Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39703809›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in systems neuroscience2024

Differential effects of isoflurane on auditory and visually evoked potentials in the cat.

Xiaohan Bao, Paisley Barnes, Stephen G Lomber

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in systems neuroscience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

3 authors.

Xiaohan BaoIntegrated Program in Neuroscience, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Paisley BarnesDepartment of Physiology, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Stephen G LomberIntegrated Program in Neuroscience, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Evoked potentials can be used as an intraoperative monitoring measure in neurological surgery. Auditory evoked potentials (AEPs), or specifically brainstem auditory evoked responses (BAERs), are known for being minimally affected by anesthetics, while visually evoked potentials (VEPs) are presumed to be unreliable and easily affected by anesthetics. While many anesthesia trials or intraoperative recordings have provided evidence in support of these hypotheses, the comparisons were always made between AEPs and VEPs recorded sequentially, rather than recorded at the same time. Although the logistics of improving data comparability of AEPs and VEPs may be a challenge in clinical settings, it is much more approachable in animal models to measure AEPs and VEPs as simultaneously as possible. Five cats under dexmedetomidine sedation received five, 10-min blocks of isoflurane with varying concentrations while click-evoked AEPs and flash-evoked VEPs were recorded from subdermal electrodes. We found that, in terms of their waveforms, (1) short-latency AEPs (BAERs) were the least affected while middle-latency AEPs were dramatically altered by isoflurane, and (2) short-latency VEPs was less persistent than that of short-latency AEPs, while both middle- and long-latency VEPs were largely suppressed by isoflurane and, in some cases, completely diminished. In addition, the signal strength in all but the middle-latency AEPs was significantly suppressed by isoflurane. We identified multiple AEP or VEP peak components demonstrating suppressed amplitudes and/or changed latencies by isoflurane. Overall, we confirmed that both cat AEPs and VEPs are affected during isoflurane anesthesia, as in humans.

Indexed as

auditory evoked potentialscat sensory systemdexmedetomidineisofluranevisually evoked potentials

Identifiers

PMID39703809
PMCPMC11656312

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.