ArticleInternational journal of physiology, pathophysiology and pharmacology2013
Using hormetic strategies to improve ischemic preconditioning and postconditioning against stroke.
Article in International journal of physiology, pathophysiology and pharmacology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Molecular docking and ADME properties of bioactive molecules against human acid-beta-glucosidase enzyme, cause of Gaucher's disease.In silico pharmacology · 2018Article
- Pathogenic mechanisms following ischemic stroke.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2017Review
- Cyclophilin D Is Involved in the Regulation of Autophagy and Affects the Lifespan of P. anserina in Response to Mitochondrial Oxidative Stress.Frontiers in genetics · 2016Article
- Extending injury- and disease-resistant CNS phenotypes by repetitive epigenetic conditioning.Frontiers in neurology · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Both ischemic preconditioning (IPreC) and ischemic postconditioning (IPostC) trigger endogenous neuroprotective mechanisms in cerebral ischemia. IPreC is defined as a brief ischemia that protects against a subsequent severe ischemia, while IPostC refers to a series of brief cerebral blood vessel occlusions performed at reperfusion following an ischemic event. Hormesis describes a biphasic dose-response relationship in toxicology, where a low dose of toxicant stimulates and a high dose inhibits biological responses. In general, any minor stress will stimulate a biological system to generate an adaptive response; in most cases, if not all, such an adaptive response to a minor stress is beneficial to the biological system. Proponents of hormesis suggest that this effect is independent of any models, either in vivo or in vitro, from animal, plant, fungi, yeast, to bacteria, by any measurement of end points, survival ratio or time, growth, tissue repair, life span, cognition, learning and memory. In this review, we examine whether IPreC and IPostC are actually sub-forms of hormesis and whether quantitative hormetic strategies can be used to study IPreC and IPostC. By integrating the concepts of IPreC and IPostC with hormesis, we aim to broaden the avenues leading to clinical translation of IPreC and IPostC in stroke treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23750305PMC3669735W46171332What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.