$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$
$$\longleftharp{xx}$$,
$$\longrightharp{xx}$$,
From the start of the experiment, the piglet's physiological homeostasis must be maintained as described in this lab's prior publication21. Minimal monitoring should include pulse oximetry, electrocardiography, capnography, non-invasive blood pressure, and temperature. Trained investigators are required so that physiologic perturbations (e.g., hypo/hyperthermia, hypoxia, hypotension, arrhythmia) can be appropriately corrected.
Prior to induction, in vitro MEA calibrations are performed to establish functionality and selectivity of the MEA under known conditions. The calibration and plating of MEAs is critical for effective use of the technology. There are many potential errors that can arise during calibration. Calibration can identify these issues as well as improper plating, which leads to incorrect interferent response. A more detailed tabular account of errors that may occur in MEA response has been compiled, along with notable causes and suggested solutions, which should prove a useful instrument for likely troubleshooting (Table 1). It is important to note that prior to both calibration and plating, the glass reference electrode should be checked for the presence of air bubbles or white discoloration, as either will negatively impact MEA function and recording accuracy.
| Symptom | Cause | Corrective Action |
| No Signal | Electrode not connected | Properly connect electrode to headstage and headstage to FAST amperometry system. |
| No power to the FAST amperometry system | Turn on power switch on back of FAST system |
| Signal Noise | Electrode contaminated by blood | Continuously irrigate the brain surface during electrode insertion |
| Rinse the electrode immediately in dH2O |
| Enzyme coating is loose | Clean and recoat the electrode |
| Reference electrode was not inserted or coated | Coat and place the reference electrode farther under the scalp |
| Electrode is detecting movement of brain surface | Usually occurs in superficial structures. Insert the electrode deeper (1 mm at a time) if possible |
| Animal Movement | Animal is inadequately secured | Move the animal in the posterior direction to better secure earbars on the skull. If necessary, elevate the torso to allow for better body alignment. |
| Animal is inadequately anesthetized | Verify the integrity of the anesthetic equipment. Titrate the anesthetic to an effective dose and administer an intramuscular rocuronium dose (5 mg/kg) |
| Inaccurate electrode placement | Electrode is not correctly aligned | Readjust the electrode while maintaining proper connection to the headstage. |
| Stereotaxic coordinates are inaccurate | Ensure that the piglet atlas being referenced does not use another reference point or plane of alignment. |
| Be careful not to obscure the suture marks by scoring the skull. |
Table 1: Instructions for troubleshooting MEA use in piglets. Possible causes and corrective actions to assist with optimization and troubleshooting.
A stereotaxic atlas for the piglet is used to determine the stereotaxic coordinates of the area of interest with respect to a known point such as bregma18. Ear bars should be properly secured to ensure that the skull is level and fully immobilized. Care should be taken during the midline incision of the scalp to avoid scoring the skull as this may affect visualization of the suture lines. The craniotomy window should be large enough to accommodate the MEA.
This protocol presents a number of technical challenges that require a well-stocked operating suite and an investigator/team skilled in the surgical and anesthetic aspects of the protocol. The model additionally presents financial limitations in that the piglet model is more expensive than the rodent model; however, it is significantly less costly than the use of non-human primates, which can cost thousands of dollars. The use of MEA technology presents its own challenges, as the procedure of coating and plating the electrodes manually require a skilled investigator or assistant to ensure sufficient selectivity and reliable function. The microelectrodes themselves are fragile, as they are made of ceramic, and thus easily damaged if proper caution is not observed. Microelectrodes are subject to interference from other electrical devices, which can create noise in recordings, and from blood at the operative site, which can occlude the recording sites. The need for specialized equipment presents an additional burden as a stereotaxic surgical frame must be custom built to immobilize the piglet skull during implantation. The stereotaxic frame, glutamate oxidase, and the electrodes themselves are all costly. Additionally, the lack of a piglet stereotaxic atlas from within the last decade poses technical limitations that require particular expertise to determine the specific location of deep structures in the piglet brain. Development of a new stereotaxic atlas, perhaps using magnetic resonance imaging, would greatly enhance the ability to use this technology in piglets.
The piglet is a clinically relevant model for the study of AIN largely due to the parallels that exist between this species and the human neonate, as both possess similar brain structure and development. Unlike more commonly used models such as mice or rats, the piglet has a greater CNS similarity to humans, which lends to the translatability of the model's results. The piglet model is additionally cheaper and involves less complicated handling than a non-human primate model. The piglet model is intended to examine the process by which anesthesia might induce developmental neurotoxicity, measure its contribution to neurological damage, and combat the issue of damage caused by confounding variables. For instance, hypoxia may be misconstrued for damage caused by anesthetics as it has global effects on the brain. The piglet is utilized with the same surgical and anesthetic conditions as those used in human medicine to ensure fidelity of results.
The use of ceramic-based MEA technology eliminates several of the disadvantages associated with the contemporary technique of microdialysis. Microdialysis has limited temporal and spatial resolution in comparison to amperometric methods such as the MEA, which can continuously record glutamate events in multiple, microscopic regions at up to 10 Hz23. This rapid sampling rate eliminates the confounding factor of localized neurotransmitter diffusion that is inherent to slow-sampling methods like microdialysis24. Additionally, the MEA is a less invasive method than a microdialysis probe, which can cause significant gliosis during insertion and may alter neurotransmitter activity at the insertion site22.
Previous studies utilizing a range of mammalian models, measurement techniques, and regions of the brain, have demonstrated basal glutamate levels comparable to those found using this technique. This suggests that MEA technology, when adapted to the piglet model, provides valid recordings of in vivo glutamate concentration (Table 2).
| Author (Year) | Recording Technique | Animal Model | Age | Brain Region(s) | Mean Basal Glutamate Concentration (µM) |
| Hascup et al. (2008)23 | MEA (Enzyme-based) | Rodent | 20 - 24 weeks | Prefrontal Cortex, Striatum | 3.3 ± 1.0; 5.0 ± 1.2 |
| Hascup et al. (2010)25 | MEA (Enzyme-based) | Rodent | 3 - 6 months | Hippocampus | 4.7 - 10.4 |
| Rutherford et al. (2007)9 | MEA (Enzyme-based) | Rodent | 3 - 6 months | Prefrontal Cortex, Striatum | 44.9 ± 4.7; 7.3 ± 0.9 |
| Miele et al. (1996)26 | Microdialysis (Enzyme-based) | Rodent | - | Striatum | 3.6 ± 0.5 |
| Day et al. (2006)27 | MEA (Enzyme-based) | Rodent | 3 - 6 months | Frontal Cortex, Striatum | 1.6 ± 0.3 ;1.4 ± 0.2 |
| Quintero et al. (2007)28 | MEA (Enzyme-based) | Non-Human Primate | 5.3 - 5.5 years | Premotor Cortex, Motor Cortex | 3.8 ± 1.7; 3.7 ± 0.9 |
| Stephens et al. (2010)29 | MEA [Spencer-Gerhardt-2 (SG-2)] | Non-Human Primate | 11 - 21 years | Putamen | 8.53 |
| Kodama et al. (2002)30 | Microdialysis (Enzyme-based) | Non-Human Primate | - | Prefrontal Cortex | 1.29 - 2.21 |
| Galvan et al. (2003)31 | Microdialysis (Enzyme-based) | Non-Human Primate | Juvenile | Striatum | 28.74 ± 2.73 |
| During and Spencer (1993)32 | Microdialysis (Enzyme-based) | Human | 18 - 35 years | Hippocampus | 20.3 ± 6.6 |
| Reinstrup et al. (2000)33 | Microdialysis (Enzyme-based) | Human | - | Frontal Cortex | 16 ± 16 |
| Cavus et al. (2005)34 | Microdialysis (Enzyme-based) | Human | 15 - 52 years | Neocortex | 2.6 ± 0.3 |
Table 2. Comparison of basal extracellular glutamate levelsacross various animal models. A selected review of studies establishing normal extracellular glutamate levels in healthy awake and anesthetized animals using microdialysis or microelectrodes.
The use of MEA technology to monitor in vivo glutamate concentrations in the piglet model can allow for the future evaluation of piglet neurological outcomes post-anesthesia. Survival experiments have been planned, which will further an understanding of the long-term impact of anesthesia on the neurocognitive well-being of human neonates. Survival experiments will allow for behavioral testing and monitoring of glutamate changes long after anesthesia exposure. It is also common for children to undergo anesthesia in conditions where they might experience physiological stress in the form of surgical intervention. Future studies addressing the influence of surgery in terms of neurological injury and increase in neurotoxicity would allow for more accurate modeling of a common clinical setting for children. The use of alternate animal models is also feasible, as is the study of these various models through chronic implantation, allowing us to track behavioral changes associated with neurotoxicity. MEA technology itself is versatile, so future study need not be limited to analysis of glutamate levels (e.g., GABA, choline, lysine, etc. could be analyzed).