Article

Gamma-Aminobutyric Acid Type A Receptor beta 3 Subunit Forebrain-Specific Knockout Mice Are Resistant to the Amnestic Effect of Isoflurane

Department of Anesthesia, S-455, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94143-0464, USA.
Anesthesia and analgesia (Impact Factor: 3.42). 09/2011; 113(3):500-4. DOI: 10.1213/ANE.0b013e3182273aff
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT β3 containing γ-aminobutyric acid type A receptors (GABA(A)-Rs) mediate behavioral end points of IV anesthetics such as immobility and hypnosis. A knockout mouse with targeted forebrain deletion of the β3 subunit of the GABA(A)-R shows reduced sensitivity to the hypnotic effect of etomidate, as measured by the loss of righting reflex. The end points of amnesia and immobility produced by an inhaled anesthetic have yet to be evaluated in this conditional knockout.
We assessed forebrain selective β3 conditional knockout mice and their littermate controls for conditional fear to evaluate amnesia and MAC, the minimum alveolar concentration of inhaled anesthetic necessary to produce immobility in response to noxious stimulation, to assess immobility. Suppression of conditional fear was assessed for etomidate and isoflurane, and MAC was assessed for isoflurane.
Etomidate equally suppressed conditional fear for both genotypes. The knockout showed resistance to the suppression of conditional fear produced by isoflurane in comparison with control littermates. Controls and knockouts did not differ in isoflurane MAC values.
These results suggest that β3 containing GABA(A)-Rs in the forebrain contribute to hippocampal-dependent memory suppressed by isoflurane, but not etomidate.

0 Followers
 · 
66 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Modulation of γ-aminobutyric acid type A receptors (GABAARs) by general anesthetics may contribute to their ability to produce amnesia. Receptors containing α5 subunits, which mediate tonic and slow synaptic inhibition, are co-localized with β3 and γ2 subunits in dendritic layers of the hippocampus and are sensitive to low (amnestic) concentrations of anesthetics. Because α5 and β3 subunits influence performance in hippocampus-dependent learning tasks in the presence and absence of general anesthetics, and the experimental inhaled drug 1,2-dichlorohexafluorocyclobutane (F6) impairs hippocampus-dependent learning, we hypothesized that F6 would modulate receptors that incorporate α5 and β3 subunits. We hypothesized further that the β3 (N265M) mutation, which controls receptor modulation by general anesthetics, would similarly influence modulation by F6.
    Anesthesia & Analgesia 09/2014; DOI:10.1213/ANE.0000000000000423 · 3.42 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptors are important in mediating excitatory neurotransmission in the nervous system. They are preferentially inhibited by some general anesthetics and have, therefore, been implied in the mediation of their effects. This review summarizes the main research findings available related to NMDA receptors and their role in anesthesia. The contribution of NMDA receptors to the anesthetized state is discussed separately for each of its components: amnesia, analgesia, unconsciousness and immobility. Anesthetic-induced unconsciousness and immobility have received the most attention in the research community and are the main focus of this review. In the overall perspective, however, studies using pharmacological or electrophysiological approaches have failed to reach definitive conclusions regarding the contribution of NMDA receptors to these anesthetic endpoints. None of the studies have specifically addressed the role of NMDA receptors in the amnestic effect of general anesthetics, and the few available data are (at best) only indirect. NMDA receptor antagonism by general anesthetics may have a preventive anti-hyperalgesic effect. The only and most extensively used genetic tool to examine the role of NMDA receptors in anesthesia is global knockout of the GluN2A subunit of the NMDA receptor. These animals are resistant to many intravenous and inhalational anesthetics, but the interpretation of their phenotype is hindered by the secondary changes occurring in these animals after GluN2A knockout, which are themselves capable of altering anesthetic sensitivity. Generation of more sophisticated conditional knockout models targeting NMDA receptors is required to finally define their role in the mechanisms of anesthesia.
    European journal of pharmacology 12/2013; DOI:10.1016/j.ejphar.2013.11.039 · 2.68 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Many anesthetics modulate 3-transmembrane (such as NMDA) and 4-transmembrane (such as GABAA) receptors. Clinical and experimental anesthetics exhibiting receptor family specificity often have low water solubility. We hypothesized that the molar water solubility of a hydrocarbon could be used to predict receptor modulation in vitro. GABAA (α1β2γ2s) or NMDA (NR1/NR2A) receptors were expressed in oocytes and studied using standard two-electrode voltage clamp techniques. Hydrocarbons from 14 different organic functional groups were studied at saturated concentrations, and compounds within each group differed only by the carbon number at the ω-position or within a saturated ring. An effect on GABAA or NMDA receptors was defined as a 10% or greater reversible current change from baseline that was statistically different from zero. Hydrocarbon moieties potentiated GABAA and inhibited NMDA receptor currents with at least some members from each functional group modulating both receptor types. A water solubility cut-off for NMDA receptors occurred at 1.1 mM with a 95% CI = 0.45 to 2.8 mM. NMDA receptor cut-off effects were not well correlated with hydrocarbon chain length or molecular volume. No cut-off was observed for GABAA receptors within the solubility range of hydrocarbons studied. Hydrocarbon modulation of NMDA receptor function exhibits a molar water solubility cut-off. Differences between unrelated receptor cut-off values suggest that the number, affinity, or efficacy of protein-hydrocarbon interactions at these sites likely differ.
    11/2014; 15(1):62. DOI:10.1186/2050-6511-15-62