Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24723314›Full record

Trial reportStroke2014

Relative contributions of sympathetic, cholinergic, and myogenic mechanisms to cerebral autoregulation.

J W Hamner, Can Ozan Tan

Open access · bronzeAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Stroke, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 69 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
69citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
7.3field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

69 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 145 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. A systematic review, meta-analysisJournal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Individualized autoregulation-guided arterial blood pressure management in neurocritical care.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2025
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Intracranial atherosclerotic disease and neurodegeneration: a narrative review and plausible mechanisms.Journal of stroke and cerebrovascular diseases : the official journal of National Stroke Association · 2024
    Review
  20. Directional sensitivity of the cerebral pressure-flow relationship during forced oscillations induced by oscillatory lower body negative pressure.Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism · 2024
    Article

9 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

J W HamnerFrom the Cardiovascular Research Laboratory, Spaulding Rehabilitation Hospital, Boston, MA (J.W.H., C.O.T.); and Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA (C.O.T.).
Can Ozan TanFrom the Cardiovascular Research Laboratory, Spaulding Rehabilitation Hospital, Boston, MA (J.W.H., C.O.T.); and Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA (C.O.T.). cotan@partners.org.
Harvard University · US

Funding

Exploring the Physiology of Short-term Control of Cerebral Blood Flow in HumansR01HL093113 · NHLBI · SPAULDING REHABILITATION HOSPITAL · PI TAYLOR, J ANDREW · 2008 to 2011
$1.4M
NHLBI NIH HHS HL093113NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL093113
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background and purposePrior work aimed at improving our understanding of human cerebral autoregulation has explored individual physiological mechanisms of autoregulation in isolation, but none has attempted to consolidate the individual roles of these mechanisms into a comprehensive model of the overall cerebral pressure-flow relationship.

methodsWe retrospectively analyzed this relationship before and after pharmacological blockade of α-adrenergic-, muscarinic-, and calcium channel-mediated mechanisms in 43 healthy volunteers to determine the relative contributions of the sympathetic, cholinergic, and myogenic controllers to cerebral autoregulation. Projection pursuit regression was used to assess the effect of pharmacological blockade on the cerebral pressure-flow relationship. Subsequently, ANCOVA decomposition was used to determine the cumulative effect of these 3 mechanisms on cerebral autoregulation and whether they can fully explain it.

resultsSympathetic, cholinergic, and myogenic mechanisms together accounted for 62% of the cerebral pressure-flow relationship (P<0.05), with significant and distinct contributions from each of the 3 effectors. ANCOVA decomposition demonstrated that myogenic effectors were the largest determinant of the cerebral pressure-flow relationship, but their effect was outside of the autoregulatory region where neurogenic control appeared prepotent.

conclusionsOur results suggest that myogenic effects occur outside the active region of autoregulation, whereas neurogenic influences are largely responsible for cerebral blood flow control within it. However, our model of cerebral autoregulation left 38% of the cerebral pressure-flow relationship unexplained, suggesting that there are other physiological mechanisms that contribute to cerebral autoregulation.

Indexed as

Models, CardiovascularAdrenergic alpha-AntagonistsAdultBlood Flow VelocityBlood PressureCalcium Channel BlockersCerebrovascular CirculationCholinergic AntagonistsFemaleHomeostasisHumansMaleMuscarinic AntagonistsSympathetic Nervous SystemAdrenergic alpha-AntagonistsCalcium Channel BlockersCholinergic AntagonistsMuscarinic Antagonistsautonomic pathwayscerebrovascular circulationstroke

Identifiers

PMID24723314
PMCPMC4102642
OpenAlexW2063930643

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.