Hydrogenology
Hydrogenology editorial study record

Inhalation of high concentration hydrogen gas improves short-term outcomes in a rat model of asphyxia induced-cardiac arrest

Huang L, Applegate RL II, Applegate PM, Boling W, Zhang JH. · Medical Gas Research. 2018;8(3):73–78.

PreclinicalInhaled H₂Published 2018
Study record, not medical adviceThis page reports one source and Hydrogenology’s source-text extraction. It does not establish that molecular hydrogen is effective, safe or appropriate for any person. Human, animal and laboratory evidence must not be treated as equivalent.
Source and classification

What kind of evidence is this?

Evidence stream

Preclinical

Reported design

Two-experiment rat asphyxial-cardiac-arrest study comparing post-treatment with pre-plus-post treatment

Research topic

Critical care and ischemia-reperfusion

Administration classification

Inhaled H₂

Study result signal

Not reported in this record.

Outcome type

Not reported in this record.

Reported in the source

Methods at a glance

Population or model

56 older male Sprague-Dawley rats subjected to nine or eleven minutes of asphyxia and cardiopulmonary resuscitation.

Sample

Experiment I: untreated n=13, post-treatment n=13 and pre-plus-post n=12. Experiment II: untreated n=9 and pre-plus-post n=9.

Duration

One-hour pre- and post-treatment or two-hour post-treatment; neurological observations through 72 hours and survival through seven days.

Intervention

One hour before plus one hour after resuscitation, or two hours beginning one hour after resuscitation, in a hydrogen-treatment chamber.

Hydrogen form

Water-electrolysis oxyhydrogen source. The chamber was monitored at 60% H₂; the exact delivered O₂ percentage was not reported, so the exposure is not relabeled as a confirmed 60:30 Brown's-gas mixture.

H₂ specification

The generator was described as capable of 67% H₂/33% O₂ at 2–3 L/min, but the experiment used a monitored chamber concentration of 60% H₂ without stating the actual intervention flow or chamber O₂ concentration.

H₂ flow

Not reported — the device capability of 2–3 L/min is not treated as the actual experimental flow.

O₂ delivered with H₂

Generated O₂ was co-delivered, but the exact chamber percentage and mL/min flow were not reported.

Comparator

Cardiac arrest without chamber H₂ treatment; no matched chamber-gas exposure was described.

Reported, not endorsed

Outcomes and reported result

Outcomes measured

Return of spontaneous circulation, hemodynamics, seizures, neurological-deficit score, body weight and seven-day survival.

Reported result

Most comparisons were trends rather than statistically confirmed benefits. In the nine-minute model, neurological scores, seizures and seven-day survival did not differ significantly. In the eleven-minute model, resuscitation success, seizures and overall mortality numerically favored H₂, but none reached statistical significance; hemodynamics and body-weight changes were also largely null.

Results-extraction completeness

The complete free PMC article, tables and figures were checked for both experiments, group allocation, exposure details, the distinction between device capability and actual flow, positive-direction trends, null findings, limitations, funding and conflicts.

A reported association, difference or mechanism is not automatically a clinical benefit. Null findings, outcome type, study design and precision all matter.

Interpretation limits

Cautions and applicability

Design and reporting cautions

Small male-rat groups, pre-treatment has limited clinical realism, no matched chamber control, severe-model attrition after failed resuscitation, only two schedules and predominantly nonsignificant outcomes. A Loma Linda anesthesiology endowment funded the study; authors declared no conflicts and identified the commercial generator manufacturer.

Applies directly to

Experimental asphyxial cardiac arrest in rats; it does not establish neurological or survival benefit after human cardiac arrest.

Preliminary appraisal framework

Not reported in this record.

Preliminary risk-of-bias status

Not reported in this record.

Appraisal rationale

Not reported in this record.

No single-study GRADE certainty rating is assigned. Certainty is assessed by important outcome across a complete eligible evidence set, not by attaching a final grade to one source.

Provenance

Sources and record status

Identifiers

PMID: 30319760 · DOI: 10.4103/2045-9912.241063

Publisher access

Free full article in PubMed Central.

Extraction basis

Complete PMC article and PubMed metadata; full-text extraction checked 9 August 2026.

Record revision

2026-08-10