Intravenous agents and neuroprotection

 

 

Chris­tian Wer­ner, M.D.

(Pro­fes­sor of An­es­the­sio­lo­gy)

 

 Kli­nik für An­aes­the­sio­lo­gie

Tech­nis­che Universität München, Klin­ik­um rechts der Isar

          Is­ma­ning­er Straße 22, 81675 Mu­nich, Ger­ma­ny

          Tel­e­phone: (89) 4140-4291; Fax: (89) 4140-4886

e-mail: C.P.Werner@lrz.tu-muen­chen.de


 

Ce­re­bral is­che­mia and/or hy­pox­ia may oc­cur as a con­se­quence of shock, vas­cu­lar sten­o­sis or oc­clu­sion, va­sos­pasm, neu­ro­trau­ma, and car­di­ac ar­rest. The is­chem­ic/hy­pox­ic in­sult evokes a cas­cade of path­o­phy­sio­log­i­cal pro­cess­es which will re­sult in neu­ro­nal death. The first lev­el of the is­chem­ic cas­cade is the ac­cu­mu­la­tion of lac­tic ac­id due to an­aer­o­bic gly­col­y­sis. This leads to in­creased mem­brane perme­a­bil­i­ty and con­sec­u­tive ede­ma for­ma­tion. Since the anae­rob­ic me­tab­o­lism is in­ad­e­quate to main­tain cel­lu­lar en­er­gy states, the ATP-stores de­plete and fail­ure of en­er­gy-de­pen­dent mem­brane ion pumps oc­curs. At the sec­ond stage of the is­chem­ic cas­cade ter­mi­nal mem­brane de­po­la­ri­za­tion along with ex­ces­sive re­lease of ex­cit­a­to­ry neu­ro­trans­mit­ters (i.e. glu­ta­mate, aspar­tate), ac­ti­va­tion of NMDA- (N-meth­yl-D-aspar­tate), AM­PA- (a-ami­no-3-hy­droxy-5-meth­yl-4-isox­a­zol­pro­pi­o­nat), and volt­age de­pen­dent Ca++ and Na+- channels. The con­sec­u­tive Ca++ and Na+- in­flux leads to cat­a­bol­ic in­tra­cel­lu­lar pro­cess­es. Ca++ ac­ti­vates li­pid­pe­rox­i­das­es, pro­teas­es, and phos­pho­li­pas­es which in turn in­crease the in­tra­cel­lu­lar con­cen­tra­tion of free fat­ty ac­ids (FFA) and free rad­i­cals. Ad­di­tion­al­ly, ac­ti­va­tion of cas­pas­es (ICE-like pro­teins), trans­lo­cas­es, and en­do­nu­cle­as­es in­i­tiate pro­gres­sive struc­tu­ral chang­es of bi­o­log­i­cal mem­branes and the nu­cle­o­so­mal DNA (DNA frag­men­ta­tion, in­hi­bi­tion of DNA re­pair). To­geth­er, these events lead to mem­brane de­gen­er­a­tion of vas­cu­lar and cel­lu­lar struc­tures and con­sec­u­tive ne­crot­ic or pro­grammed cell death (apop­to­sis).

The strat­e­gies to pro­tect the brain from is­chem­ic/hy­pox­ic in­sults are based on the un­der­stand­ing of these path­o­phy­sio­log­i­cal pro­cess­es. Main­te­nance of nor­mal to high ce­re­bral per­fu­sion pres­sure, nor­mox­ia, and sur­gi­cal de­com­pres­sion are by far the most im­por­tant and ef­fec­tive neuropro­tec­tive in­ter­ven­tions. Be­sides these treat­ment mo­dal­ities, con­cepts of phys­i­cal and pharmaco­log­i­cal brain pro­tec­tion in­clude in­ter­ven­tions to in­crease ce­re­bral blood flow (CBF) in the is­chem­ic ter­ri­to­ry, re­duc­tion of ce­re­bral me­tab­o­lism and in­tra­cra­ni­al pres­sure (ICP), in­hi­bi­tion of lac­tic ac­id ac­cu­mu­la­tion and ex­cit­a­to­ry neu­ro­trans­mit­ter ac­tiv­i­ty, pre­ven­tion of Ca++ - influx, inhi­bi­tion of li­pid­pe­rox­i­da­tion, and free rad­i­cal scav­eng­ing.

An­es­thet­ics

The pro­posed mech­a­nisms of an­es­thet­ic pro­tec­tion in­clude re­duc­tion of ce­re­bral me­tab­o­lism, and ICP, sup­pres­sion of sei­zures and sym­pa­thet­ic dis­charge, and a re­set of ther­mo­reg­u­la­to­ry thresh­old. Ad­di­tion­al­ly, an­es­thet­ics may re­duce in­tra­cel­lu­lar Ca++- and free rad­i­cal ac­cu­mu­la­tion. How­ev­er, the clin­i­cal and ex­per­i­men­tal da­ta re­main con­tro­ver­sial.

Hyp­not­ics

Stud­ies in la­bor­a­to­ry an­i­mals have shown that bar­bit­u­rates as well as pro­pof­ol re­duce in­farct size and im­prove neu­ro­log­ic out­come fol­low­ing fo­cal or in­com­plete glo­bal ce­re­bral is­che­mia as long as phys­i­o­log­i­cal var­i­ables were con­trolled dur­ing the ex­per­i­ments. While ex­per­i­men­tal da­ta sup­port the pre­ven­tive neu­ro­pro­tec­tive ef­fects of hyp­not­ic agents, the clin­i­cal ev­i­dence is less con­vinc­ing. In pa­tients un­der­go­ing car­di­ac sur­gery with nor­mo­ther­mic car­di­o­pul­mo­nary by­pass the in­fu­sion of thi­o­pen­tal (to­tal dose dur­ing ECC: 39,5±8,4 mg/kg iv) was able to re­duce post­op­er­a­tive neu­ro­psy­cho­log­i­cal def­i­cits. In con­trast, bar­bit­u­rates in­fused to co­ma­tose pa­tients with­in the first hour fol­low­ing car­di­o­pul­mo­nary re­sus­ci­ta­tion were in­ef­fec­tive to re­duce mor­tal­i­ty as well as neu­ro­log­i­cal def­i­cits in sur­vi­vors com­pared to stan­dard ICU treat­ment. These da­ta are con­sis­tent with the view that the in­fu­sion of hyp­not­ics prior to fo­cal but not glo­bal is­chem­ic in­sults may in­crease the is­chem­ic tol­er­ance of neu­rons. Bar­bit­u­rates may be al­so ben­e­fi­cial in pa­tients with se­vere head in­ju­ry and re­frac­to­ry in­tra­cra­ni­al hy­per­ten­sion. This con­clu­sion is re­lat­ed to a se­ries of clin­i­cal stud­ies where in­fu­sion of bar­bit­u­rates was ef­fec­tive in re­duc­ing in­tra­cra­ni­al pres­sure and like­ly the mor­tal­i­ty rate fol­low­ing brain trau­ma as long as sys­tem­ic he­mo­dy­nam­ic sta­bil­i­ty was main­tained. More re­cent­ly pro­pof­ol was sug­gest­ed as an al­ter­na­tive to bar­bit­u­rates in pa­tients un­der­go­ing car­di­ac sur­gery or for se­da­tion fol­low­ing head in­ju­ry due to a fa­vour­a­ble con­text-sen­si­tive half-time. While pro­pof­ol did not re­duce neu­ro­psy­cho­log­i­cal def­i­cits fol­low­ing car­di­ac valve sur­gery com­pared to su­fen­ta­nil an­es­the­tized pa­tients it turned out to be more ef­fec­tive in treat­ing el­e­vat­ed ICP with a sim­i­lar neu­ro­log­ic out­come fol­low­ing head in­ju­ry when com­pared to an op­i­oid-based sed­a­tive reg­i­men.

NMDA-re­cep­tor an­ta­go­nists

Glu­ta­ma­te and aspar­ta­te are known as ex­ci­ta­to­ry neu­ro­trans­mit­ters which sti­mu­la­te N-me­thyl-D-aspar­ta­te re­cep­tors (NMDA, Ca++ - and Na+- in­flux). Sin­ce the ac­ti­va­tion of the­se re­cep­tors in­i­ti­ates cat­ab­o­lic in­tra­cel­lu­lar pro­ces­ses, blocka­de of NMDA-re­cep­tors may pro­tect cere­bral tis­sue.

Ket­a­mine, MK-801 (diz­o­cil­pine), ap­tig­a­nel, dex­trom­e­thor­phan, dex­tror­phan, and Mg++ rep­re­sent non-com­pet­i­tive NMDA- re­cep­tor an­ta­go­nists. In an­i­mal mod­els of fo­cal (but not glo­bal) cer­e­bral is­che­mia and head in­ju­ry ket­a­mine as well as MK-801 re­duced neu­ro­nal in­ju­ry and im­proved out­come. Li­ke­wi­se, in­fu­sion of the com­pet­e­tive NMDA-re­cep­tor an­tag­o­nist CGS 19755 (self­ot­el) re­duced in­farct size fol­low­ing fo­cal and glo­bal is­che­mia. Cli­ni­cal tri­als using MK-801 we­re ter­mi­na­ted due to to­xic si­de ef­fects and the in­duc­tion of mit­o­chon­dri­al va­cu­o­li­za­tion. The cli­ni­cal de­ve­lop­ment of the an­ti­tus­si­ve agents dex­tro­me­thor­phan and dex­tror­phan was al­so ter­mi­nat­ed be­cause of side ef­fects such as hal­lu­ci­na­tion, ag­i­ta­tion, and se­da­tion. Clin­i­cal trials in pa­tients with acute stroke or head in­ju­ry were either pre­ma­ture­ly ter­mi­nat­ed be­cause ad­verse ef­fects or did not show improved outcome with the administration of the com­pet­e­tive NMDA-re­cep­tor an­tag­o­nist self­ot­el or ap­tig­a­nel. The an­ti­ep­i­lep­tic drug re­mac­e­mide is the on­ly NMDA re­cep­tor an­tag­o­nist with prov­en neu­ro­pro­tec­tive ef­fi­ca­cy. In pa­tients un­der­go­ing cor­o­nary ar­tery by­pass sur­gery the per­i­op­er­a­tive ad­min­is­tra­tion of re­mac­e­mide sig­nif­i­cant­ly re­duced post­op­er­a­tive neu­ro­psy­cho­log­i­cal def­i­cits along with some diz­zi­ness as the on­ly rel­e­vant side ef­fect.

Benzodiazepines

Midazolam and diazepam reduce neurologic deficit and increase survival rate following incomplete global ischemia and hypoxia. Likewise, intraoperative administration of diazepam reduced the incidence and extent of postoperative neuropsychological deficits in patients undergoing cardiopulmonary bypass. Despite the modest neuroprotective potential of benzodiazepines, midazolam and diazepam are no first choice agents in patients with cerebral ischemia due to their extended duration of recovery along with a delayed neurological examination.

Alpha-2-adrenergic agonists

Clonidine and dexmedetomidine reduce peripheral but not central sympathetic tone with consectivie modulation of circulating and synaptic catecholamine concentration. Studies in laboratory animals revealed a 37% decrease with theses combounds without changes in cerebral metabolism. The cerebrovascular constriction is not associated with a reduction in cerebral blood volume or intracranial pressure. Despite uncoupling between cerebral blood flow and metabolism there is no evidence that infarct size increases during cerebral ischemia. In fact, clonidine and dexmedetomidine produced a dose-dependent decrease in infarcz size and neurologic deficits in rats subjected to incomplete cerebral ischemia and reperfusion.

In summary, intravenous anesthetic agents exert profound neuroprotection in laboratory animals. In contrast, there is little evidence for these neuroprotective effects in humans.