Ex Vivo and In Vivo Neuroprotection Induced by Argon When Given after an Excitotoxic or Ischemic Insult
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In vitro studies have well established the neuroprotective action of the noble gas argon. However, only limited data from in vivo models are available, and particularly whether postexcitotoxic or postischemic argon can provide neuroprotection in vivo still remains to be demonstrated. Here, we investigated the possible neuroprotective effect of postexcitotoxic-postischemic argon both ex vivo in acute brain slices subjected to ischemia in the form of oxygen and glucose deprivation (OGD), and in vivo in rats subjected to an intrastriatal injection of N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) or to the occlusion of middle-cerebral artery (MCAO). We show that postexcitotoxic-postischemic argon reduces OGD-induced cell injury in brain slices, and further reduces NMDA-induced brain damage and MCAO-induced cortical brain damage in rats. Contrasting with its beneficial effect at the cortical level, we show that postischemic argon increases MCAO-induced subcortical brain damage and provides no improvement of neurologic outcome as compared to control animals. These results extend previous data on the neuroprotective action of argon. Particularly, taken together with previous in vivo data that have shown that intraischemic argon has neuroprotective action at both the cortical and subcortical level, our findings on postischemic argon suggest that this noble gas could be administered during but not after ischemia, i.e. before but not after reperfusion has occurred, in order to provide cortical neuroprotection and to avoid increasing subcortical brain damage. Also, the effects of argon are discussed as regards to the oxygen-like chemical, pharmacological, and physical properties of argon.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".