Nimodipine in Animal Model Experiments of Focal Cerebral Ischemia

Abstract

Background and Purpose-Based on the results of animal experiments, clinical trials were performed with nimodipine, which did not demonstrate a beneficial effect on outcome after stroke. The aim of this study was to determine whether the evidence from animal experiments with nimodipine supported the use of nimodipine in clinical trials. Methods-We performed a systematic review of animal experiments with nimodipine in focal cerebral ischemia. Studies were identified by searching Medline and Embase. We assessed whether these studies showed a beneficial effect of active treatment. In-depth analyses were performed on infarct size and amount of edema, and subgroup analyses were performed on the length of the time window to the initiation of treatment and the methodological quality of the studies. Results-Of 225 identified articles, 20 studies were included. The methodological quality of the studies was poor. Of the included studies, 50% were in favor of nimodipine. In-depth analyses showed statistically significant effects in favor of treatment (10 studies). No influence of the length of time to the initiation of treatment or of the methodological quality on the results was found. Conclusions-We conclude that the results of this review did not show convincing evidence to substantiate the decision to perform trials with nimodipine in large numbers of patients. There were no differences between the results of the animal experiments and clinical studies. Surprisingly, we found that animal experiments and clinical studies ran simultaneously.

Systematic Review and Metaanalysis of the Efficacy of FK506 in Experimental Stroke

“…The reported methodological quality of individual studies was scored against the following criteria: publication after peer review; statement of control of temperature; random allocation to treatment or control; masked induction of ischaemia; masked assessment of outcome; use of anaesthetic without significant intrinsic neuroprotective activity; appropriate animal model (aged, diabetic or hypertensive); sample size calculation; compliance with animal welfare regulations; statement of potential conflict of interests (Horn et al, 2001;Macleod et al, 2004). Each study was given a quality score out of a possible total of 10 points, and the group median was calculated.…”

Neuroprotection for ischemic stroke: Past, present and future

“…A careful survey of this literature, however, was able to identify only 20 controlled animal studies of focal cerebral ischemia in which nimodipine was administered after the induction of ischemia and its consequences assessed (Horn et al, 2001b). Ten of these studies reported a positive outcome, but 10 did not; in the 7 studies in which exact infarct-size data were presented, the pooled effect size (standardized mean difference) favoring nimodipine was −1.2 (Horn et al, 2001b). In several of the positive studies, nimodipine treatment was initiated within the first 15 minutes after onset of ischemia.…”

Extracellular vesicles derived from mesenchymal stromal cells may possess increased therapeutic potential for acute kidney injury compared with conditioned medium in rodent models: A meta-analysis

“…Therefore, further animal experiments involving different species are necessary in order to assess the safety and efficiency of CM/Evs therapy, prior to human clinical trials. Meta-analysis of animal studies was not common, yet they were recommended in several settings (33)(34)(35), and could often guide research (36), even clinical endeavors. Based on the present meta-analysis, our recommendations for MSCs cell-free MSCs therapy (CM/Evs) for AKI are as follows: i) Compared with CM, Evs have the priority as they possess greater therapeutic potential; ii) the time point of treatment should be as early as possible after injury; iii) the therapeutic effects may emerge at a later time; and iv) the delivery route could not affect the therapeutic effects.…”