ArticleExperimental neurology2026
Initiation site of experimentally-evoked spreading depolarizations influence tissue outcomes in a murine stroke model.
Article in Experimental neurology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Spreading depolarization waves (SDs) are implicated in secondary expansion of brain injuries and are the target for initial clinical intervention trials. However, the assumption that SD directly causes neuronal injury has been challenged by recent findings with experimentally-induced SD in stroke models. The current study addressed this controversy by examining whether stroke consequences are confounded by the precise location of experimental SD initiation. Focal ischemic lesions were generated by transient distal middle cerebral artery occlusion in male mice. Clusters of SDs (6 at 10-min intervals) were induced by either focal KCl application or optogenetic stimulation during occlusion. SDs were initiated either in regions close to the infarct core (penumbral-SD; <50% perfusion) or in less compromised tissue in the same hemisphere (remote-SD; >70% perfusion). Despite the fact that all SDs fully invaded stroke expansion areas, the location of experimental SD induction had significant effects on stroke outcomes measured 48 h after reperfusion. Penumbral-SDs resulted in larger infarct expansion than seen in control stroke mice lacking experimentally-imposed SD. Conversely, remote-SDs led to significantly smaller infarcts than stroke alone. Laser speckle contrast imaging of blood flow in injury expansion areas showed enhanced hypoperfusion responses after penumbral-SDs and larger hyperemic responses after remote-SDs, suggesting that differential vascular responses could contribute to stroke outcomes. Overall, this study helps to reconcile different prior reports by showing that experimentally-induced SDs can either exacerbate or reduce stroke-induced injury depending on the SD initiation site and further strengthens evidence for injurious roles of SDs initiating in vulnerable brain tissue.
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.