A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Therapeutic Hypothermia and Pharmacological Cotherapies in Animal Models of Ischemic Stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Therapeutic hypothermia (TH) lessens ischemic brain injury. Cytoprotective agents can augment protection, although it is unclear which combinations are most effective. The objective of this study is to identify which cytoprotective drug works best with delayed TH. Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic review (PubMed, Web of Science, MEDLINE, Scopus) identified controlled experiments that used an in vivo focal ischemic stroke model and evaluated the efficacy of TH (delay of ≥1 hour) coupled with cytoprotective agents. This combination was our main intervention compared with single treatments with TH, drug, or no treatment. Endpoints were brain injury and neurological impairment. The CAMARADES checklist for study quality and the SYRCLE’s risk of bias tool gauged study quality. Twenty-five studies were included. Most used young, healthy male rats, with only one using spontaneously hypertensive rats. Two studies used mice models, and six used adult animals. Study quality was moderate (median score = 6), and risk of bias was high. Pharmacological agents provided an additive effect on TH for all outcomes measured. Magnesium coupled with TH had the greatest impact compared with other agent-TH combinations on all outcomes. Longer TH durations improved both behavioral and histological outcomes and had greater cytoprotective efficacy than shorter durations. Anti-inflammatories were the most effective in reducing infarction (standardized mean difference [SMD]: −1.64, confidence interval [CI]: [−2.13, −1.15]), sulfonylureas reduced edema the most (SMD: −2.32, CI: [−3.09, −1.54]), and antiapoptotic agents improved behavioral outcomes the most (normalized mean difference: 52.38, CI: [45.29, 59.46]). Statistically significant heterogeneity was observed ( I 2 = 82 − 98%, all p < 0.001), indicating that studies wildly differ in their effect size estimates. Our results support the superiority of adding cytoprotective therapies with TH (vs. individual or no therapy). Additional exploratory and confirmatory studies are required to identify and thoroughly assess combination therapies owing to limited work and inconsistent translational quality.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".