No abstract

The blood-brain barrier (BBB) is a dynamic component of the brain-vascular interface that maintains brain homeostasis and regulates solute permeability into brain tissue. The expression of tight junction proteins between adjacent endothelial cells and the presence of efflux proteins prevents entry of foreign substances into the brain parenchyma. BBB dysfunction, however, is evident in many neurological disorders including ischemic stroke, trauma, and chronic neurodegenerative diseases. Currently, major contributors to BBB dysfunction are not well understood. Here, we employed a multicellular 3D neurovascular unit organoid containing human brain microvascular endothelial cells, pericytes, astrocytes, microglia, oligodendrocytes and neurons to model the effects of hypoxia and neuroinflammation on BBB function. Organoids were cultured in hypoxic chamber with 0.1% O 2 for 24 hours. Organoids cultured under this hypoxic condition showed increased permeability, proinflammatory cytokine production, and increased oxidative stress. The anti-inflammatory agents, secoisolariciresinol diglucoside and 2-arachidonoyl glycerol, demonstrated protection by reducing inflammatory cytokine levels in the organoids under hypoxic conditions. Through the assessment of a free radical scavenger and an anti-inflammatory endocannabinoid, we hereby report the utility of the model in drug development for drug candidates that may reduce the effects of ROS and inflammation under disease conditions. This 3D organoid model recapitulates characteristics of BBB dysfunction under hypoxic physiological conditions and when exposed to exogenous neuroinflammatory mediators and hence may have potential in disease modeling and therapeutic development.

ImportanceIn patients with severe aortic valve stenosis at intermediate surgical risk, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with a self-expanding supra-annular valve was noninferior to surgery for all-cause mortality or disabling stroke at 2 years. Comparisons of longer-term clinical and hemodynamic outcomes in these patients are limited.ObjectiveTo report prespecified secondary 5-year outcomes from the Symptomatic Aortic Stenosis in Intermediate Risk Subjects Who Need Aortic Valve Replacement (SURTAVI) randomized clinical trial.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsSURTAVI is a prospective randomized, unblinded clinical trial. Randomization was stratified by investigational site and need for revascularization determined by the local heart teams. Patients with severe aortic valve stenosis deemed to be at intermediate risk of 30-day surgical mortality were enrolled at 87 centers from June 19, 2012, to June 30, 2016, in Europe and North America. Analysis took place between August and October 2021.InterventionPatients were randomized to TAVR with a self-expanding, supra-annular transcatheter or a surgical bioprosthesis.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe prespecified secondary end points of death or disabling stroke and other adverse events and hemodynamic findings at 5 years. An independent clinical event committee adjudicated all serious adverse events and an independent echocardiographic core laboratory evaluated all echocardiograms at 5 years.ResultsA total of 1660 individuals underwent an attempted TAVR (n = 864) or surgical (n = 796) procedure. The mean (SD) age was 79.8 (6.2) years, 724 (43.6%) were female, and the mean (SD) Society of Thoracic Surgery Predicted Risk of Mortality score was 4.5% (1.6%). At 5 years, the rates of death or disabling stroke were similar (TAVR, 31.3% vs surgery, 30.8%; hazard ratio, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.85-1.22]; P = .85). Transprosthetic gradients remained lower (mean [SD], 8.6 [5.5] mm Hg vs 11.2 [6.0] mm Hg; P < .001) and aortic valve areas were higher (mean [SD], 2.2 [0.7] cm2 vs 1.8 [0.6] cm2; P < .001) with TAVR vs surgery. More patients had moderate/severe paravalvular leak with TAVR than surgery (11 [3.0%] vs 2 [0.7%]; risk difference, 2.37% [95% CI, 0.17%- 4.85%]; P = .05). New pacemaker implantation rates were higher for TAVR than surgery at 5 years (289 [39.1%] vs 94 [15.1%]; hazard ratio, 3.30 [95% CI, 2.61-4.17]; log-rank P < .001), as were valve reintervention rates (27 [3.5%] vs 11 [1.9%]; hazard ratio, 2.21 [95% CI, 1.10-4.45]; log-rank P = .02), although between 2 and 5 years only 6 patients who underwent TAVR and 7 who underwent surgery required a reintervention.Conclusions and RelevanceAmong intermediate-risk patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis, major clinical outcomes at 5 years were similar for TAVR and surgery. TAVR was associated with superior hemodynamic valve performance but also with more paravalvular leak and valve reinterventions.

Physical rehabilitation is essential for enhancing recovery in individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI); however, aside from early surgical intervention and hemodynamic management, there are no proven interventions for promoting recovery in the acute phase. In general, early rehabilitation is considered beneficial, but optimal parameters and potential contraindications for implementing rehabilitation at very early time points are unclear. Moreover, clinical trials to date are limited to studies initiating rehabilitation 2 weeks after injury and later. To address these gaps, this article reviews the preclinical literature on physical interventions initiated within the first 8 days postinjury. Effects of early rehabilitation on molecular and structural nervous system changes, behavioral function, and body systems are considered. Most studies utilized treadmill or cycle training as the primary intervention. Treadmill training initiated within the first 3 days and terminated by 1 week after injury worsened autonomic function, inflammation, and locomotor outcomes, while swim training during this period increased microvascular dysfunction. In contrast, lower-intensity rehabilitation such as reach training, ladder training, or voluntary wheel or ball training showed benefits when implemented during the first 3 days. Rehabilitation initiated at 4 days postinjury was also associated with enhanced motor recovery. Cycling appears to have the greatest risk-benefit ratio; however, the effects of cycle training in the first 3 days were not investigated. Overall, research suggests that lower intensity or voluntary rehabilitation during the hyperacute phase is more appropriate until at least 4 days postinjury, at which point higher-intensity activity becomes safer and more beneficial for recovery.