Inhibition of α5 γ-Aminobutyric Acid Type A Receptors Restores Recognition Memory After General Anesthesia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: General anesthetics cause cognitive deficits that persist much longer than would be expected on the basis of their pharmacokinetics. The cellular mechanisms underlying these postanesthetic cognitive deficits remain unknown. γ-Aminobutyric acid type A (GABA(A)) receptors are principal targets for most anesthetics. In particular, the α5GABA(A) receptor subtype has been implicated in acute memory blockade during anesthesia and memory deficits in the early postoperative period. We first sought to determine whether working memory and short-term recognition memory are impaired after isoflurane anesthesia. The second aim of the study was to determine whether memory deficits after isoflurane can be reversed by inhibiting α5GABA(A) receptors. We also sought to determine whether the expression of α5GABA(A) receptors is necessary for the development of memory dysfunction after isoflurane. Lastly, the effect of sevoflurane on memory was studied. METHODS: Wild-type and α5GABA(A) receptor null-mutant (Gabra5-/-) mice were treated with isoflurane (1.3%; 1 minimum alveolar concentration [MAC]) or sevoflurane (2.3%; 1 MAC) or vehicle gas for 1 hour. Memory performance was assessed with a novel object recognition task. Mice were trained on the recognition task either 24 hours or 72 hours after isoflurane anesthesia. Working memory and short-term memory were tested 1 minute and 1 hour after training, respectively. To determine whether inhibition of α5GABA(A) receptors reverses memory deficits, we treated a subset of mice with L-655,708 (0.35 mg/kg or 0.7 mg/kg) 23.5 hours after isoflurane and 30 minutes before behavioral training. RESULTS: Short-term memory was impaired in wild-type mice 24 hours after isoflurane as evidenced by a decrease in the discrimination ratio (control 0.66 ± 0.03 vs isoflurane 0.51 ± 0.03, P = 0.0005). In contrast, working memory was not impaired by isoflurane (control 0.68 ± 0.05 vs isoflurane 0.67 ± 0.04, P = 0.979). The deficit in short-term memory was fully reversed by L-655,708 (effect of isoflurane × L-655,708, F(2,102) = 3.59, P = 0.032; isoflurane 0.51 ± 0.03 vs isoflurane + L-655,708 at 0.35 mg/kg 0.67 ± 0.03, P < 0.05). By 72 hours, the deficits in short-term memory resolved spontaneously (control 0.65 ± 0.05 vs isoflurane 0.60 ± 0.04, P = 0.441). Gabra5-/- mice showed no short-term memory deficits 24 hours after isoflurane (effect of isoflurane F(1,47) = 0.375, P = 0.544). Sevoflurane also caused memory deficits 24 hours after anesthesia, as evidence by a reduction in the discrimination ratio (control 0.63 ± 0.02 vs sevoflurane 0.53 ± 0.03, P = 0.039). CONCLUSIONS: Inhalational anesthetics cause deficits in anterograde recognition memory. This proof-of-concept study shows that α5GABA(A) receptors are necessary for the development of postanesthetic deficits in recognition memory and that these receptors can be targeted to restore memory even after the anesthetic has been eliminated.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".