to high K+ injection at time t = 0. The time delay of the applied field response on the SD arrest rate is consistent across field strengths – the earlier the field is applied to the SD wave the more effective the arrest rate. Preconditioning the tissue with an applied field before SD induction shows the most effective arrest rates for each field strength tested.