Talk:Cardiovascular centre

Neuroscience Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Neuroscience, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Neuroscience on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NeuroscienceWikipedia:WikiProject NeuroscienceTemplate:WikiProject Neuroscienceneuroscience articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Physiology Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physiology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physiology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysiologyWikipedia:WikiProject PhysiologyTemplate:WikiProject PhysiologyPhysiology articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
	This article has been classified as relating to the physiology of the heart.

More Research Needed

Wow who ever wrote this really needs to do some more research!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.92.97.212 (talk • contribs) 04:45, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

consequences of damage

Apart from the question if there is actually one "cardiovasular" unit in the brainstem or a collection of several nuclei controlling distinct aspects of it - what would be the consequences if that system gets damaged by things like stroke, craniocervical injury, brain herniation or intoxication?

As the heart is principally capable of maintaining a stable rhythm without nervous control, one might assume that it will continue beating with a fixed rate even when the entire CNS loses its function. However this doesn't seem to be the case, as those with injuries like atlanto-occipital dislocation often experience cardiac arrhythmias and arrests even in the presence of mechanical ventilation. So damage ot the "cardiac" part - if it exists as a distinct subunit - appears to be potentially fatal. Loss of function to the "vascular" part of the system should lead to neurogenic shock, similarly to spinal cord injury but with involvement of the parasympathetic nervous system as well. So it would probably resemble a high-dose ganglionic blocker intoxication, but with less involvement of the gastrointestinal system. If other centers of the lower brainstem are damaged as well, that would add widespread paralysis and sensory loss alongside respiratory arrest, which should be the main cause of death unless the patient receives mechanical ventilation.

So far these are the results of my little research. One might add a section about "clinical significance" into the article - but the problem is that isolated damage to this neural system is likely very rare. It usually appears to be part of more widespread brainstem dysfunction following injuries of all kinds to the medulla oblongata. And as such it is confounded with other neurological symptoms ranging from minor cranial nerve paresis to respiratory paralysis. Consequently, it would be more appropriate to add such a section in the article "medulla oblongata" than here...

This in turn popped up another question in my mind: In how far can we write a separate article about the "cardiovascular center" when we can't really separate its function and pathology from that of the medulla oblongata as a whole? Another article named "cardiac center" has already been deleted and redirected to "medulla oblongata", but the latter gives little information about a "cardiac center". So I'm unsure if this article here should be expanded or merged into "medulla oblongata" but without losing its present content... --2003:E7:7727:B621:61C1:C094:6183:8232 (talk) 17:28, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]