After intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH), brain edema commonly occurs and can cause death. Along with edema, there are significant alterations in the concentrations of key ions such as sodium, potassium, and chloride, which are essential to brain function. NKCC1, a cation-chloride cotransporter, is upregulated after brain damage, such as traumatic injury and ischemic stroke. NKCC1 brings sodium and chloride into the cell, possibly worsening ion dyshomeostasis. Bumetanide, a specific NKCC1 antagonist, blocks the transport of chloride into cells, and thus should attenuate the increases in chloride, which should lessen brain edema and improve neuronal functioning post-ICH, as with other injuries. We used the collagenase model of ICH to test whether bumetanide treatment for three days (vs. vehicle) would improve outcome. We gave bumetanide beginning at two hours or seven days post-ICH and measured behavioural outcome, edema, and brain ion content after treatment. There was some evidence for a minor reduction in edema after early dosing, but this did not improve behaviour or lessen injury. Contrary to our hypothesis, bumetanide did not normalize ion concentrations after late dosing. Bumetanide did not improve behavioural outcome or affect lesion volume. After ICH, bumetanide is safe to use in rats but does not improve functional outcome in the majority of animals.

Background: As not all ischemic stroke patients benefit from currently available treatments, there is considerable need for neuroprotective co-therapies. Therapeutic hypothermia is one such co-therapy, but numerous issues have hampered its clinical use (e.g., pneumonia risk with whole-body cooling). Some problems may be avoided with brain-specific methods, such as intra-arterial selective cooling infusion (IA-SCI) into the arteries supplying the ischemic tissue.Objective: Our research question was about the efficacy of IA-SCI in animal middle cerebral artery occlusion models. We hypothesized that IA-SCI would be beneficial, but translationally-relevant study elements may be missing (e.g., aged animals).Methods: We completed a systematic review of the PubMed database following the PRISMA guidelines on May 21, 2020 for animal studies that administered IA-SCI in the peri-reperfusion period and assessed infarct volume, behavior (primary meta-analytic endpoints), edema, or blood-brain barrier injury (secondary endpoints). Our search terms included: “focal ischemia” and related terms, “IA-SCI” and related terms, and “animal” and related terms. Nineteen studies met inclusion criteria. We adapted a methodological quality scale from 0 to 12 for experimental design assessment (e.g., use of blinding/randomization, a priori sample size calculations).Results: Studies were relatively homogenous (e.g., all studies used young, healthy animals). Some experimental design elements, such as blinding, were common whereas others, such as sample size calculations, were infrequent (median methodological quality score: 5; range: 2–7). Our analyses revealed that IA-SCI provides benefit on all endpoints (mean normalized infarct volume reduction = 23.67%; 95% CI: 19.21–28.12; mean normalized behavioral improvement = 35.56%; 95% CI: 25.91–45.20; mean standardized edema reduction = 0.95; 95% CI: 0.56–1.34). Unfortunately, blood-brain barrier assessments were uncommon and could not be analyzed. However, there was substantial statistical heterogeneity and relatively few studies. Therefore, exploration of heterogeneity via meta-regression using saline infusion parameters, study quality, and ischemic duration was inconclusive.Conclusion: Despite convincing evidence of benefit in ischemic stroke models, additional studies are required to determine the scope of benefit, especially when considering additional elements (e.g., dosing characteristics). As there is interest in using this treatment alongside current ischemic stroke therapies, more relevant animal studies will be critical to inform patient studies.