Baker Pamela M, Pennefather Peter S, Orser Beverley A, Skinner Frances K
Toronto Western Research Institute, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario M5T 2S8, Canada.
J Neurophysiol. 2002 Nov;88(5):2821-33. doi: 10.1152/jn.00052.2002.
The effect of anesthetic drugs at central synapses can be described quantitatively by developing kinetic models of ligand-gated ion channels. Experiments have shown that the hypnotic propofol and the sedative benzodiazepine midazolam have similar effects on single inhibitory postsynaptic potentials (IPSPs) but very different effects on slow desensitization that are not revealed by examining single responses. Synchronous oscillatory activity in networks of interneurons connected by inhibitory synapses has been implicated in many hippocampal functions, and differences in the kinetics of the GABAergic response observed with anesthetics can affect this activity. Thus we have examined the effect of propofol and midazolam-enhanced IPSPs using mathematical models of self-inhibited one- and two-cell inhibitory networks. A detailed kinetic model of the GABA(A) channel incorporating receptor desensitization is used at synapses in our models. The most dramatic effect of propofol is the modulation of slow desensitization. This is only revealed when the network is driven at frequencies that are thought to be relevant to cognitive tasks performed in the hippocampus. The level of desensitization at synapses with propofol is significantly reduced compared to control synapses. In contrast, midazolam increases macroscopic desensitization at network synapses by altering receptor affinity without concurrently modifying desensitization rates. These differences in gating between the two drugs are shown to alter network activity in stereotypically different ways. Specifically, propofol dramatically increases the amount of excitatory drive necessary for synchronized behavior relative to control, which is not the case for midazolam. Moreover, the range of parameters for which synchrony occurs is larger for propofol but smaller for midazolam, relative to control. This is an important first step in linking alterations in channel kinetics with behavioral changes.
通过建立配体门控离子通道的动力学模型,可以定量描述麻醉药物在中枢突触处的作用。实验表明,催眠药丙泊酚和镇静药苯二氮䓬类咪达唑仑对单个抑制性突触后电位(IPSP)具有相似的作用,但对缓慢脱敏的作用却非常不同,而仅检查单个反应无法揭示这种差异。通过抑制性突触连接的中间神经元网络中的同步振荡活动与许多海马功能有关,麻醉药引起的GABA能反应动力学差异可能会影响这种活动。因此,我们使用自我抑制的单细胞和双细胞抑制网络的数学模型,研究了丙泊酚和咪达唑仑增强IPSP的作用。我们的模型在突触处使用了包含受体脱敏的GABA(A)通道详细动力学模型。丙泊酚最显著的作用是对缓慢脱敏的调节。这只有在网络以被认为与海马中执行的认知任务相关的频率驱动时才会显现出来。与对照突触相比,丙泊酚存在时突触处的脱敏水平显著降低。相比之下,咪达唑仑通过改变受体亲和力增加了网络突触处的宏观脱敏,而不同时改变脱敏速率。这两种药物在门控方面的这些差异显示出以刻板的不同方式改变网络活动。具体而言,相对于对照,丙泊酚显著增加了同步行为所需的兴奋性驱动量,而咪达唑仑则不然。此外,相对于对照,丙泊酚发生同步的参数范围更大,而咪达唑仑则更小。这是将通道动力学改变与行为变化联系起来的重要第一步。