4.6 Article

Epileptiform activity during rewarming from moderate cerebral hypothermia in the near-term fetal sheep

期刊

PEDIATRIC RESEARCH
卷 57, 期 3, 页码 342-346

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1203/01.PDR.0000150801.61188.5F

关键词

-

资金

  1. NICHD NIH HHS [HD32752] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Moderate hypothermia is consistently neuroprotective after hypoxic-ischemic insults and is the subject of ongoing clinical trials. In pilot studies, we observed rebound seizure activity in one infant during rewarming from a 72-h period of hypothermia. We therefore quantified the development of EEG-defined seizures during rewarming in an experimental paradigm of delayed cooling for cerebral ischemia. Moderate cerebral hypothermia (n = 9) or sham cooling (n = 13) was initiated 5.5 It after reperfusion from a 30-min period of bilateral carotid occlusion in near-term fetal sheep and continued for 72 h after the insult. During spontaneous rewarming, fetal extradural temperature rose from 32.5 +/- 0.6degreesC to control levels (39.4 +/- 0.1degreesC) in 47 +/- 6 min. Carotid blood flow and mean arterial blood pressure increased transiently during rewarming. The cooling group showed a significant increase in electrical seizure events 2, 3, and 5 h after rewarming, maximal at 2 h (2.9 +/- 1.2 versus 0.5 +/- 0.5 events/h; p < 0.05). From 6 h after rewarming, there was significant difference between the groups. Individual seizures were typically short (28.8 +/- 5.8 s versus 29.0 +/- 6.8 s in sham cooled; NS), and of modest amplitude (35.9 +/- 2.8 versus 38.8 +/- 3.4 muV; NS). Neuronal loss in the parasagittal cortex was significantly reduced in the cooled group (51 +/- 9% versus 91 +/- 5%; p < 0.002) and was not correlated with rebound epileptiform activity. In conclusion, rapid rewarming after a prolonged interval of therapeutic hypothermia can be associated with a transient increase in epileptiform events but does not seem to have significant adverse implications for neural outcome.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据