| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Isoflurane and halothane cause electroencephalographic (EEG) depression and neuronal depression in the reticular formation, a site critical to consciousness. We hypothesized that isoflurane, more than halothane, would depress EEG activation elicited by electrical microstimulation of the reticular formation. Rats were anesthetized with either halothane or isoflurane and stimulating electrodes were positioned in the reticular formation. In a crossover design, anesthetic concentration was adjusted to 0.8 and 1.2 minimum alveolar concentration (MAC) of halothane or isoflurane and electrical microstimulation was performed and the EEG responses were recorded. Microstimulation increased the spectral edge and median edge frequencies 22.5 Hz at 0.8 MAC for halothane and isoflurane and 1.2 MAC halothane. At 1.2 MAC isoflurane, burst suppression occurred and microstimulation decreased the period of isoelectricity (24% ± 19% to 8% ± 7%; P < 0.05), whereas the spectral edge and median edge frequencies were unchanged. At anesthetic concentrations required to produce immobility, the cortex remains responsive to electrical microstimulation of the reticular formation, although the EEG response is depressed in the transition from 0.8 to 1.2 MAC. These data indicate that cortical neurons remain responsive to synaptic input during isoflurane and halothane anesthesia.
General anesthetics, such as isoflurane and halothane, cause electroencephalographic (EEG) depression. Furthermore, these drugs alter EEG responses to a variety of stimuli, including noxious stimulation (14). Although the EEG depression likely occurs primarily via a direct action in the brain, part of the EEG depression occurs because of an indirect spinal cord action (2). We have hypothesized that anesthetics act spinally to blunt the ascending transmission of somatosensory signals, thereby decreasing the arousal level in the brain to result in EEG depression, as well as depressing EEG activation elicited by noxious stimulation (2). As part of our approach, we have used electrical microstimulation of the midbrain reticular formation (MRF), an area critical to cerebral arousal and consciousness (5,6). Moruzzi and Magoun (7) first reported that microstimulation of this area resulted in EEG arousal, and their work laid the groundwork for further studies on the importance of the reticular formation to arousal. Although many of the animals used in that study were anesthetized with chloralose, little work has since been performed to determine how anesthetics alter EEG responses to electrical microstimulation of the MRF and pontine reticular formation. Isoflurane and halothane are two commonly used anesthetics that have disparate EEG effects, with isoflurane generally resulting in more EEG depression than halothane. In the present study, we hypothesized that isoflurane would cause greater depression of the EEG activation elicited by electrical microstimulation of the reticular formation, as compared with halothane.
The local animal care and use committee approved this study. Adult male rats (weight 400600 g) were anesthetized with either halothane (n = 6) or isoflurane (n = 6) in a chamber. Anesthesia was maintained via mask and a tracheostomy tube (14-gauge) inserted through a neck incision. The rats' lungs were mechanically ventilated. End-tidal CO2 was maintained at 3045 mm Hg. Alveolar anesthetic concentration was measured using a calibrated anesthetic agent analyzer (Ohmeda Rascal II, Salt Lake City, UT). A catheter was inserted into a jugular vein for fluid and drug administration and another catheter was inserted into a carotid artery for monitoring mean arterial blood pressure (MAP). Unilateral ligation of a carotid artery does not appreciably alter cerebral blood flow (8). A posterior craniotomy was performed to permit insertion of stimulating electrodes. Four small stainless steel screws were inserted into the skull for EEG measurement. A ground electrode was placed in the midline over the anterior skull 15 mm anterior to the interaural line and 2 were inserted (on either side) 5 mm lateral to midline and 57 mm rostral to the interaural line. The reference electrode was placed over the midline 23 mm caudal to the interaural line. Cables were attached to the screws and the EEG signals were downloaded to a Bispectral index (BIS) monitor (A-1050; Aspect Medical, Newton, MA) at 256 samples/s. The filters were set at 270 Hz. Impedance was <5000 ohms. The BIS monitor calculated the median edge frequency (MEF) and spectral edge (95%) frequency (SEF) every 5 s and these were downloaded to computer hard drive. The BIS monitor used a "rolling" average of the previous 30-s period. In addition, the raw EEG was recorded onto a computer hard drive using Chart version 5.1 (ADInstruments, Colorado Springs, CO). The rats were placed into a stereotaxic frame (D. Kopf, Tujunga, CA). Two bipolar stimulating electrodes (FHC, Bowdoinham, ME) were attached to an electrode holder 1 mm apart in the rostral caudal axis and lowered into the brain. We used two electrodes to increase the chance to elicit EEG activation. The areas targeted were the MRF (2 mm lateral to midline, 2 mm rostral to the interaural line, and 67 mm below the brain surface) and the pontomesencephalic tegmental area (2 mm lateral to midline, 2 mm rostral to the interaural line, and 78 mm below the brain surface). The stimulating sites were confirmed histologically. Pancuronium was administered (0.20.3 mg/kg every 12 h) to minimize electromyographic artifacts in the EEG recording. A crossover experimental paradigm was used. The anesthetic concentration was adjusted to either 0.8 or 1.2 minimum alveolar concentration (MAC) (order alternated experiment to experiment) and maintained for at least 15 min. Population MAC values were assumed for halothane (1%) and isoflurane (1.2%) based on previous studies from our laboratory (9,10). Electrical stimuli consisted of 2-s trains of 100-µs square wave pulses delivered at 300 Hz, at current intensities of 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, and 0.5 mA. Two to 3 min elapsed between each stimulus train, permitting return to the baseline EEG pattern. The order of the current intensities was randomized. The same paradigm was used to deliver electrical stimuli through the other electrode. In addition, we separately determined EEG responses to supramaximal stimulation of the tail using 2 methods: electrical current (60 mA, 50 Hz for 30 s) via percutaneous platinum needle electrodes placed into the proximal tail and a hemostat clamp applied to the tail for 30 s. The anesthetic concentration was switched and after 1520 min equilibration the stimulating paradigm was repeated. The anesthetic was then changed (from halothane to isoflurane, or vice versa, counterbalanced across experiments) in 10 animals. After approximately 45 min equilibration, the stimulation paradigm was repeated at 0.8 and 1.2 MAC as described above. On completion of the study the rats were killed with excess anesthetic and IV potassium chloride. An electrolytic lesion was made by delivering current (68 V, 3060 s) through each of the electrodes, after which the brain was removed. The brains were fixed in 10% buffered formalin and sectioned several days later and counterstained with Neutral Red. Electrolytic lesions were examined under the light microscope and compiled on representative brain sections taken from the atlas of Paxinos and Watson (11). Data are presented as mean and standard deviation. The EEG parameters were averaged for the 30-s period before microstimulation and the second 30-s period after microstimulation. The EEG responses were nearly identical between the rostrally and caudally placed electrodes so the data from both electrodes were pooled. The EEG data (MEF and SEF) were compared before and after stimulation. The values for each anesthetic were compared using repeated-measures analysis of variance; post hoc testing was performed using the Student-Newman-Keuls test. To compare the 0.8 and 1.2 MAC post-stimulus values for each anesthetic we used an area under the curve analysis whereby the MEF and SEF values for each stimulus current were summed and evaluated using a paired Student's t-test. For the 1.2 MAC isoflurane EEG data, the burst suppression ratio was calculated as the period of isoelectricity divided by the total EEG period evaluated, which was 30 s. The MAP was analyzed using analysis of variance followed by the Student-Newman-Keuls test or with the paired Student's t-test to compare MAP responses at 0.8 and 1.2 MAC. A P < 0.05 was considered significant.
Electrical microstimulation in the reticular formation resulted in EEG activation as demonstrated by a change from a high amplitude, low frequency pattern to a low amplitude, high frequency pattern. The threshold for this change was usually at 0.050.1 mA and peaked at 0.20.3 mA. At 0.8 MAC for both isoflurane and halothane, SEF and MEF increased significantly at 0.1 mA. An example of the EEG activation in one rat is shown in Figure 1. Note that there was EEG activation at 0.8 MAC for halothane and isoflurane. At 1.2 MAC halothane there was EEG activation after electrical microstimulation of the MRF. At 1.2 MAC isoflurane, however, burst suppression occurred, and electrical microstimulation decreased the period of EEG isoelectricity.
Summary data are shown in Figure 2. Electrical microstimulation in the midbrain resulted in EEG activation as demonstrated by the increased SEF and MEF at 0.8 and 1.2 MAC halothane and 0.8 MAC isoflurane. The post-stimulus MEF and SEF for all currents combined were greater at 0.8 MAC as compared with values at 1.2 MAC for both halothane and isoflurane (P < 0.01). The prestimulus SEF at 0.8 MAC was significantly greater compared with the value at 1.2 MAC for halothane (P < 0.05) but not isoflurane. Electrical stimulation of the tail and the tail clamp generally were as effective in causing EEG activation when compared to the electrical microstimulation of the MRF. At 1.2 MAC isoflurane, however, electrical microstimulation did not change SEF and MEF (Fig. 2) but decreased the amount of EEG isoelectricity occurring during burst suppression. At 1.2 MAC isoflurane, the prestimulus burst suppression ratio was 24% ± 19%, whereas the post-stimulus ratio (average of all post-stimuli values) was 8% ± 7%, P < 0.007. The suppression ratios for each stimulus are shown in Figure 3. Burst suppression rarely occurred during 0.8 MAC isoflurane, with the average period of isoelectricity representing only 1% of the EEG activity. Burst suppression was not observed during halothane anesthesia.
The MAP increased as a result of electrical microstimulation, with the peak occurring at about 0.5 mA (Fig. 4). The MAP for all currents combined was greater at 0.8 MAC as compared with the values at 1.2 MAC for both isoflurane and halothane (Fig. 4). The stimulus sites were located in the reticular formation, extending from the rostral midbrain to the rostral pons, including the area surrounding the pedunculopontine tegmental nucleus (Fig. 5).
The main finding of the present study was that halothane and isoflurane had different effects on the EEG response to electrical microstimulation of the reticular formation. The transition from 0.8 MAC to 1.2 MAC halothane depressed the post-stimulus SEF and MEF, in part because of decreased prestimulus values for halothane only. Isoflurane, however, produced burst suppression at 1.2 MAC, and electrical microstimulation of the reticular formation decreased the period of isoelectricity, but the SEF and MEF were not affected. These findings reflect the differences between the EEG effects of isoflurane and halothane but indicate that the cerebral cortex and subcortical structures remain responsive to the activating effect of electrical microstimulation of the reticular formation, albeit with depression of the EEG response between 0.8 and 1.2 MAC. When increased from 0.8 to 1.2 MAC, isoflurane ablates EEG activation that follows noxious stimulation (9). Is this effect primarily the result of an action in the brain, or is action in the spinal cord partly responsible? Our prior work suggests that this blunting effect is in large part because of action in the spinal cord (1,2). For example, addition of isoflurane to the torso (and hence spinal cord) ablates EEG activation in animals that have approximately 1 MAC isoflurane administered to the brain (1). With respect to the blunting of EEG activation, how important is isoflurane's and halothane's action in the brain? In the present study we addressed this question by applying a stimulus to the reticular formation that essentially bypasses the spinal cord. Had isoflurane and halothane prevented EEG activation, we could reasonably conclude that their action in the brain was significant. As this was not the case, however, the present study provides further evidence that isoflurane and halothane can depress EEG activity partly via action in subcortical structures such as the spinal cord. The presence of burst suppression during 1.2 MAC isoflurane anesthesia, and its absence during 1.2 MAC halothane anesthesia, is consistent with other evidence that isoflurane causes more EEG depression than halothane (1214). In a prior study we (9) reported burst suppression during 1.2 MAC isoflurane anesthesia that was minimally altered by repetitive stimulation that produced EEG activation at 0.8 MAC isoflurane and which normally produces neuronal windup. We did not observe burst suppression during halothane anesthesia. In the present study, electrical microstimulation of the reticular formation, as well as noxious stimulation applied to the tail, significantly decreased the period of isoelectricity during 1.2 MAC isoflurane, indicating that even under deep anesthesia the brain remains responsive to noxious stimulation applied to the periphery and to electrical microstimulation of the reticular formation. In the present study the burst suppression in isoflurane-anesthetized rats complicated EEG analysis, inasmuch as the SEF and MEF do not accurately reflect the EEG changes (15). That is, although the SEF and MEF were unchanged after electrical microstimulation, the period of EEG isoelectricity decreased from approximately 20% to as little as 1%2% at the greater electrical currents. Thus, comparing isoflurane and halothane at 1.2 MAC was difficult. Some have argued that SEF and MEF can be linearly corrected for the amount of burst suppression (15). For example, if 50% of the EEG is isoelectric, then the SEF and MEF can be decreased 50%. Although this is a convenient method to handle the data, the choice of linear adjustment is arbitrary. We chose to report the unadjusted SEF and MEF as well as the burst suppression ratio. The EEG pattern (low amplitude, high frequency) resulting from electrical microstimulation of the reticular formation is normally associated with arousal. In humans in a persistent vegetative state, prolonged microstimulation of deep brain structures, including the reticular formation, can increase arousal (16). Evoked potentials are enhanced after electrical microstimulation of the reticular formation (17). Furthermore, electrical stimulation in the reticular formation causes behavioral arousal in awake animals (18) and is associated with enhanced learning (19). However, depending on the method and site of stimulation, central nervous system depression can also occur. For example, stimulation of the thalamus for 3060 seconds at 48 Hz, instead of faster frequencies, such as the 50300 Hz described by Moruzzi and Magoun (7), can produce EEG slowing and induce sleep (20). The mechanism is unclear but is possibly related to activation of sleep-promoting areas of the brain, such as the ventrolateral preoptic nucleus and the tuberomammilary nucleus (21). The reticular formation as a site of anesthetic-induced unconsciousness has received varying attention over the years. Anesthetics such as isoflurane differentially alter neuronal activity, with both excitation and depression occurring (22,23). In addition, neural activity, as indirectly determined using positron emission tomography, is depressed at halothane and isoflurane concentrations associated with unconsciousness (24,25). Infusion of volatile anesthetics into the reticular formation causes unconsciousness (26). In addition, IV anesthetics such as propofol and pentobarbital appear to act, at least in part, on subcortical structures to produce unconsciousness. Devor and Zalkind (27) reported that microinjections of pentobarbital in the mesopontine tegmental area produced anesthesia, while Nelson et al. (21) reported that propofol and pentobarbital act in the tuberomammillary nucleus to produce anesthesia. Collectively, these data suggest that anesthetic action in subcortical structures, including the reticular formation, might be important to anesthetic-induced unconsciousness. Others have argued that anesthetics act in the cerebral cortex to produce unconsciousness (28), in part because cortical neurons, as compared with thalamic (and other subcortical) neurons, appear to be more sensitive to anesthetics. The present data and previously published data (29) indicate, however, that at sub-MAC anesthetic concentrations, the cortex remains responsive to electrical stimulation in the reticular formation as well as to peripheral stimulation. In summary, we found that electrical microstimulation of the reticular formation resulted in EEG activation that was affected differently by isoflurane and halothane. In the transition from 0.8 MAC to 1.2 MAC, halothane depressed the SEF and MEF response to microstimulation, whereas for isoflurane the amount of burst suppression was decreased. During halothane and isoflurane anesthesia the cortex and subcortical structures remain responsive to electrical stimulation, although the response is depressed.
Accepted for publication January 12, 2006. Supported, in part, by National Institutes of Health grants GM 57970, GM61283, and P01-GM47818
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|