ArticleAnesthesiology2014
Cellular registration without behavioral recall of olfactory sensory input under general anesthesia.
Article in Anesthesiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Odorant representations indicate nonlinear processing across the olfactory system.Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) · 2025Article
- Effects of Propofol General Anesthesia on Olfactory Relearning.Scientific reports · 2016Article
- Percolation Model of Sensory Transmission and Loss of Consciousness Under General Anesthesia.Physical review letters · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPrevious studies suggest that sensory information is "received" but not "perceived" under general anesthesia. Whether and to what extent the brain continues to process sensory inputs in a drug-induced unconscious state remain unclear.
methodsOne hundred seven rats were randomly assigned to 12 different anesthesia and odor exposure paradigms. The immunoreactivities of the immediate early gene products c-Fos and Egr1 as neural activity markers were combined with behavioral tests to assess the integrity and relationship of cellular and behavioral responsiveness to olfactory stimuli under a surgical plane of ketamine-xylazine general anesthesia.
resultsThe olfactory sensory processing centers could distinguish the presence or absence of experimental odorants even when animals were fully anesthetized. In the anesthetized state, the c-Fos immunoreactivity in the higher olfactory cortices revealed a difference between novel and familiar odorants similar to that seen in the awake state, suggesting that the anesthetized brain functions beyond simply receiving external stimulation. Reexposing animals to odorants previously experienced only under anesthesia resulted in c-Fos immunoreactivity, which was similar to that elicited by familiar odorants, indicating that previous registration had occurred in the anesthetized brain. Despite the "cellular memory," however, odor discrimination and forced-choice odor-recognition tests showed absence of behavioral recall of the registered sensations, except for a longer latency in odor recognition tests.
conclusionsHistologically distinguishable registration of sensory processing continues to occur at the cellular level under ketamine-xylazine general anesthesia despite the absence of behavioral recognition, consistent with the notion that general anesthesia causes disintegration of information processing without completely blocking cellular communications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.