Prophylactic Edaravone Prevents Transient Hypoxic-Ischemic Brain Injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Hypoperfusion-induced thrombosis is an important mechanism for postsurgery stroke and cognitive decline, but there are no perioperative neuroprotectants to date. This study investigated whether prophylactic application of Edaravone, a free radical scavenger already used in treating ischemic stroke in Japan, can prevent infarct and cognitive deficits in a murine model of transient cerebral hypoxia-ischemia. METHODS: Adult male C57BL/6 mice were subjected to transient hypoxic-ischemic (tHI) insult that consists of 30-minute occlusion of the unilateral common carotid artery and exposure to 7.5% oxygen. Edaravone or saline was prophylactically applied to compare their effects on cortical oxygen saturation, blood flow, coagulation, oxidative stress, metabolites, and learning-memory using methods that include photoacoustic imaging, laser speckle contrast imaging, solid-state NMR, and Morris water maze. The effects on infarct size by Edaravone application at different time points after tHI were also compared. RESULTS: Prophylactic administration of Edaravone (4.5 mg/kg×2, IP, 1 hour before and 1 hour after tHI) improved vascular reperfusion, oxygen saturation, and the maintenance of brain metabolites, reducing oxidative stress, thrombosis, white-matter injury, and learning impairment after tHI insult. Delayed Edaravone treatment after 3 h post-tHI became unable to reduce infarct size. CONCLUSIONS: Acute application of Edaravone may be a useful strategy to prevent postsurgery stroke and cognitive impairment, especially in patients with severe carotid stenosis.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".