MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Deep Brain Stimulation rescues memory and synaptic activity in a rat model of global ischemia

2019· article· en· W2912935959 on OpenAlexaff
Elise Gondard, Lucy Teves, Lihua Wang, Chris McKinnon, Clement Hamani, Suneil K. Kalia, Peter L. Carlen, Michael Tymianski, Andrés M. Lozano

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurological disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthToronto Western HospitalUniversity Health Network
FundersNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsDeep brain stimulationSynaptophysinNeuroscienceStimulationMemory impairmentPsychologyMedicineEntorhinal cortexHippocampusDiseaseCognitionInternal medicineParkinson's disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ischemic stroke is responsible for a large number of neurological deficits including memory impairment. Deep brain stimulation (DBS), a well established therapeutic modality for the treatment of movement disorders, has recently shown potential beneficial effects on memory in animals and patients with Alzheimer9s disease. Here, we test DBS for its ability to improve memory impairments by stimulating the entorhinal cortex (EC) in a rat model of global ischemia (GI). Two weeks after GI, adult male rats received high-frequency EC DBS for 1 h, and animals were assessed for changes in locomotor activity, learning, and memory 6 weeks later. GI produced spatial memory impairment that was ameliorated by DBS, with no difference between the group that received DBS for GI (GI-DBS ON group) and nonstroke control groups. Although GI led to a dramatic CA1 neuronal loss that could not be rescued with DBS, stimulation attenuated the reduction of CA1 synaptophysin expression after GI. Further, in vitro slice recordings showed a restoration of typical evoked synaptic dendritic fields in GI-DBS ON animals, indicating that the DBS-induced memory rescue is associated with increased synaptophysin expression and enhanced synaptic function. These results suggest that DBS may ameliorate the functional consequences of cerebral ischemia and point to be a potential new therapeutic approach. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is remarkably effective in treating Parkinson9s disease and is currently under investigation for the treatment of neuropsychiatric disorders including Alzheimer9s disease. Until now, DBS has not been examined for its cognitive benefits in the context of hypoxic-ischemic injuries. Here, we investigated the effect of DBS in a rat model of global ischemia (GI) that mimics the neurological consequences occurring after a cardiac arrest. We show that DBS rescues memory deficits induced by GI and produces changes in synaptic activity in the hippocampus. Novel approaches to improve neurological outcomes after stroke are urgently needed; therefore, the present study highlights a possible role for DBS in the treatment of cognitive impairment associated with ischemia.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.274 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations26
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neuroscience→Same topicNeurological disorders and treatments→French-language works237,207→