Donate Help Contact The AHA Sign In Home
American Heart Association
Stroke
Search: search_blue_button Advanced Search
Stroke. 2003;34:e152-e153
Published online before print August 21, 2003, doi: 10.1161/01.STR.0000087098.30644.E1
This Article
Right arrow Extract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
34/9/e152    most recent
01.STR.0000087098.30644.E1v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Zhang, J. H.
Right arrow Articles by Toole, J. F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Zhang, J. H.
Right arrow Articles by Toole, J. F.

(Stroke. 2003;34:e152.)
© 2003 American Heart Association, Inc.


Letters to the Editor

Oxygen Therapy in Ischemic Stroke

John H. Zhang, MD, PhD

Department of Neurosurgery, Louisiana State University-Health Science Center, Shreveport, Louisiana

Aneesh B. Singhal, MD

Department of Neurology, Harvard Medical School, Stroke Service, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts

James F. Toole, MD

Stroke Research Center, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina

To the Editor:

Previous studies of therapeutic oxygen in stroke have had conflicting results, and the latest study by Rusyniak et al1 seems to suggest that hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBO) is harmful in ischemic stroke. The authors have already discussed how several inadequacies in trial design might explain their negative results. We wish to draw attention to additional features in their study that might offer important insights into the design of future studies of oxygen in stroke.

The authors evaluated the safety, feasibility, and efficacy of using HBO in a sham-controlled pilot study of 33 patients with acute (<24 hours) ischemic stroke. The HBO group (17 patients) received 100% oxygen at 2.5 atm absolute (ATA), and the sham group (16 patients) received 100% oxygen at 1.14 ATA, both for 60 minutes. Outcomes were measures at 24 hours and 90 days using several clinical stroke scales. Complications related to the use of pressurized chambers were comparable in both groups. There was no difference in stroke outcomes at 24 hours; however, at 90 days a significantly higher percentage of patients in the sham group had good outcome. The authors conclude that their HBO protocol appears feasible and safe (ie, without significant pressure-related complications) but state that HBO might be harmful in patients with acute ischemic stroke.

As acknowledged by the authors, this study had a small number of patients, which limits data interpretation, and the negative results are probably attributable to factors like late timing of therapy and use of excessively high chamber pressures. It is well known that higher pressures, late timing, and longer duration of HBO produce harmful effects.2–5 In a recent animal study we found that HBO at 3 ATA for 60 minutes (similar to the present study) reduced infarct volumes and improved neurological outcomes when applied at 3 and 6 hours, but enhanced infarct volumes and aggravated neurological deficits when applied at 12 or 24 hours after the onset of reperfusion.6 If most patients in this pilot study were treated >12 hours after the onset of stroke (only 15% were treated within 6 hours), it is not surprising that a harmful effect of HBO was observed. Whether early HBO therapy (within 3 to 6 hours) affords benefit remains to be determined.

It is extremely important to note that the sham group was actually treated with 100% oxygen. There was no control group treated with room air at elevated atmospheric pressures, as in previous studies.2,3 We have compared the results of different oxygen pressures on brain protection in a neonatal rat model and found that oxygen therapies at 1, 1.5, and 3 ATA produced similar brain protection (measured by brain weight) in pups (Figure; for detailed methods see Ref. 7). Since this study only compared oxygen therapy at different pressures, it is misleading to conclude that HBO itself might be harmful—the only fair conclusion is that (within the limits of this protocol), oxygen therapy at 2.5 ATA is harmful as compared with oxygen therapy at 1.14 ATA.



View larger version (25K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Brain weight was measured at 2 weeks after neonatal hypoxia/ ischemia (7-day pup model: ligation of right common carotid artery then treated with 8% oxygen for 2 hours). Ipsilateral side (with common carotid artery ligation) is divided by contralateral side to calculate a percentage of brain loss. Normal control is usually 100% (98% in this case). Hypoxia produced severe brain loss to 55% (HI). Pressured oxygen (100%) at 3, 1.5, and 1 ATA produced similar brain protection and reversed brain loss to 77%, 82%, and 80%, respectively. Thus, oxygen at 1 ATA (normobaric hyperoxia) can prevent brain damage.

We were impressed by the excellent results in the sham group: 80% to 91% of patients had good outcome at 90 days, depending on the stroke scale used. Spontaneous reperfusion is common in patients with low NIHSS, and since 15 of 33 patients had NIHSS <7 at onset, factors such as reperfusion might have contributed. However, these excellent outcomes might not be simply fortuitous—an alternate possibility is that low-pressure oxygen therapy is, in fact, highly beneficial. Several recent animal studies have shown that short-duration normobaric oxygen therapy can be highly neuroprotective and does not increase oxidative stress, if started early after stroke onset.8–10 Maximum benefit was observed in the cerebral cortex.8–10 We ask whether the authors have any information regarding tissue perfusion status, stroke subtypes, and immediate response to oxygen treatment. This information would be extremely useful in analyzing why the sham group had such excellent outcomes.

References

1. Rusyniak DE, Kirk MA, May JD, Kao LW, Brizendine EJ, Welch JL, Cordell WH, Alonso RJ. Hyperbaric oxygen therapy in acute ischemic stroke: results of the hyperbaric oxygen in acute ischemic stroke trial pilot study. Stroke. 2003; 34: 571–574.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

2. Anderson DC, Bottini AG, Jagiella WM, Westphal B, Ford S, Rockswold GL, Loewenson RB. A pilot study of hyperbaric oxygen in the treatment of human stroke. Stroke. 1991; 22: 1137–1142.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

3. Nighoghossian N, Trouillas P, Adeleine P, Salord F. Hyperbaric oxygen in the treatment of acute ischemic stroke: a double-blind pilot study. Stroke. 1995; 26: 1369–1372.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

4. Blenkarn GD, Schanberg SM, Saltzman HA. Cerebral amines and acute hyperbaric oxygen toxicity. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1969; 166: 346–353.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

5. Weinstein PR, Anderson GG, Telles DA. Results of hyperbaric oxygen therapy during temporary middle cerebral artery occlusion in unanesthetized cats. Neurosurgery. 1987; 20: 518–524.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]

6. Badr AE, Yin W, Mychaskiw G, Zhang JH. Dual effect of HBO on cerebral infarction in MCAO rats. Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol. 2001; 280: R766–R770.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

7. Calvert J, Yin W, Patel M, Badr A, Mychaskiw G, Parent A, Zhang J. Hyperbaric oxygenation prevented brain injury induced by hypoxia-ischemia in a neonatal rat model. Brain Res. 2002; 951: 1–8.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]

8. Singhal AB, Dijkhuizen RM, Rosen BR, Lo EH. Normobaric hyperoxia reduces MRI diffusion abnormalities and infarct size in experimental stroke. Neurology. 2002; 58: 945–952.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

9. Singhal AB, Wang X, Sumii T, Mori T, Lo EH. Effects of normobaric hyperoxia in a rat model of focal cerebral ischemia-reperfusion. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2002; 22: 861–868.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]

10. Flynn EP, Auer RN. Eubaric hyperoxemia and experimental cerebral infarction. Ann Neurol. 2002; 52: 566–572.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]





This Article
Right arrow Extract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
34/9/e152    most recent
01.STR.0000087098.30644.E1v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Zhang, J. H.
Right arrow Articles by Toole, J. F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Zhang, J. H.
Right arrow Articles by Toole, J. F.