British journal of anaesthesia · 2023
Evaluation of putative signatures of consciousness using specific definitions of responsiveness, connectedness, and consciousness.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Casey Cameron P, Tanabe Sean, Farahbakhsh Zahra Z, Parker Margaret, Bo Amber, White Marissa, Ballweg Tyler, Mcintosh Andrew, Filbey William, Banks Matthew I, Saalmann Yuri B, Pearce Robert A, Sanders Robert D
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Understanding the neural correlates of consciousness has important ramifications for the theoretical understanding of consciousness and for clinical anaesthesia. A major limitation of prior studies is the use of responsiveness as an index of consciousness. We identified a collection of measures derived from unresponsive subjects and more specifically their association with consciousness (any subjective experience) or connectedness (specific experience of environmental stimuli).
METHODS: Using published data generated through the UNderstanding Consciousness Connectedness and Intra-Operative Unresponsiveness Study (NCT03284307), we evaluated 10 previously published resting-state EEG-based measures that were derived using unresponsiveness as a proxy for unconsciousness. Measures were tested across dexmedetomidine and propofol sedation and natural sleep. These markers represent the complexity, connectivity, cross-frequency coupling, graph theory, and power spectrum measures.
RESULTS: Although many of the proposed markers were associated with consciousness per se (reported subjective experience), none were specific to consciousness alone; rather, each was also associated with connectedness (i.e. awareness of the environment). In addition, multiple markers showed no association with consciousness and were associated only with connectedness. Of the markers tested, loss of normalised-symbolic transfer entropy (front to back) was associated with connectedness across all three experimental conditions, whereas the transition from disconnected consciousness to unconsciousness was associated with significant decreases in permutation entropy and spectral exponent (P<0.05 for all conditions).
CONCLUSIONS: None of the proposed EEG-based neural correlates of unresponsiveness corresponded solely to consciousness, highlighting the need for a more conservative use of the term (un)consciousness when assessing unresponsive participants.
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03284307.
METHODS: Using published data generated through the UNderstanding Consciousness Connectedness and Intra-Operative Unresponsiveness Study (NCT03284307), we evaluated 10 previously published resting-state EEG-based measures that were derived using unresponsiveness as a proxy for unconsciousness. Measures were tested across dexmedetomidine and propofol sedation and natural sleep. These markers represent the complexity, connectivity, cross-frequency coupling, graph theory, and power spectrum measures.
RESULTS: Although many of the proposed markers were associated with consciousness per se (reported subjective experience), none were specific to consciousness alone; rather, each was also associated with connectedness (i.e. awareness of the environment). In addition, multiple markers showed no association with consciousness and were associated only with connectedness. Of the markers tested, loss of normalised-symbolic transfer entropy (front to back) was associated with connectedness across all three experimental conditions, whereas the transition from disconnected consciousness to unconsciousness was associated with significant decreases in permutation entropy and spectral exponent (P<0.05 for all conditions).
CONCLUSIONS: None of the proposed EEG-based neural correlates of unresponsiveness corresponded solely to consciousness, highlighting the need for a more conservative use of the term (un)consciousness when assessing unresponsive participants.
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03284307.