Full Access

Electrocerebral Recovery During the Intracarotid Amobarbital Procedure: Influence of Interval Between Injections

Corresponding Author

Linda M. Selwa

Department of Neurology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, U.S.A.

Address correspondence and reprint requests to Dr. L. M. Selwa at University of Michigan, Department of Neurology, 1914 Taubman Center/0316, 1500 E. Medical Center Drive, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109, U.S.A.Search for more papers by this author

Henry A. Buchtel,

Henry A. Buchtel

Ann Arbor VA Medical Center, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, U.S.A.

Department of Psychiatry and Psychology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, U.S.A.

Search for more papers by this author

Thomas R. Henry,

Thomas R. Henry

Department of Neurology, Emory University, Ann Arbor, Michigan, U.S.A.

Search for more papers by this author

Linda M. Selwa,

Corresponding Author

Linda M. Selwa

Department of Neurology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, U.S.A.

Henry A. Buchtel,

Henry A. Buchtel

Ann Arbor VA Medical Center, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, U.S.A.

Department of Psychiatry and Psychology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, U.S.A.

Search for more papers by this author

Thomas R. Henry,

Thomas R. Henry

Department of Neurology, Emory University, Ann Arbor, Michigan, U.S.A.

Search for more papers by this author

First published: 03 August 2005

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1528-1157.1997.tb00067.x

Citations: 11

About

PDF

Tools

Share a link

Email
Wechat
Bluesky

Abstract

Summary: Purpose and Methods: During the intracarotid amobarbital procedure (IAP) at the University of Michigan, continuous scalp EEG monitoring guides the timing for presentation of memory items and postinjection testing. Most of our patients have undergone bilateral injections. The interval between injections varied from 22 to 60 min, depending on the test and recovery time, as well as the time to catheterize the second side. After noting a trend toward prolonged electro-graphic recovery following the second injection, we tested our clinical impression that recovery of the second hemisphere may be influenced by (a) the time between injections and (b) which hemisphere is injected first (epileptogenic or nonepileptogenic).

To study these questions, we analyzed EEG recovery data from 48 consecutive IAPs. Approximately half the patients had the epileptogenic side injected first.

Results: We found that (a) electrographic recovery after the second injection is prolonged if the interval between bilateral injections is less than 40 minutes and (b) electrographic recovery is more rapid after injection of the epileptogenic hemisphere.

Conclusions: We now recommend waiting at least 45 min between injections. The pathophysiology of more prolonged amobarbital effect on the nonepileptogenic hemisphere than on the epileptogenic hemisphere remains unclear.

References

1 Wada J. A new method for determination of the side of cerebral speech dominance: A preliminary report on the intracarotid injection of sodium Anmtal in man. Iqaku to Seibutzuqaki 1949; 14: 221–2.
Google Scholar
2 Milner B, Branch C, Rasmussen T. Study of short-term memory after intracarotid injection of sodium Amytal. Trans Am Neurol Assoc 1962; 87: 224–6.
Google Scholar
3 Engel J Jr, Rausch R, Lieb JP, Kuhl DE, Crandall PH: Correlation of criteria used for localizing epileptic foci in patients considered for surgical therapy of epilepsy. Ann Neurol 1981; 9: 215–24.
10.1002/ana.410090303
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
4 Rouleau I, Labrecque R, Saint-Hilaire J-M: Short-termand long-term memory deficit following intracarotid Amytal injection: Further support for the memory consolidation hypothesis. Brain Cogn 1989; 11: 167–85.
10.1016/0278-2626(89)90016-X
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
5 Rausch R, Babb TL, Engle J Jr, Crandall PH: Memory following intracarotid amobarbital injection contralateral to hippocampal damage. Arch Neurol 1989; 46: 783–88.
10.1001/archneur.1989.00520430077022
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
6 Rausch R, Langfitt JT: Memory evaluation during the intracarotid sodium amobarbital procedure. In: HO Luders (ed). Epilepsy Surgery. New York : Raven Press, 1992: 507–15.
Web of Science® Google Scholar
7 Penine K, Westerveld M, Sass KJ, Devinsky O, Dogali M, Spencer DD, Luciano DJ, Nelson PK. Wada memory disparities predict seizure laterality and postoperative seizure control. Epilepsia 1995; 36(9): 851–6.
10.1111/j.1528-1157.1995.tb01627.x
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
8 Wyllie E, Naugle R, Awad I, Chelune G, Luders Dinner D, Ski-binski C, Ahl J: Intracarotid amobarbital procedure: I. Prediction of decreased modality-specific memory scores after temporal lobectomy. Epilepsia 1991; 32(6): 857–64.
10.1111/j.1528-1157.1991.tb05542.x
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
9 Kneebone AC, Chelune GJ, Dinner DS, Naugle RI, Awad IA: Intracarotid amobarbital procedure as a predictor of material-specific memory change after anterior temporal lobectomy. Epilepsia 1995; 36(9): 857–65.
10.1111/j.1528-1157.1995.tb01628.x
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
10 Bouwer MS, Jones-Gotman M, Gotman J: Duration of sodium Amytal effect: Behavioral and EEG measures. Epilepsia 1993; 34.
10.1111/j.1528-1157.1993.tb02376.x
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
11 Rausch R, Silfvenius H, Wieser H-G, Dodrill C, Meador KJ, Jones-Gotman M. Intraarterial Amobarbital Procedures. In: J Engle, (ed.) Surgical Treatment of the Epilepsies. New York : Raven Press, 1993.
Google Scholar
12 Dinner DS: Intracarotid amobarbital test to define language lateralization. In: HO Luders (ed). Epilepsy Surgery. New York : Raven Press, 1992: 503–6.
Web of Science® Google Scholar
13 Henry TR, Ross DA. Summary of epilepsy surgery protocols: University of Michigan. In: H Luders, (ed.) Epilepsy Surgery New York : Raven Press, 1992: 781.
Web of Science® Google Scholar
14 Milner B. Psychological aspects of focal epilepsy and its neurological management. In: JK Penry & RD Walters (eds.) Advances in Neurology ( Vol 8). New York : Raven Press, 1975: 299–321.
Google Scholar
15 Aasly J, Silfvenius H: Evaluation of early and late presented tasks in the intracarotid Amytal test for epileptic patients. Epilepsy Res 1990; 7: 155–64.
10.1016/0920-1211(90)90101-Z
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
16 Rausch R, Fedio P, Ary CM, Engel J Jr, Crandall PH: Resumption of behavior following intracarotid sodium amobarbital injection. Ann Neurol 1984; 15: 31–5.
10.1002/ana.410150106
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
17 During MJ, Spencer DD. Extracellular hippocampal glutamate and spontaneous seizure in the conscious human brain. Lancet 1993; 341: 1607–10.
10.1016/0140-6736(93)90754-5
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
18 Savic I, Ingvar M, Stone-Elander S. Comparison of [¹¹C]flumazenil and [¹⁸F]FDG ad PET markers of epileptic foci. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1993; 56: 615–21.
10.1136/jnnp.56.6.615
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
19 Macdonald RL, Olsen RW. GABA_A receptor channels. Annu Rev Neurosci 1994; 17: 569–602.
10.1146/annurev.ne.17.030194.003033
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
20 Mcdonald JW, Garofalo EA, Hood T, et al. Altered excitatory and inhibitory amino acid receptor binding in hippocampus of patients with temporal lobe epilepsy. Ann Neurol 1991; 29: 529–41.
10.1002/ana.410290513
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
21 Johnson EW, de Lanerolle NC, Kim JH, et al. “Central” and “peripheral” benzodiazepine receptors: Opposite changes in human epileptogenic tissue. Neurology 1992; 42: 811–5.
10.1212/WNL.42.4.811
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
22 Burdette DE, Dakurai SY, Henry TR, et al. Temporal lobe central benzodiazepine binding in unilateral mesial temporal lobe epilepsy. Neurology 1995; 45: 934–41.
10.1212/WNL.45.5.934
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
23 Henry TR, Frey KA, Sackellares JC, et al. In vivo cerebral metabolism and central benzodiazepine-receptor binding in temporal lobe epilepsy. Neurology 1993; 43: 1998–2006.
10.1212/WNL.43.10.1998
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
24 Gotman J, Brouwer MS, Jones-Gotman M. Intracranial EEG study of brain structures affected by internal carotid injection of amobarbital. Neurology 1992; 42: 2136–43.
10.1212/WNL.42.11.2136
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar

Citing Literature

Volume38, Issue12

December 1997

Pages 1294-1299

Electrocerebral Recovery During the Intracarotid Amobarbital Procedure: Influence of Interval Between Injections

Abstract

References

Citing Literature

References

Information

About Wiley Online Library

Help & Support

Opportunities

Connect with Wiley

Electrocerebral Recovery During the Intracarotid Amobarbital Procedure: Influence of Interval Between Injections

Abstract

References

Citing Literature

References

Related

Information