The Influence of Anesthetic Agents on the Immune Response: A Crucial Factor in Immune Suppression?

  • P. Schmucker
  • C. Hammer
Conference paper

Abstract

The immunological status, subsequent to surgery, plays a crucial part in the recovery of the patient. It is now entirely clear that immunological parameters are influenced by a multitude of factors induced by trauma or surgery. Neural and humoral factors are influenced by traumatic events and surgical operations resulting in the liberation of mediators. So far, in the event of trauma the situation is clear, but it is impossible to undertake surgical procedures without some type of anesthesia or analgesia. However, the anesthesia itself could exert an immune-depressive or immune-simulative influence or anesthesia might modify the surgical effects on the immunological state of the patient. The effect of anesthesia itself could again give rise to alterations in neurohumoral mechanisms, secondarily influencing immunologic parameters, or quite simply influence the immunological state by some direct action of the anesthetics on immunocompetent cells.

Keywords

Cortisol Ketamine Midazolam Halothane Stim 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Ledingham IM, Watt I (1983) Influence of sedation on mortality in critically ill multiple trauma patients. Lancet 1: 1270PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Allolio B, Stuttmann R, Leonhard U, Fischer H, Winkelmann W (1984) Adrenocortical suppression by a single induction dose of etomidate. Klin Wochenschr 62: 1014–1017PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Plaut M (1987) Lymphocyte hormone receptors. Annu Rev Immunol 5: 621–669PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Smith EM, Brosnan P, Meyer WJ, Blalock JE (1987) An ACTH receptor on human mononuclear leukocytes. Relation to adrenal ACTH-receptor activity. N Engl J Med 317: 1266–1269PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    von Haefen B, Zenner HP (1987) Zum Einfluß verschiedener Anästhesieverfahren auf die Natürliche-Killer-Zell-Aktivität. Anaesthesist 36: Zentral Europäischer Anaesthesiekongreß, ZAK 87 München, p. 412Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Crozier TA, Beck D, Schuff-Werner P, Kettler D (1987) Veränderte Expression lymphozytärer Oberflächenmarker nach Gabe von Etomidat, Midazolam oder Methohexital. Anaesthesist 36: 692–695PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fink RB, Kenny GE (1968) Metabolie effects of volatile anaesthetics in cell culture. Anesthesiology 29: 505–516PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bruce DL, Harold HH (1969) The effect of halothane on the cell cycle in rat small intestine. Anesthesiology 30: 401–405PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Park SK, Brody JJ, Wallace HA, Blakmore WS (1971) Immunosuppressive effect of surgery. Lancet 53: 108Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bruce DL (1972) Halothane inhibition of phytohemagglutinin-induced transformation of lymphocytes. Anesthesiology 36: 201–205PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bruce DL (1976) Halothane action on lymphocytes does not involve cyclic AMP. Anesthesiology 44: 151–154PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Neuwelt EA, Kikuchi K, Hill SA, Lipsky P, Frenkel E (1982) Barbiturate inhibition of lymphocyte function. J Neurosurg 54: 254Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Puppo F, Adami GF, Corsini G, Zavarise GM, Zattoni J (1980) Effect of single oral dose of phenobarbitone on lymphocyte blastogenesis response in man. Br J Anaesth 5: 1205–1207CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • P. Schmucker
  • C. Hammer

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations