Xenon anesthesia reduces TNFα and IL10 in bariatric patients

Xenon attenuated neonatal lipopolysaccharide exposure induced neuronal necroptosis and subsequently improved cognition in juvenile rats

Background: Neonatal sepsis is known to cause neurodevelopment impairment and has been reported to increase risks for neurological/psychiatric disorders. In this study, we investigated the effect of xenon, a well-known potent neuroprotective gas, on neonatal sepsis-induced neurodevelopment impairment in rats together with underlying mechanism by focusing on receptor-interacting protein kinase (RIP) mediated neuronal necroptosis. Methods: 3-day-old Sprague-Dawley rat pups were exposed to either 70% xenon or N2 balanced with O2 for 6 h, during which lipopolysaccharide (LPS) was injected intraperitoneally for 3 times (500 μg/kg for the 1st and 250 μg/kg for the second and third dose; n = 6-10/group). In another cohort of 3-day-old rat pups, intracerebroventricular injection of necrostatin-1 (4 µg in 4 µl saline, a RIP-1-targeted inhibitor of necroptosis) was performed 20 min after the third dose of LPS. The learning ability and memory were assessed 25 days after LPS injection. Then, their hippocampus was collected for neuronal necroptosis with RIP and MIKL assessments using western blot and in situ immunostaining. Systemic and neuro-inflammation was also assessed. Results: LPS insult resulted in elevation of pro-inflammatory cytokine TNF-𝝰 and IL-6, caused neuronal necroptosis and damaged synaptic integrity at the brain developing stage, which finally led to the long-term cognitive impairment. Xenon inhibited necroptosis associated mediator RIP-1, RIP-3, and MLKL activation, protected neurons and attenuated cognitive dysfunction induced by LPS. Like xenon, the similar pattern changes induced by a RIP-1 inhibitor Necrostatin-1 were also found. Conclusion: This study indicates that necroptosis is involved in neonatal sepsis-induced neurofunctional impairments and xenon may be a novel therapeutic strategy to prevent/treat cognitive impairment in neonatal septic patients.

Inflammatory Biomarker Levels After Propofol or Sevoflurane Anesthesia: A Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The perioperative inflammatory response may be implicated in adverse outcomes including neurocognitive dysfunction and cancer recurrence after oncological surgery. The immunomodulatory role of anesthetic agents has been demonstrated in vitro; however, its clinical relevance is unclear. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to compare propofol and sevoflurane with respect to biomarkers of perioperative inflammation. The secondary aim was to correlate markers of inflammation with clinical measures of perioperative cognition.

METHODS

Databases were searched for randomized controlled trials examining perioperative inflammation after general anesthesia using propofol compared to sevoflurane. Inflammatory biomarkers investigated were interleukin (IL)-6, IL-10, tissue necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α), and C-reactive protein (CRP). The secondary outcome was incidence of perioperative neurocognitive disorders. Meta-analysis with metaregression was performed to determine the difference between propofol and sevoflurane.

RESULTS

Twenty-three studies were included with 1611 participants. Studies varied by surgery type, duration, and participant age. There was an increase in the mean inflammatory biomarker levels following surgery, with meta-analysis revealing no difference in effect between propofol and sevoflurane. Heterogeneity between studies was high, with surgery type, duration, and patient age contributing to the variance across studies. Only 5 studies examined postoperative cognitive outcomes; thus, a meta-analysis could not be performed. Nonetheless, of these 5 studies, 4 reported a reduced incidence of cognitive decline associated with propofol use.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgery induces an inflammatory response; however, the inflammatory response did not differ as a function of anesthetic technique. This absence of an effect suggests that patient and surgical variables may have a far more significant impact on the postoperative inflammatory responses than anesthetic technique. The majority of studies assessing perioperative cognition in older patients reported a benefit associated with the use of propofol; however, larger trials using homogenous outcomes are needed to demonstrate such an effect.

Intraoperative immunomodulatory effects of sevoflurane versus total intravenous anesthesia with propofol in bariatric surgery (the OBESITA trial): study protocol for a randomized controlled pilot trial

Background

Obesity is associated with a chronic systemic inflammatory process. Volatile or intravenous anesthetic agents may modulate immune function, and may do so differentially in obesity. However, no study has evaluated whether these potential immunomodulatory effects differ according to type of anesthesia in obese patients undergoing laparoscopic bariatric surgery.

Methods/design

The OBESITA trial is a prospective, nonblinded, single-center, randomized, controlled clinical pilot trial. The trial will include 48 patients with a body mass index ≥ 35 kg/m², scheduled for laparoscopic bariatric surgery using sleeve or a Roux-en-Y gastric bypass technique, who will be allocated 1:1 to undergo general inhalational anesthesia with sevoflurane or total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) with propofol. The primary endpoint is the difference in plasma interleukin (IL)-6 levels when comparing the two anesthetic agents. Blood samples will be collected prior to anesthesia induction (baseline), immediately after anesthetic induction, and before endotracheal extubation. Levels of other proinflammatory and anti-inflammatory cytokines, neutrophil chemotaxis, macrophage differentiation, phagocytosis, and occurrence of intraoperative and postoperative complications will also be evaluated.

Discussion

To our knowledge, this is the first randomized clinical trial designed to compare the effects of two different anesthetics on immunomodulation in obese patients undergoing laparoscopic bariatric surgery. Our hypothesis is that anesthesia with sevoflurane will result in a weaker proinflammatory response compared to anesthesia with propofol, with lower circulating levels of IL-6 and other proinflammatory mediators, and increased macrophage differentiation into the M2 phenotype in adipose tissue.

Trial registration

Registro Brasileiro de Ensaios Clínicos, RBR-77kfj5. Registered on 25 July 2018.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-019-3399-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Clinical efficacy of xenon versus propofol: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Interest in the anesthetic use of xenon, a noble gas, has waxed and waned for decades, and the clinical effects of xenon are still debated. We performed a meta-analysis to compare the clinical efficacy of xenon with that of propofol.

METHODS

Electronic searches were performed through December 2017 using various databases, including PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. We identified thirteen trials that included a total of 817 patients.

RESULTS

Patients treated with xenon had a lower bispectral index (BIS) (weighted mean difference (WMD): -6.26, 95% confidence interval (CI): -11.33 to -1.18, P = .02), a higher mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) (WMD: 7.00, 95% CI: 2.32-11.68, P = .003) and a lower heart rate (HR) (WMD: -9.45, 95% CI: -12.28 to -6.63, P < 0.00001) than propofol-treated patients. However, there were no significant differences between the 2 treatment groups in the effects of nondepolarizing muscular relaxants, the duration spent in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) (WMD: -0.94, 95% CI: -8.79-6.91, P = .81), or the incidence of perioperative complications [assessed using the outcomes of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) (relative risk (RR): 2.01, 95% CI: 0.79-5.11, P = .14), hypotension (RR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.27 to 1.40, P = .25), hypertension (RR: 1.27, 95% CI: 0.73-2.21, P = .39) and bradycardia (RR: 1.00, 95% CI: 0.36-2.74, P = 1.00)].

CONCLUSION

In this meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials, we found that xenon treatment resulted in a higher MAP, a lower HR, and a smaller BIS index than treatment with propofol.

The Modification and Performance of a Large Animal Anesthesia Machine (Tafonius®) in Order to Deliver Xenon to a Horse

Introduction

Xenon, due to its interesting anesthetic properties, could improve the quality of anesthesia protocols in horses despite its high price. This study aimed to modify and test an anesthesia machine capable of delivering xenon to a horse.

Materials and methods

An equine anesthesia machine (Tafonius, Vetronic Services Ltd., UK) was modified by including a T-connector in the valve block to introduce xenon, so that the xenon was pushed into the machine cylinder by the expired gases. A xenon analyzer was connected to the expiratory limb of the patient circuit. The operation of the machine was modeled and experimentally tested for denitrogenation, wash-in, and maintenance phases. The system was considered to consist of two compartments, one being the horse’s lungs, the other being the machine cylinder and circuit. A 15-year-old, 514-kg, healthy gelding horse was anesthetized for 70 min using acepromazine, romifidine, morphine, diazepam, and ketamine. Anesthesia was maintained with xenon and oxygen, co-administered with lidocaine. Ventilation was controlled. Cardiorespiratory variables, expired fraction of xenon (FeXe), blood gases were measured and xenon was detected in plasma. Recovery was unassisted and recorded.

Results

FeXe remained around 65%, using a xenon total volume of 250 L. Five additional boli of ketamine were required to maintain anesthesia. PaO₂ was 45 ± 1 mmHg. The recovery was calm. Xenon was detected in blood during the entire administration time.

Conclusion

This pilot study describes how to deliver xenon to a horse. Although many technical problems were encountered, their correction could guide future endeavors to study the use of xenon in horses.

Immunomodulatory effects of anesthetics in obese patients

Anesthesia and surgery have an impact on inflammatory responses, which influences perioperative homeostasis. Inhalational and intravenous anesthesia can alter immune-system homeostasis through multiple processes that include activation of immune cells (such as monocytes, neutrophils, and specific tissue macrophages) with release of pro- or anti-inflammatory interleukins, upregulation of cell adhesion molecules, and overproduction of oxidative radicals. The response depends on the timing of anesthesia, anesthetic agents used, and mechanisms involved in the development of inflammation or immunosuppression. Obese patients are at increased risk for chronic diseases and may have the metabolic syndrome, which features insulin resistance and chronic low-grade inflammation. Evidence has shown that obesity has adverse impacts on surgical outcome, and that immune cells play an important role in this process. Understanding the effects of anesthetics on immune-system cells in obese patients is important to support proper selection of anesthetic agents, which may affect postoperative outcomes. This review article aims to integrate current knowledge regarding the effects of commonly used anesthetic agents on the lungs and immune response with the underlying immunology of obesity. Additionally, it identifies knowledge gaps for future research to guide optimal selection of anesthetic agents for obese patients from an immunomodulatory standpoint.