Infusion of Cold Saline into the Carotid Artery Does Not Affect Outcome After Intrastriatal Hemorrhage

An Assessment of Physical and N6-Cyclohexyladenosine-Induced Hypothermia in Rodent Distal Focal Ischemic Stroke

Therapeutic hypothermia (TH) mitigates damage in ischemic stroke models. However, safer and easier TH methods (e.g., pharmacological) are needed to circumvent physical cooling complications. This study evaluated systemic and pharmacologically induced TH using the adenosine A1 receptor agonist, N6-cyclohexyladenosine (CHA), with control groups in male Sprague-Dawley rats. CHA was administered intraperitoneally 10 minutes following a 2-hour intraluminal middle cerebral artery occlusion. We used a 1.5 mg/kg induction dose, followed by three 1.0 mg/kg doses every 6 hours for a total of 4 doses, causing 20-24 hours of hypothermia. Animals assigned to physical hypothermia and CHA-hypothermia had similar induction rates and nadir temperatures, but forced cooling lasted ∼6 hours longer compared with CHA-treated animals. The divergence is likely attributable to individual differences in CHA metabolism, which led to varied durations at nadir, whereas physical hypothermia was better regulated. Physical hypothermia significantly reduced infarction (primary endpoint) on day 7 (mean reduction of 36.8 mm3 or 39% reduction; p = 0.021 vs. normothermic animals; Cohen's d = 0.75), whereas CHA-induced hypothermia did not (p = 0.33). Similarly, physical cooling improved neurological function (physical hypothermia median = 0, physical normothermia median = 2; p = 0.008) and CHA-induced cooling did not (p > 0.99). Our findings demonstrate that forced cooling was neuroprotective compared with controls, but prolonged CHA-induced cooling was not neuroprotective.

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Animal Studies Testing Intra-Arterial Chilled Infusates After Ischemic Stroke

Background: As not all ischemic stroke patients benefit from currently available treatments, there is considerable need for neuroprotective co-therapies. Therapeutic hypothermia is one such co-therapy, but numerous issues have hampered its clinical use (e.g., pneumonia risk with whole-body cooling). Some problems may be avoided with brain-specific methods, such as intra-arterial selective cooling infusion (IA-SCI) into the arteries supplying the ischemic tissue. Objective: Our research question was about the efficacy of IA-SCI in animal middle cerebral artery occlusion models. We hypothesized that IA-SCI would be beneficial, but translationally-relevant study elements may be missing (e.g., aged animals). Methods: We completed a systematic review of the PubMed database following the PRISMA guidelines on May 21, 2020 for animal studies that administered IA-SCI in the peri-reperfusion period and assessed infarct volume, behavior (primary meta-analytic endpoints), edema, or blood-brain barrier injury (secondary endpoints). Our search terms included: "focal ischemia" and related terms, "IA-SCI" and related terms, and "animal" and related terms. Nineteen studies met inclusion criteria. We adapted a methodological quality scale from 0 to 12 for experimental design assessment (e.g., use of blinding/randomization, a priori sample size calculations). Results: Studies were relatively homogenous (e.g., all studies used young, healthy animals). Some experimental design elements, such as blinding, were common whereas others, such as sample size calculations, were infrequent (median methodological quality score: 5; range: 2-7). Our analyses revealed that IA-SCI provides benefit on all endpoints (mean normalized infarct volume reduction = 23.67%; 95% CI: 19.21-28.12; mean normalized behavioral improvement = 35.56%; 95% CI: 25.91-45.20; mean standardized edema reduction = 0.95; 95% CI: 0.56-1.34). Unfortunately, blood-brain barrier assessments were uncommon and could not be analyzed. However, there was substantial statistical heterogeneity and relatively few studies. Therefore, exploration of heterogeneity via meta-regression using saline infusion parameters, study quality, and ischemic duration was inconclusive. Conclusion: Despite convincing evidence of benefit in ischemic stroke models, additional studies are required to determine the scope of benefit, especially when considering additional elements (e.g., dosing characteristics). As there is interest in using this treatment alongside current ischemic stroke therapies, more relevant animal studies will be critical to inform patient studies.