Postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD) is a common complication of the surgical experience and is common in the elderly and patients with preexisting neurocognitive disorders. Animal and human studies suggest that neuroinflammation from either surgery or anesthesia is a major contributor to the development of POCD. Moreover, a large and growing body of literature has focused on identifying potential risk factors for the development of POCD, as well as identifying candidate treatments based on the neuroinflammatory hypothesis. However, variability in animal models and clinical cohorts makes it difficult to interpret the results of such studies, and represents a barrier for the development of treatment options for POCD. Here, we present a broad topical review of the literature supporting the role of neuroinflammation in POCD. We provide an overview of the cellular and molecular mechanisms underlying the pathogenesis of POCD from pre-clinical and human studies. We offer a brief discussion of the ongoing debate on the root cause of POCD. We conclude with a list of current and hypothesized treatments for POCD, with a focus on recent and current human randomized clinical trials.
We present a method called muscle synergy analysis, which can offer clinicians insight into both underlying neural strategies for movement and functional outcomes of muscle activity. Although neural dysfunction is central to many motor deficits, neural activity during movements is not directly measurable. Consequently, the majority of clinical tests focus on evaluating motor outputs at the behavioral and kinematic levels. However, altered behavioral or kinematic outcomes could be the result of multiple distinct neural abnormalities with very different muscle coordination patterns. Because muscle activity reflects motoneuron activity and generates the forces that produce behavioral outcomes, an analysis of muscle activity may provide a better understanding of the functional neural deficits in the impaired nervous system. Unfortunately electromyographic datasets can be large, highly variable, and difficult to interpret, precluding their clinical utility. Computational analyses can be used to extract muscle synergies from such datasets, revealing underlying patterns that may reflect different levels of neural function. These muscle synergies are hypothesized to represent motor modules recruited by the nervous system to flexibly perform biomechanical subtasks necessary for movement. For example, hemiparetic stroke patients exhibit differences in the number of muscle synergies, which may reflect disruptions in descending neural pathways and are correlated to deficits in motor function. Muscle synergy analysis may thus offer the clinician a better view of the neural structure underlying motor behaviors and how they change in motor deficits and rehabilitation. Such information could inform diagnostic tools and evidence-based interventions specifically targeted to a patient’s deficits.
We investigated muscle activity, ground reaction forces, and center of mass (CoM) acceleration in two different postural behaviors for standing balance control in humans to determine whether common neural mechanisms are used in different postural tasks. We compared nonstepping responses, where the base of support is stationary and balance is recovered by returning CoM back to its initial position, with stepping responses, where the base of support is enlarged and balance is recovered by pushing the CoM away from the initial position. In response to perturbations of the same direction, these two postural behaviors resulted in different muscle activity and ground reaction forces. We hypothesized that a common pool of muscle synergies producing consistent task-level biomechanical functions is used to generate different postural behaviors. Two sets of support-surface translations in 12 horizontal-plane directions were presented, first to evoke stepping responses and then to evoke nonstepping responses. Electromyographs in 16 lower back and leg muscles of the stance leg were measured. Initially (∼100-ms latency), electromyographs, CoM acceleration, and forces were similar in nonstepping and stepping responses, but these diverged in later time periods (∼200 ms), when stepping occurred. We identified muscle synergies using non-negative matrix factorization and functional muscle synergies that quantified correlations between muscle synergy recruitment levels and biomechanical outputs. Functional muscle synergies that produce forces to restore CoM position in nonstepping responses were also used to displace the CoM during stepping responses. These results suggest that muscle synergies represent common neural mechanisms for CoM movement control under different dynamic conditions: stepping and nonstepping postural responses.
In both the upper and lower limbs, evidence suggests that short-latency electromyographic (EMG) responses to mechanical perturbations are modulated based on muscle stretch or joint motion, whereas long-latency responses are modulated based on attainment of task-level goals, e.g., desired direction of limb movement. We hypothesized that long-latency responses are modulated continuously by task-level error feedback. Previously, we identified an error-based sensorimotor feedback transformation that describes the time course of EMG responses to ramp-and-hold perturbations during standing balance (Safavynia and Ting 2013; Welch and Ting 2008, 2009). Here, our goals were 1) to test the robustness of the sensorimotor transformation over a richer set of perturbation conditions and postural states; and 2) to explicitly test whether the sensorimotor transformation is based on task-level vs. joint-level error. We developed novel perturbation trains of acceleration pulses such that perturbations were applied when the body deviated from the desired, upright state while recovering from preceding perturbations. The entire time course of EMG responses (∼4 s) in an antagonistic muscle pair was reconstructed using a weighted sum of center of mass (CoM) kinematics preceding EMGs at long-latency delays (∼100 ms). Furthermore, CoM and joint kinematic trajectories became decorrelated during perturbation trains, allowing us to explicitly compare task-level vs. joint feedback in the same experimental condition. Reconstruction of EMGs was poorer using joint kinematics compared with CoM kinematics and required unphysiologically short (∼10 ms) delays. Thus continuous, long-latency feedback of task-level variables may be a common mechanism regulating long-latency responses in the upper and lower limbs.
This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.