JOURNAL HOME CME HOME THIS MONTH PAST ISSUES ETOC COLLECTIONS
AUTHORS REVIEWERS EDITORIAL BOARD FEEDBACK RSS HELP
A&A International Anesthesia Research Society
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Anesth Analg 2009; 108:176-180
© 2009 International Anesthesia Research Society
doi: 10.1213/ane.0b013e31818ca33e
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a colleague
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Milutinovic, P. S.
Right arrow Articles by Sonner, J. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Milutinovic, P. S.
Right arrow Articles by Sonner, J. M.
Related Collections
Right arrow Mechanisms
Right arrow Preclinical Pharmacology
Right arrow Pharmacology

ANESTHETIC PHARMACOLOGY

Tolerance to Isoflurane Does Not Occur in Developing Xenopus laevis Tadpoles

Pavle S. Milutinovic, MS*, Jing Zhao, MD{dagger}, and James M. Sonner, MD{ddagger}

From the *The University of Pittsburg School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; {dagger}Peking Union Medical College, Peking, China; and {ddagger}The Department of Anesthesia and Perioperative Care, University of California, San Francisco, California.

Address correspondence to Dr. James M. Sonner, Department of Anesthesia and Perioperative Care, Room S-455i, University of California, San Francisco, CA 94143-0464. Address e-mail to sonnerj{at}anesthesia.ucsf.edu.


   Abstract
Top
 Abstract
Introduction
 METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
INTRODUCTION: Tolerance is observed for a variety of central nervous system depressants including ethanol, which is an anesthetic, but has not been convincingly demonstrated for a potent halogenated volatile anesthetic. Failure to demonstrate tolerance to these agents may be the result of inadequate exposure to anesthetic. In this study, we exposed Xenopus laevis tadpoles to surgical anesthetic concentrations of isoflurane for 1 wk.

METHODS: Xenopus laevis tadpoles were produced by in vitro fertilization, and exposed to isoflurane (0.59%, 0.98%, 1.52%) or oxygen for 1 wk starting from the time of fertilization.

RESULTS: Changes in anesthetic EC50 were small and not in a consistent direction. Control animals had an anesthetic EC50 of 0.594% ± 0.003% isoflurane. Tadpoles exposed to 1.52% isoflurane had a lower EC50 than controls (by 16%), whereas tadpoles raised under 0.59% and 0.98% isoflurane had higher EC50s than control (by 4.7% and 7.4%, respectively).

CONCLUSION: We provide the first description of week-long exposures of vertebrates to surgical anesthetic concentrations of isoflurane, and the first report of such exposures in developing vertebrates. Tolerance to isoflurane does not occur in developing Xenopus laevis tadpoles. Taken together with studies in other organisms, the development of tolerance to ethanol but not isoflurane suggests that mechanisms shared by these drugs probably do not account for the development of tolerance.


   Introduction
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Tolerance, defined as the diminished effect of a drug with time, is observed for several central nervous system depressants, including barbiturates,1 ethanol,2 nitrous oxide,3 and benzodiazepines.4 Potent halogenated clinical anesthetics, such as isoflurane and desflurane, are thought to share certain mechanisms with these drugs. For example, barbiturates,5 ethanol,6 benzodiazepines,7 and potent halogenated drugs6 all positively modulate {gamma}-aminobutyric acid (GABA) type A (GABAA) receptor function. Nitrous oxide, ethanol, and isoflurane inhibit N-methyl-d-aspartate receptor function.8,9 There is additional evidence of a common mechanism between potent halogenated anesthetics and alcohol. Desflurane is additive in its effects with ethanol.10 The similar modulation of N-methyl-d-aspartate,9 GABAA and glycine6 receptor function by isoflurane and ethanol is attenuated by the same point mutations on those receptors.6,9 Indeed, it has been proposed that ethanol and isoflurane bind to the same site on glycine receptors.11 Despite this similarity in mechanism, unlike ethanol, tolerance to potent halogenated anesthetics has not been convincingly demonstrated.

Attempts to demonstrate tolerance to potent inhaled anesthetics have generally focused on short (minutes to hours) exposure to surgical anesthetic concentrations of anesthetics in order to mimic clinical situations, or longer exposures (days) to lower, subanesthetic concentrations in order to address mechanistic questions. For example, burst suppression on electroencephalogram produced by approximately two minimum alveolar anesthetic concentration (MAC) desflurane has been reported to change to continuous electrical activity after approximately 30 min in dogs.12 However, a similar protocol showed no electroencephalogram evidence for tolerance to desflurane in swine.13 MAC to halothane does not change over 500 min in dogs.14 Mice continuously exposed to 0.15% or 0.30% atm isoflurane for 21 or 42 days showed small (2%–9%) but insignificant increases in the righting reflex EC50.

Lack of development of tolerance to a potent inhaled anesthetic would be of considerable mechanistic significance, because it would indicate a difference in mechanism of action with other, tolerance-producing drugs15 and, in particular, would suggest that common molecular mechanisms are unlikely to be involved in producing tolerance. However, lengthy exposures over the course of days to high concentrations of inhaled anesthetic have not been attempted in efforts to produce tolerance, perhaps because of the difficulty in caring for animals anesthetized for these longer spans of time. In the present report, we studied this concentration range. We exposed animals to concentrations of isoflurane larger than MAC for a week to determine whether tolerance developed. To circumvent the husbandry issues associated with long-term exposure of most animals to immobilizing concentrations of anesthetic, we exposed developing tadpoles to isoflurane. In their first week of life, tadpoles subsist on their yolk sac and do not require food. Tadpoles were produced by in vitro fertilization, and exposed to isoflurane from the moment of fertilization until approximately 1 wk of age.

In humans, more than 50% of acutely intoxicated patients have a blood alcohol concentration of 150 mg/dL.15 By contrast, patients who chronically ingest alcohol can have more than twice this blood alcohol concentration (300–400 mg/dL) without sedation, a concentration that approaches the lethal concentration in a nontolerant individual.15 Thus, EC50s more than double with tolerance to ethanol in humans. In this study of isoflurane, we regarded a 25% increase in EC50 as the lowest increase indicative of tolerance.


   METHODS
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 METHODS
RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
All studies in animals were approved by the University of California at San Francisco institutional animal care and use committee. Tadpoles were raised by in vitro fertilization.16 A sexually mature, 9 cm Xenopus laevis female (Nasco, Modesto, CA) was primed with 50 IU human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) (1 IU/µL) (Sigma, St. Louis, MO) injected into the dorsal lymph sac. Seven days later ovulation was induced by injecting 800 IU hCG into the dorsal lymph sac. After induction, the frog was kept in high salt modified Barth’s solution (high salt MBS) (108 mM NaCl, 1 mM KCl, 1 mM MgSO4, 5 mM HEPES, 2.5 mM NaHCO3, 0.7 mM CaCl2, adjusted to pH 7.0). Egg laying began 6–12 h later. A male frog was euthanized; the testes were removed and kept in 1 x MBS (88 mM NaCl,1 mM KCl, 1 mM MgSO4, 5 mM HEPES, 2.5 mM NaHCO3, adjusted to pH 7.0) on ice. A sperm slurry was made by crushing testes with a razor blade in a small amount of 0.1 x Marc’s modified ringer’s (MMR) + gentamicin (10 mM NaCl, 0.18 mM KCl, 0.2 mM CaCl2, 0.1 mM MgCl2, 0.5 mM HEPES, 50 µg/mL gentamicin, adjusted to pH 7.0); this solution was kept on ice until the fertilization step.

Eggs were collected within 10 min of laying, and placed in 100 x 15 mM Petri dishes (Fisher Scientific, Pittsburgh, PA). The high salt MBS was decanted, and the eggs were covered with the sperm slurry. After successful fertilization, as indicated by upward rotation of the animal pole, eggs were placed in 0.1 x MMR equilibrated with the isoflurane concentration under study. The eggs were kept in batches of up to 30–40 in Petri dishes in 0.1 x MMR + gentamicin for the first 2 days; subsequently, the developing embryos were kept in 0.1 x MMR without gentamicin. Medium was changed every day.

Petri dishes were kept in gas-tight plastic cylinders with rubber stoppers at both ends. Air (control) or varying concentrations of isoflurane in air delivered by vaporizer was passed through the cylinders at 60 mL/min. Dry gasses passed through a humidifier before being introduced into the cylinders.

Anesthetic potency was tested in tadpoles at 7–8 days after fertilization using established, validated methods.17 Fertilized eggs 112, 25, 26, and 25, respectively, were initially placed in 0.00%, 0.59%, 0.98%, and 1.52% isoflurane. However, only 30 control tadpoles (0% isoflurane group) were used for testing of anesthetic response. Tadpoles were scored for survival and gross morphological abnormalities on days 4, 6, and 7 or 8. Those with gross morphological abnormalities were not tested for anesthetic response.

To test anesthetic potency, tadpoles were placed in 100 mL cylindrical glass containers containing 0.1 x MMR with isoflurane. Isoflurane was bubbled into this solution at a rate of 120 mL/min. The system was covered with a plastic top and allowed to equilibrate for 20 min. A small sample of gas was drawn with a gas-tight syringe through a line hanging just above the liquid and analyzed by gas chromatography.

Tadpoles were prodded on their side for 30 s with a glass rod, or until they moved, whichever occurred first. Tadpoles that responded to any amount of prodding were classified as moving. Tadpoles that did not respond to prodding were classified as nonmoving and tadpoles were removed and placed in isoflurane-free 0.1 x MMR for recovery. The concentration of isoflurane was increased by approximately 20% for the tadpoles that moved, and the procedure of equilibrating the 0.1 x MMR and testing for movement in response to prodding was repeated until a concentration of isoflurane was found at which no tadpole moved.

Sample Size
Sample size was calculated based on pilot data which suggested that, under control conditions, the isoflurane EC50 in tadpoles would be approximately 0.6% atm with a Hill coefficient of 12. This Hill coefficient corresponds to a standard deviation in the underlying distribution of EC50s of about 0.08% atm.18 As noted previously, we regarded tolerance resulting in an increase in EC50 by at least 25%, from 0.6% to 0.75% atm, as biologically important. To have a 90% probability of detecting an effect of this size at the 1% significance threshold using an unpaired t-test required at least 10 tadpoles per group.

Statistics
The fraction of nonmoves as a function of isoflurane concentration was analyzed by nonlinear regression to a Hill equation. EC50s and Hill coefficients were calculated and used to compare the curves. Comparisons of means between groups was done using a Student’s t-test, or an analysis of variance with the Student-Newman-Keuls test used for post hoc multiple comparison testing. We considered tolerance to have developed if there was a concentration-dependent increase in anesthetic EC50 with exposure to increasing concentrations of isoflurane during development. We regarded tolerance resulting in an increase in EC50 by at least 25% as biologically important and amenable to further study. Data on abnormalities and mortality were compared using a {chi}2 test. Where appropriate, a Bonferroni correction was used. P < 0.05 was considered significant.


   RESULTS
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 METHODS
 RESULTS
DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
The concentration-response curves in Figure 1 show the relation between isoflurane exposure and evoked movement in tadpoles. The EC50 and Hill coefficient for each of these curves is tabulated in Table 1.


Figure 126
View larger version (40K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Figure 1. Xenopus laevis tadpoles were produced by in vitro fertilization and raised from conception until 1 wk of age in air (control), or in air with 0.59%, 0.98%, or 1.52% atmospheres (% atm) isoflurane. Isoflurane EC50 was determined at 1 wk of age. This figure shows the fraction of tadpoles moving in response to prodding as a function of isoflurane concentration. EC50s are open circles, with horizontal error bars representing the standard error in the EC50.

 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 1. EC50 and Hill Coefficient for no Move in Response to Isoflurane in Tadpoles Raised in Varying Concentrations of Isoflurane

 

There was a statistically significant difference in the EC50s (one-way analysis of variance F3,68 = 46.50, P < 0.001). A post hoc Student-Newman-Keuls test showed that all of the groups differed at the 0.05 significance threshold from control, with tadpoles treated with 1.52% isoflurane having a lower EC50 than controls (by 16.2%), and tadpoles raised under 0.59% and 0.98% isoflurane having higher EC50s than control (by 4.7% and 7.4%, respectively). There was no significant difference in Hill coefficients (F3,68 = 2.29, P = 0.087).

Figure 2 shows the fraction of tadpoles that were healthy (i.e., did not die and were not morphologically abnormal) at 4, 6, and 7 or 8 (denoted 7/8) days after fertilization as a function of their isoflurane exposure. At 4 days, there was no difference in survival among control animals or animals raised in any concentration of isoflurane (P > 0.05). At days 6 and 7/8 healthy survival was high and unchanged in the control and 0.56% isoflurane groups. However, animals exposed to 0.98% isoflurane and 1.52% isoflurane began to die or develop morphological abnormalities by day 6 (P < 0.005 for both groups). Table 2 lists the number of animals that died or developed morphological abnormalities in each treatment group at these times.


Figure 226
View larger version (32K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Figure 2. Xenopus laevis tadpoles were raised from zygotes to 1 wk old tadpoles in air, or in air with 0.59%, 0.98%, or 1.52% atmospheres isoflurane. The fraction of tadpoles that were healthy (did not die and had no morphological abnormalities) on days 4, 6, and 7/8 is shown here (some animals were studied on day 7, and some on day 8; these results were pooled and are denoted 7/8). At 4 days, there was no difference in survival among control animals or animals raised in any concentration of isoflurane. Animals exposed to 0.98% isoflurane and 1.52% isoflurane began to die or develop morphological abnormalities by day 6.

 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 2. Abnormalities and Deaths in Developing Tadpoles Exposed to Isoflurane

 


   DISCUSSION
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
 
We used tadpoles to address the question of whether isoflurane could produce tolerance in a vertebrate. We chose to use tadpoles because week-long exposures to high concentrations of anesthetic are possible in this animal, because they have many of the same neurotransmitters (e.g., GABAA, glycine, glutamate, acetylcholine) and anatomic substrates (forebrain, hindbrain, spinal cord) as more complex vertebrates and, most importantly, because tadpoles have been used as a model organism to study mechanisms of anesthetic action.17,19,20

The isoflurane concentrations we used were equivalent to 0.4 to 1 MAC in mice or rats. Keeping sufficient numbers of rats or mice healthy while exposed continuously to these concentrations of isoflurane for 7 days would have posed significant husbandry (and ethical) issues. For example, the animals would need to be fed and hydrated while anesthetized, and body temperature and airway patency would have to be monitored and maintained around the clock. These issues were not present in developing tadpoles. Although the isoflurane concentration we used reduced spontaneous movement in tadpoles, in their first week of development tadpoles derive nutrition from their yolk sac and have none of the aforementioned care requirements.

Our tadpoles were raised in an aqueous environment at room temperature (averaging 22°C in our laboratory). Because the potency of volatile anesthetics delivered in the gas phase increases as temperature decreases,21 the gas phase concentrations we report place a lower limit on the MAC fraction of isoflurane we applied. However, even without a correction for temperature, ours are the highest concentrations that have been used in any study of anesthetic tolerance in vertebrates. At the highest exposure, tadpoles were exposed to approximately three times their anesthetic EC50 during development.

Although we found statistically significant effects of prolonged treatment with isoflurane on the concentration of isoflurane required to prevent movement in Xenopus laevis tadpoles, this effect was small and varied from at most a 7.4% increase in EC50 (with exposure to 0.98% isoflurane for 1 wk) to a 16.2% decrease in EC50 (with exposure to 1.52% isoflurane). This decrease is in the opposite direction expected for tolerance. Possibly, the presence of isoflurane throughout development led to compensation for the presence of isoflurane. Because the observed effects were small and there was no consistent direction to the change in EC50 over a range of isoflurane concentrations, these effects are probably of little biological significance. Given the small and inconsistent effects we observed at 1 wk, it is doubtful that shorter exposures, which might correspond to the duration of surgical procedures, would produce measurable effects. We conclude that tolerance does not develop in tadpoles with exposure to isoflurane. Our results are in accord with other published studies that fail to show tolerance to halogenated clinical anesthetics at lower concentrations or with shorter exposures.

At the two higher concentrations of isoflurane, some animals died in the course of the study. Might the loss of these animals have biased our results by selecting for animals with isoflurane EC50s that promoted survival? Although we cannot exclude this, we think selection, if present, would have biased the data in favor of producing tolerance. We reasoned that animals that were particularly sensitive to isoflurane, with lower EC50s, should have succumbed to exposure to isoflurane, rather than those that were more resistant to isoflurane and had higher EC50s. This would have enriched the remaining population in animals with higher EC50s. That there was no increase in EC50 at the highest concentration, and only small increases at lower concentrations, in the face of possible selection, strengthens our conclusion that tolerance did not develop.

We did not design our study to evaluate possible toxic effects of isoflurane during development; however, developing Xenopus laevis tadpoles are an established model for these effects. The Frog Embryo Teratogenesis Assay-Xenopus model, and modifications thereof,22 use procedures similar to ours. The Frog Embryo Teratogenesis Assay-Xenopus test concludes on day 4, at which time the number of abnormalities and deaths are totaled and compared between treatment groups. We determined the cumulative number of abnormalities and deaths in each group by day 4 and asked whether there were differences between groups in this measure. Although at the two higher concentrations, some morphological abnormalities were present while none were present at the two lower concentrations, and there was a greater frequency of deaths in the control (no isoflurane) group, the total number of deaths and abnormalities combined did not differ between any of the isoflurane exposure groups and the control group over this span of time (P > 0.05). However, by day 6 and day 7/8, there were significantly more abnormalities and deaths in the 2 highest isoflurane exposure groups compared to control, but not in the lowest isoflurane exposure group. While this might suggest a toxic or teratogenic effect to high or prolonged exposures to isoflurane, the clinical relevance of this finding is questionable, since surgical procedures during pregnancy do not expose developing human fetuses to isoflurane over such a large period of their development. The finding of toxicity from isoflurane in developing Xenopus laevis tadpoles would be of concern if there were a short but crucial time when exposure to isoflurane is deleterious in humans, but this is a situation for which there is currently no evidence.

A variety of microorganisms respond to long-term exposure to anesthetics by changing the composition of their membranes.23–25 This is presumably part of a general response to changing environmental conditions, which allows the organism to compensate for perturbations in membrane properties produced by chemicals in the environment. This response might be considered to produce "tolerance" in these organisms. We did not investigate membrane compositional changes in tadpoles, reasoning that because vertebrates regulate their internal milieu, there would be no selection to maintain such a mechanism. The lack of tolerance of Xenopus laevis tadpoles to isoflurane in this study suggests either that we were correct in thinking that this mechanism does not occur in Xenopus laevis, or that the mechanism occurs but has little functional effect.

In summary, we provide the first description of week-long exposures of vertebrates to surgical anesthetic concentrations of isoflurane, and the first report of such exposures in developing vertebrates. We conclude that tolerance to isoflurane does not occur in developing Xenopus laevis tadpoles. Taken together with studies in other organisms, the development of tolerance to ethanol, but not isoflurane, indicates that molecular mechanisms shared with isoflurane probably cannot account for the development of tolerance to ethanol.


   Footnotes
 
Accepted for publication August 21, 2008.

Supported, in part, by NIGMS R01 GM069379.

Reprints will not be available from the author.


   REFERENCES
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 

  1. Okamoto M, Hinman DJ, Aaronson LM. Comparison of ethanol and barbiturate physical dependence. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 1981;218:701–8[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  2. Chandler LJ, Harris RA, Crews FT. Ethanol tolerance and synaptic plasticity. Trends Pharmacol Sci 1998;19:491–5[Medline]
  3. Ramsay DS, Leroux BG, Rothen M, Prall CW, Fiset LO, Woods SC. Nitrous oxide analgesia in humans: acute and chronic tolerance. Pain 2005;114:19–28[Web of Science][Medline]
  4. Hutchinson MA, Smith PF, Darlington CL. The behavioural and neuronal effects of the chronic administration of benzodiazepine anxiolytic and hypnotic drugs. Prog Neurobiol 1996;49:73–97[Web of Science][Medline]
  5. Ito T, Suzuki T, Wellman SE, Ho IK. Pharmacology of barbiturate tolerance/dependence: GABAA receptors and molecular aspects. Life Sci 1996;59:169–95[Web of Science][Medline]
  6. Mihic SJ, Ye Q, Wick MJ, Koltchine VV, Krasowski MD, Finn SE, Mascia MP, Valenzuela, CF, Hanson KK, Greenblatt EP, Harris RA, Harrison NL. Sites of alcohol and volatile anaesthetic action on GABA(A) and glycine receptors. Nature 1997;389:385–9[Medline]
  7. Rudolph U, Crestani F, Benke D, Brunig I, Benson JA, Fritschy JM, Martin JR, Bluethmann H, Mohler H. Benzodiazepine actions mediated by specific gamma-aminobutyric acid(A) receptor subtypes. Nature 1999;401:796–800[Medline]
  8. Yamakura T, Harris RA. Effects of gaseous anesthetics nitrous oxide and xenon on ligand-gated ion channels. Comparison with isoflurane and ethanol. Anesthesiology 2000;93:1095–101[Web of Science][Medline]
  9. Ogata J, Shiraishi M, Namba T, Smothers CT, Woodward JJ, Harris RA. Effects of anesthetics on mutant N-methyl-d-aspartate receptors expressed in Xenopus oocytes. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 2006;318:434–43[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  10. Fang Z, Ionescu P, Chortkoff BS, Kandel L, Sonner J, Laster MJ, Eger EI II. Anesthetic potencies of n-alkanols: results of additivity and solubility studies suggest a mechanism of action similar to that for conventional inhaled anesthetics. Anesth Analg 1997;84:1042–8[Abstract]
  11. Roberts MT, Phelan R, Erlichman BS, Pillai RN, Ma L, Lopreato GF, Mihic SJ. Occupancy of a single anesthetic binding pocket is sufficient to enhance glycine receptor function. J Biol Chem 2006;281:3305–11[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  12. Lutz LJ, Milde JH, Milde LN. The cerebral functional, metabolic, and hemodynamic effects of desflurane in dogs. Anesthesiology 1990;73:125–31[Web of Science][Medline]
  13. Rampil IJ, Laster M, Dwyer RC, Taheri S, Eger EI II. No EEG evidence of acute tolerance to desflurane in swine. Anesthesiology 1991;74:889–92[Web of Science][Medline]
  14. Eger EI II. MAC, Anesthetic Uptake and Action. Balitmore: Williams and Wilkins, 1974
  15. Brunton L, Lazo J, Parker K. Goodman & Gilman’s The Pharmacological Basis of Therapeutics. 11th ed. McGraw-Hill Professional, 2005
  16. Sive H, Grainger R, Harland R. Early Development of Xenopus laevis. Cold Spring Harbor, New York: Cold Spring Harbor Press, 2000
  17. Mohr JT, Gribble GW, Lin SS, Eckenhoff RG, Cantor RS. Anesthetic potency of two novel synthetic polyhydric alkanols longer than the n-alkanol cutoff: evidence for a bilayer-mediated mechanism of anesthesia? J Med Chem 2005;48:4172–6[Web of Science][Medline]
  18. Sonner JM. Issues in the design and interpretation of minimum alveolar anesthetic concentration (MAC) studies. Anesth Analg 2002;95:609–14[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  19. Alifimoff JK, Firestone LL, Miller KW. Anesthetic potencies of secondary alcohol enantiomers. Anesthesiology 1987;66:55–9[Web of Science][Medline]
  20. Halsey MJ, Wardley-Smith B. Pressure reversal of narocsis produced by anaesthetics, narcotics and tranquillisers. Nature 1975;257:811–3[Web of Science][Medline]
  21. Franks NP, Lieb WR. Temperature dependence of the potency of volatile general anesthetics: implications for in vitro experiments. Anesthesiology 1996;84:716–20[Web of Science][Medline]
  22. Fort DJ, Rogers RL, Thomas JH, Buzzard BO, Noll AM, Spaulding CD. Comparative sensitivity of Xenopus tropicalis and Xenopus laevis as test species for the FETAX model. J Appl Toxicol 2004;24:443–57[Web of Science][Medline]
  23. Nandini-Kishore SG, Mattox SM, Martin CE, Thompson GA Jr. Membrane changes during growth of Tetrahymena in the presence of ethanol. Biochim Biophys Acta 1979;551:315–27[Medline]
  24. Koblin DD, Wang HH. Chronic exposure to inhaled anesthetics increases cholesterol content in Acholeplasma laidlawii. Biochim Biophys Acta 1981;649:717–25[Medline]
  25. Ingram LO. Adaptation of membrane lipids to alcohols. J Bacteriol 1976;125:670–8[Abstract/Free Full Text]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Anesth. Analg.Home page
Y. Weng, T. T. Hsu, J. Zhao, S. Nishimura, G. G. Fuller, and J. M. Sonner
Isovaleric, Methylmalonic, and Propionic Acid Decrease Anesthetic EC50 in Tadpoles, Modulate Glycine Receptor Function, and Interact with the Lipid 1,2-Dipalmitoyl-Sn-Glycero-3-Phosphocholine
Anesth. Analg., May 1, 2009; 108(5): 1538 - 1545.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a colleague
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Milutinovic, P. S.
Right arrow Articles by Sonner, J. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Milutinovic, P. S.
Right arrow Articles by Sonner, J. M.
Related Collections
Right arrow Mechanisms
Right arrow Preclinical Pharmacology
Right arrow Pharmacology

Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins Anesthesia & Analgesia® is published for the International Anesthesia Research Society® by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins and Stanford University Libraries' HighWire Press®. Copyright 2009 by the International Anesthesia Research Society. Online ISSN: 1526-7598   Print ISSN: 0003-2999 HighWire Press