308 research outputs found
The Differential Effects of Acute Right- vs. Left-Sided Vestibular Deafferentation on Spatial Cognition in Unilateral Labyrinthectomized Mice
This study aimed to investigate the disparity in locomotor and spatial memory deficits caused by left- or right-sided unilateral vestibular deafferentation (UVD) using a mouse model of unilateral labyrinthectomy (UL) and to examine the effects of galvanic vestibular stimulation (GVS) on the deficits over 14 days. Five experimental groups were established: the left-sided and right-sided UL (Lt.-UL and Rt.-UL) groups, left-sided and right-sided UL with bipolar GVS with the cathode on the lesion side (Lt.-GVS and Rt.-GVS) groups, and a control group with sham surgery. We assessed the locomotor and cognitive-behavioral functions using the open field (OF), Y maze, and Morris water maze (MWM) tests before (baseline) and 3, 7, and 14 days after surgical UL in each group. On postoperative day (POD) 3, locomotion and spatial working memory were more impaired in the Lt.-UL group compared with the Rt.-UL group (p < 0.01, Tamhane test). On POD 7, there was a substantial difference between the groups; the locomotion and spatial navigation of the Lt.-UL group recovered significantly more slowly compared with those of the Rt.-UL group. Although the differences in the short-term spatial cognition and motor coordination were resolved by POD 14, the long-term spatial navigation deficits assessed by the MWM were significantly worse in the Lt.-UL group compared with the Rt.-UL group. GVS intervention accelerated the vestibular compensation in both the Lt.-GVS and Rt.-GVS groups in terms of improvement of locomotion and spatial cognition. The current data imply that right- and left-sided UVD impair spatial cognition and locomotion differently and result in different compensatory patterns. Sequential bipolar GVS when the cathode (stimulating) was assigned to the lesion side accelerated recovery for UVD-induced spatial cognition, which may have implications for managing the patients with spatial cognitive impairment, especially that induced by unilateral peripheral vestibular damage on the dominant side
Comparison of infarct-related artery vs multivessel revascularization in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction with multivessel disease: Analysis from Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry
Background: Many ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients have
multivessel disease. There is still controversy in treatment strategy in STEMI patients with
multivessel disease. We compared clinical outcomes of multivessel revascularization with infarct-
related artery (IRA) revascularization in STEMI patients.
Methods: The 1,644 STEMI patients with multivessel disease (1,106 in IRA group, 538 in
multivessel group) who were received primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were
analyzed from a nationwide Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry. Primary endpoint
was 12-month major adverse cardiac events (MACE, defined as death, myocardial infarction,
and repeated revascularization). Secondary endpoints were 1-month MACE and each component,
stent thrombosis during 12 month follow-up, and each components of the 12-month
MACE.
Results: There were more patients with unfavorable baseline conditions in IRA group.
12-month MACE occurred in 165 (14.9%) patients in IRA group, 81 (15.1%) patients in
multivessel group (p = 0.953). There were no statistical significance in the rate of 1-month
MACE, each components of 1-month MACE, and stent thrombosis during 12 month follow-up.
Each components of 12-month MACE were occurred similarly in both groups except for target
lesion revascularization (2.4% in IRA group vs 5.9% in multivessel group, p < 0.0001). After
adjusting for confounding factors, multivessel revascularization was not associated with reduced
12-month MACE (OR 1.096, 95% CI 0.676–1.775, p = 0.711).
Conclusions: There were no significant differences in clinical outcomes between both groups
except for high risk of target lesion revascularization in multivessel revascularization group
- ā¦