Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24932894›Full record

ArticlePloS one2014

Comparison of neurodegeneration and cognitive impairment in neonatal mice exposed to propofol or isoflurane.

Bin Yang, Ge Liang, Soorena Khojasteh, Zhen Wu, Wenqiong Yang, Donald Joseph, Huafeng Wei

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed
5.1field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

35 citing papers in PubMed, 67 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Expression of S100β during mouse cochlear development.European journal of histochemistry : EJH · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Observational
  18. Propofol Alters Long Non-Coding RNA Profiles in the Neonatal Mouse Hippocampus: Implication of Novel Mechanisms in Anesthetic-Induced Developmental Neurotoxicity.Cellular physiology and biochemistry : international journal of experimental cellular physiology, biochemistry, and pharmacology · 2018
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Bin YangDepartment of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States of America; Department of Anesthesiology, Shanghai First People's Hospital, Shanghai JiaoTong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Ge LiangDepartment of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States of America.
Soorena KhojastehDepartment of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States of America.
Zhen WuDepartment of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States of America; Department of Anesthesiology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Wenqiong YangDepartment of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States of America; Department of Neurology, Dongfeng General Hospital, Hubei University of Medicine, Shiyan, Hubei, China.
Donald JosephDepartment of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States of America.
Huafeng WeiDepartment of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States of America.
University of Pennsylvania · USHuazhong University of Science and Technology · CNHubei University of Medicine · CN

Funding

Mechanisms of Anesthesia Mediated NeurotoxicityR01GM084979 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI WEI, HUAFENG · 2008 to 2018
$2.8M
Volatile anesthetics, calcium homeostasis and apoptosisK08GM073224 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI WEI, HUAFENG · 2005 to 2009
$639k
NIGMS NIH HHS 1-K08-GM-073224NIGMS NIH HHS 1-R01GM084979-01NIGMS NIH HHS 3R01GM084979-02S1NIGMS NIH HHS K08 GM073224NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM084979
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhile previous studies have demonstrated neuronal apoptosis and associated cognitive impairment after isoflurane or propofol exposure in neonatal rodents, the effects of these two anesthetics have not been directly compared. Here, we compare and contrast the effectiveness of isoflurane and propofol to cause neurodegeneration in the developing brain and associated cognitive dysfunction.

methodsSeven-day-old mice were used. Mice in the isoflurane treatment group received 6 h of 1.5% isoflurane, while mice in propofol treatment group received one peritoneal injection (150 mg/kg), which produced persistent anesthesia with loss of righting for at least 6 h. Mice in control groups received carrying gas or a peritoneal injection of vehicle (intralipid). At 6 h after anesthetic treatment, a subset of each group was sacrificed and examined for evidence of neurodegeneration, using plasma levels of S100β, and apoptosis using caspase-3 immunohistochemistry in the cerebral cortex and hippocampus and Western blot assays of the cortex. In addition, biomarkers for inflammation (interleukin-1, interleukin-6, and tumor necrosis factor alpha) were examined with Western blot analyses of the cortex. In another subset of mice, learning and memory were assessed 32 days after the anesthetic exposures using the Morris water maze.

resultsIsoflurane significantly increased plasma S100β levels compared to controls and propofol. Both isoflurane and propofol significantly increased caspase-3 levels in the cortex and hippocampus, though isoflurane was significantly more potent than propofol. However, there were no significant differences in the inflammatory biomarkers in the cortex or in subsequent learning and memory between the experimental groups.

conclusionBoth isoflurane and propofol caused significant apoptosis in the mouse developing brain, with isoflurane being more potent. Isoflurane significantly increased levels of the plasma neurodegenerative biomarker, S100β. However, these neurodegenerative effects of isoflurane and propofol in the developing brain were not associated with effects on inflammation or with cognitive dysfunction in later life.

Indexed as

Administration, InhalationAnestheticsAnimalsAnimals, NewbornApoptosisBrain Damage, ChronicCaspase 3Cerebral CortexCognition DisordersFemaleHippocampusInflammationInjections, IntraperitonealIsofluraneLearning DisabilitiesMaleAnestheticsCasp3 protein, mouseCaspase 3IsofluranePropofolS100b protein, mouseS100 Calcium Binding Protein beta Subunit

Identifiers

PMID24932894
PMCPMC4059617
OpenAlexW2041580732

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.