4.6 Article

Impact of anaesthetics and surgery on neurodevelopment: an update

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA
卷 110, 期 -, 页码 53-72

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1093/bja/aet054

关键词

brain; anaesthesia; molecular effects; nerve; damage (postoperative); nerve; neurotransmitters; nerve; regeneration

资金

  1. Wellcome Trust
  2. Action Medical Research
  3. Association of Anaesthetists of Great Britain
  4. National Institute of Health (USA)
  5. National Institute of Health Research
  6. Australian National Health
  7. Victorian Government Operational Infrastructure Support Program
  8. Wellbeing of Women
  9. Medical Research Council
  10. Alzheimer's Society
  11. SPARKS
  12. UK Department of Health's National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centres funding scheme
  13. Association of Anaesthetists of Ireland
  14. Medical Research Council [MR/J00457X/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  15. MRC [MR/J00457X/1] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Accumulating preclinical and clinical evidence suggests the possibility of neurotoxicity from neonatal exposure to general anaesthetics. Here, we review the weight of the evidence from both human and animal studies and discuss the putative mechanisms of injury and options for protective strategies. Our review identified 55 rodent studies, seven primate studies, and nine clinical studies of interest. While the preclinical data consistently demonstrate robust apoptosis in the nervous system after anaesthetic exposure, only a few studies have performed cognitive follow-up. Nonetheless, the emerging evidence that the primate brain is vulnerable to anaesthetic-induced apoptosis is of concern. The impact of surgery on anaesthetic-induced brain injury has not been adequately addressed yet. The clinical data, comprising largely retrospective cohort database analyses, are inconclusive, in part due to confounding variables inherent in these observational epidemiological approaches. This places even greater emphasis on prospective approaches to this problem, such as the ongoing GAS trial and PANDA study.

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