Potential application of hydrogen in traumatic and surgical brain injury, stroke and neonatal hypoxia-ischemia

This article summarized findings of current preclinical studies that implemented hydrogen administration, either in the gas or liquid form, as treatment application for neurological disorders including traumatic brain injury (TBI), surgically induced brain injury (SBI), stroke, and neonatal hypoxic-ischemic brain insult (HI). Most reviewed studies demonstrated neuroprotective effects of hydrogen administration. Even though anti-oxidative potentials have been reported in several studies, further neuroprotective mechanisms of hydrogen therapy remain to be elucidated. Hydrogen may serve as an adjunct treatment for neurological disorders

Hydrogen is neuroprotective against surgically induced brain injury

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Neurosurgical operations cause unavoidable damage to healthy brain tissues. Direct surgical injury as well as surgically induced oxidative stress contributes to the subsequent formation of brain edema. Therefore, we tested the neuroprotective effects of hydrogen (H₂) in an established surgical brain injury (SBI) model in rats.</p> <p>Materials and methods</p> <p>Adult male Sprague - Dawley rats (weight 300-350g) were divided into three groups to serve as sham operated, SBI without treatment, and SBI treated with H₂(2.9%). Brain water content, myeloperoxidase (MPO) assay, lipid peroxidation (LPO), and neurological function were measured at 24 hrs after SBI.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>SBI resulted in localized brain edema (p = < 0.001). Hydrogen (2.9%) administered concurrently with surgery significantly decreased the formation of cerebral edema (p = 0.028) and improved neurobehavioral score (p = 0.022). However, hydrogen treatment failed to reduce oxidative stress (LPO assay) or inflammation (MPO assay) in brain tissues.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Hydrogen appears to be promising as an effective, yet inexpensive way to reduce cerebral edema caused by surgical procedures. Hydrogen has the potential to improve clinical outcome, decrease hospital stay, and reduce overall cost to patients and the health care system.</p

Overview of data-synthesis in systematic reviews of studies on outcome prediction models

Background: Many prognostic models have been developed. Different types of models, i.e. prognostic factor and outcome prediction studies, serve different purposes, which should be reflected in how the results are summarized in reviews. Therefore we set out to investigate how authors of reviews synthesize and report the results of primary outcome prediction studies. Methods: Outcome prediction reviews published in MEDLINE between October 2005 and March 2011 were eligible and 127 Systematic reviews with the aim to summarize outcome prediction studies written in English were identified for inclusion. Characteristics of the reviews and the primary studies that were included were independently assessed by 2 review authors, using standardized forms. Results: After consensus meetings a total of 50 systematic reviews that met the inclusion criteria were included. The type of primary studies included (prognostic factor or outcome prediction) was unclear in two-thirds of the reviews. A minority of the reviews reported univariable or multivariable point estimates and measures of dispersion from the primary studies. Moreover, the variables considered for outcome prediction model development were often not reported, or were unclear. In most reviews there was no information about model performance. Quantitative analysis was performed in 10 reviews, and 49 reviews assessed the primary studies qualitatively. In both analyses types a range of different methods was used to present the results of the outcome prediction studies. Conclusions: Different methods are applied to synthesize primary study results but quantitative analysis is rarely performed. The description of its objectives and of the primary studies is suboptimal and performance parameters of the outcome prediction models are rarely mentioned. The poor reporting and the wide variety of data synthesis strategies are prone to influence the conclusions of outcome prediction reviews. Therefore, there is much room for improvement in reviews of outcome prediction studies. (aut.ref.

Extracranial Repair of Cerebrospinal Fluid Rhinorrhea

ABSTRACT:There has been a recent renewal of interest in the extracranial repair of cerebrospinal fluid rhinorrhea because of the relatively high morbidity associated with the transcranial approach. The authors describe an extracranial approach that involves packing of the sphenoid and ethmoid sinuses on the side of the CSF leak. A case of successful treatment of CSF rhinorrhea by this method is presented. The extracranial approach may be advantageous for the repair of CSF rhinorrhea and the authors advocate an increase in its utilization by neurosurgeons and otolaryngologists working as a team.</jats:p

Intradural perimedullary arteriovenous fistulas (Type IV spinal cord arteriovenous malformations)

✓ Intradural perimedullary arteriovenous fistulas (Type IV spinal cord arteriovenous malformations (AVM's)) are rarely reported in the literature and occasionally are classified together with Type II AVM's as intradural spinal cord AVM's. The authors report eight cases of Type IV spinal cord AVM's managed over a 2-year period. Seven of these AVM's were surgically obliterated, with intraoperative angiography being used as an adjunct; one other patient was managed using endovascular therapy. One of these lesions was definitely and another possibly the result of trauma; a malformation in a newborn infant was clearly congenital. The authors believe that the pathophysiological mechanisms and anatomical features of these lesions represent a unique spinal vascular anomaly that must be recognized angiographically to plan appropriate therapy.</jats:p