Could a dose of arthritis medication prevent postsurgical memory loss?

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


Like people, mice sometimes show signs of general confusion and memory loss after surgery. Common major (noncardiac) procedures, such as orthopedic operations, can lead to postsurgical cognitive decline in some seven to 26 percent of patients. And though it's usually temporary, this mental fogginess has been linked to worse overall recovery and long-term cognitive problems.

This phenomenon has come to the attention of some researchers working in the field of immunology. Surgery, like acute infection, has been shown to spur the immune system's inflammatory response, producing a spike in cytokine levels (including that of interleukin-1 beta), which are involved in cellular communication. A surge of inflammation, as detected by increases in interleukin-1 beta, has also been linked to cognitive dysfunction of the ilk often seen after surgery. And a study published in Neurology also found that Alzheimer's patients with persistent inflammation had quadruple the memory loss over six months compare to those without signs of inflammation.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


In hopes of dialing down passing postoperative dementia, researchers have been exploring the use of common cytokine inhibitors, such as those used to treat rheumatoid arthritis.

A new study found that giving mice a dose of anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antibody before orthopedic surgery decreased the animals' dementia-like behaviors.

"This finding suggests a pivotal role for systemic inflammation in producing neuroinflammation and cognitive decline," the researchers noted in the new study, which was published online November 1 in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

The prophylactic could be as simple as a single pre-operative shot, and researchers hope to move into human clinical testing of this use for the drugs within a year.

Beyond this postsurgical forgetfulness, "cytokines are potential therapeutic targets in a wider range of diseases," Sir Marc Feldmann, of the Kennedy Institute of Rheumatology at Imperial College London and study collaborator, said in a prepared statement. Systemic inflammation has also been linked to depression and other neurological ills. "Moreover," Feldmann said, "effective therapeutics already are available, with a known safety profile and modest cost."

Image courtesy of iStockphoto/BassittART

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe