Neuroligin-3 (Nlgn3), a neuronal adhesion protein implicated in autism spectrum disorder (ASD), is expressed at excitatory and inhibitory postsynapses and hence may regulate neuronal excitation/inhibition balance. To test this hypothesis, we recorded field excitatory postsynaptic potentials (fEPSPs) in the dentate gyrus of Nlgn3 knockout (KO) and wild-type mice. Synaptic transmission evoked by perforant path stimulation was reduced in KO mice, but coupling of the fEPSP to the population spike was increased, suggesting a compensatory change in granule cell excitability. These findings closely resemble those in neuroligin-1 (Nlgn1) KO mice and could be partially explained by the reduction in Nlgn1 levels we observed in hippocampal synaptosomes from Nlgn3 KO mice. However, unlike Nlgn1, Nlgn3 is not necessary for long-term potentiation. We conclude that while Nlgn1 and Nlgn3 have distinct functions, both are required for intact synaptic transmission in the mouse dentate gyrus. Our results indicate that interactions between neuroligins may play an important role in regulating synaptic transmission and that ASD-related neuroligin mutations may also affect the synaptic availability of other neuroligins.

Acute brain injuries such as intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) and ischemic stroke have been reported in critically ill COVID-19 patients as well as in patients treated with veno-venous (VV)-ECMO independently of their COVID-19 status. The purpose of this study was to compare critically ill COVID-19 patients with and without VV-ECMO treatment with regard to acute neurological symptoms, pathological neuroimaging findings (PNIF) and long-term deficits. The single center study was conducted in critically ill COVID-19 patients between February 1, 2020 and June 30, 2021. Demographic, clinical and laboratory parameters were extracted from the hospital’s databases. Retrospective imaging modalities included head computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Follow-up MRI and neurological examinations were performed on survivors > 6 months after the primary occurrence. Of the 440 patients, 67 patients received VV-ECMO treatment (15%). Sixty-four patients (24 with VV-ECMO) developed acute neurological symptoms (pathological levels of arousal/brain stem function/motor responses) during their ICU stay and underwent neuroimaging with brain CT as the primary modality. Critically ill COVID-19 patients who received VV-ECMO treatment had a significantly lower survival during their hospital stay compared to those without (p < 0.001). Among patients treated with VV-ECMO, 10% showed acute PNIF in one of the imaging modalities during their ICU stay (vs. 4% of patients in the overall COVID-19 ICU cohort). Furthermore, 9% showed primary or secondary ICH of any severity (vs. 3% overall), 6% exhibited severe ICH (vs. 1% overall) and 1.5% were found to have non-hemorrhagic cerebral infarctions (vs. < 1% overall). There was a weak, positive correlation between patients treated with VV-ECMO and the development of acute neurological symptoms. However, the association between the VV-ECMO treatment and acute PNIF was negligible. Two survivors (one with VV-ECMO-treatment/one without) showed innumerable microhemorrhages, predominantly involving the juxtacortical white matter. None of the survivors exhibited diffuse leukoencephalopathy. Every seventh COVID-19 patient developed acute neurological symptoms during their ICU stay, but only every twenty-fifth patient had PNIF which were mostly ICH. VV-ECMO was found to be a weak risk factor for neurological complications (resulting in a higher imaging rate), but not for PNIF. Although logistically complex, repeated neuroimaging should, thus, be considered in all critically ill COVID-19 patients since ICH may have an impact on the treatment decisions and outcomes.

No abstract

Veno-venous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (VV-ECMO) therapy has become increasingly used and established in many hospitals as a routine treatment. With ECMO-therapy being a resource-demanding procedure, it is of interest whether a more prolonged VV-ECMO treatment would hold sufficient therapeutic success. Our retrospective study included all VV-ECMO runs from 1 January 2020 to 31 June 2022. We divided all runs into four groups (<14 days, 14–27, 28–49, 50+) of different durations and looked for differences overall in hospital survival. Additionally, corresponding treatments and therapeutic modalities, as well as laboratory results, were analyzed. We included 117 patients. Of those, 97 (82.9%) received a VV-ECMO treatment longer than two weeks. We did not find a significant association between ECMO duration (p = 0.15) and increased mortality though a significant correlation between the patients’ age and their probability of survival (p = 0.02). Notably, we found significantly lower interleukin-6 levels with an increase in therapy duration (p < 0.01). Our findings show no association between the duration of ECMO therapy and mortality. Thus, the treatment duration alone may not be used for making assumptions about the prospect of survival. However, attention is also increasingly focused on long-term outcomes, such as post-intensive care syndrome with severe impairments.