Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34975424›Full record

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?

Gizelle N K Fauss, Misty M Strain, Yung-Jen Huang, Joshua A Reynolds, Jacob A Davis, Melissa K Henwood, Christopher R West, James W Grau

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 29% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Gizelle N K FaussDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, United States.
Misty M StrainDepartment of Cellular and Integrative Physiology, University of Texas Health Science San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, United States.
Yung-Jen HuangSundia MediTech Co., Ltd., Shanghai, China.
Joshua A ReynoldsDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, United States.
Jacob A DavisDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, United States.
Melissa K HenwoodDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, United States.
Christopher R WestCentre for Chronic Disease Prevention and Management, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Kelowna, BC, Canada.
James W GrauDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, United States.
Texas A&M University · USThe University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio · USUniversity of British Columbia · CA

Funding

Nociceptive input after spinal cord injury (SCI) expands the region of secondary injury and undermines long-term recoveryR01NS104422 · NINDS · TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY · PI GRAU, JAMES WILLIAM · 2018 to 2022
$1.5M
NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS104422
6 · The paper itself

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

blood pressurecardiovascular functionhemorrhagenorepinepherinepainpolytraumaspinal cord injuryspinal transection

Identifiers

PMID34975424
PMCPMC8714654
OpenAlexW4200090172

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.