Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Fig. 3 | Fluids and Barriers of the CNS

Fig. 3

From: Cerebral influx of Na+ and Cl as the osmotherapy-mediated rebound response in rats

Fig. 3

Inhibitors of ion-transporting mechanisms at the blood-side membranes do not affect water loss and electrolyte gain. a The arterial blood pressure was measured before and until 1 h after i.v. treatment with vehicle or inhibitors (10 mg/kg bumetanide, 6 mg/kg amiloride, and 20 mg/kg methazolamide). Values are given as the percentage of arterial blood pressure from the last control measurement (corresponding to 30 s before i.v. injection). The arterial blood pressure did not differ significantly from control measurements after 1 h (p > 0.90). The end arterial blood pressure was unchanged following inhibitor delivery, n = 3 of each, p > 0.90. b The brain water content was unaffected by i.v. inhibitor application in control rats [in (ml/g dry weight): vehicle: 3.79 ± 0.01 vs. inhibitors: 3.76 ± 0.01] and in rats subjected to NaCl-mediated osmotherapy (vehicle: 3.46 ± 0.01 vs. inhibitors: 3.45 ± 0.02), n = 7–9. Inset: Brain water content in osmotherapy-treated rats exposed to triple doses of vehicle (3.38 ± 0.02) or inhibitors (3.38 ± 0.02), n = 4 of each. c The brain Na+ content (in mmol/kg dry weight) in control rats (vehicle: 197 ± 1 vs. inhibitors: 194 ± 1) and in rats exposed to osmotherapy (vehicle: 227 ± 2 vs. inhibitors: 224 ± 3), n = 7–9. d The brain Cl content (in mmol/kg dry weight) in control rats (vehicle: 132 ± 3 vs. inhibitors: 131 ± 4) and in rats exposed to osmotherapy (vehicle: 173 ± 3 vs. inhibitors: 170 ± 4), n = 7–9. Vehicle values from control and osmotherapy-treated rats are from Fig. 2a–c and included for comparison. Statistically significant differences were determined by a two-way ANOVA with Tukey’s multiple comparisons post hoc test, except for values in the inset of b, which were analyzed using a two-tailed un-paired Student’s t-test. ns not significant

Back to article page