ArticleFrontiers in systems neuroscience2021
Contribution of Brain Processes to Tissue Loss After Spinal Cord Injury: Does a Pain-Induced Rise in Blood Pressure Fuel Hemorrhage?
Article in Frontiers in systems neuroscience, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Measurement of blood pressure in rats: Invasive or noninvasive methods?Physiological reports · 2024Review
- Updating perspectives on spinal cord function: motor coordination, timing, relational processing, and memory below the brain.Frontiers in systems neuroscience · 2024Review
- General Anesthesia Blocks Pain-Induced Hemorrhage and Locomotor Deficits After Spinal Cord Injury in Rats.Journal of neurotrauma · 2023Article
- Review
- Noxious Stimulation Induces Acute Hemorrhage and Impairs Long-Term Recovery after Spinal Cord Injury (SCI) in Female Rats: Evidence Estrous Cycle May Have a Modulatory Effect.Neurotrauma reports · 2022Article
- The effect of concurrent neural injuries on hemorrhage.Frontiers in neurologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Pain (nociceptive) input soon after spinal cord injury (SCI) expands the area of tissue loss (secondary injury) and impairs long-term recovery. Evidence suggests that nociceptive stimulation has this effect because it promotes acute hemorrhage. Disrupting communication with the brain blocks this effect. The current study examined whether rostral systems exacerbate tissue loss because pain input drives an increase in systolic blood pressure (BP) and flow that fuels blood infiltration. Rats received a moderate contusion injury to the lower thoracic (T12) spinal cord. Communication with rostral processes was disrupted by cutting the spinal cord 18 h later at T2. Noxious electrical stimulation (shock) applied to the tail (Experiment 1), or application of the irritant capsaicin to one hind paw (Experiment 2), increased hemorrhage at the site of injury. Shock, but not capsaicin, increased systolic BP and tail blood flow in sham-operated rats. Cutting communication with the brain blocked the shock-induced increase in systolic BP and tail blood flow. Experiment 3 examined the effect of artificially driving a rise in BP with norepinephrine (NE) in animals that received shock. Spinal transection attenuated hemorrhage in vehicle-treated rats. Treatment with NE drove a robust increase in BP and tail blood flow but did not increase the extent of hemorrhage. The results suggest pain input after SCI can engage rostral processes that fuel hemorrhage and drive sustained cardiovascular output. An increase in BP was not, however, necessary or sufficient to drive hemorrhage, implicating other brain-dependent processes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.