Skip to content

SANS Research Cluster — FO's Contribution to Spaceflight-Associated Neuro-ocular Syndrome

Four FO projects, four institutions, one syndrome — how suborbital and parabolic flights enabled NASA's understanding of SANS.

Created: Session 35, 2026-04-06
Last updated: Session 35, 2026-04-06

What Is SANS?

Spaceflight-Associated Neuro-ocular Syndrome (SANS) affects ~50% of astronauts on long-duration missions. Symptoms include optic disc edema, globe flattening, choroidal folds, and hyperopic shifts — collectively threatening vision on missions to the Moon and Mars. The underlying mechanism is debated: leading hypotheses involve cephalad fluid shift, elevated intracranial pressure (ICP), and impaired venous drainage in microgravity.

SANS is one of NASA's top human health risks for exploration missions. Flight Opportunities funded four complementary projects that attacked the problem from different angles — diagnostics, basic physiology, non-invasive monitoring, and clinical protocols. Together they form a research cluster that has shaped NASA's current SANS countermeasure strategy.

The Four FO Projects

# FO Project Institution PI Approach TRL Period
1 12464 Wyle Laboratories (NASA JSC contractor) Douglas Ebert Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) — retinal imaging 4→6 2013–2016
2 93937 UT Southwestern Medical Center Benjamin Levine Intracranial Pressure (ICP) — direct invasive measurement 6→7 2014–2015
3 93962 Massachusetts General Hospital / Harvard Gary Strangman NINscan — near-infrared cerebral hemodynamics monitoring 4→7 2014–2017
4 94139 Henry Ford Health System Scott Dulchavsky Ultrasound protocols — non-invasive IOP and brain pressure 4→8 2013–2016

Temporal clustering: All four projects ran between 2013–2017. This was not coincidence — NASA's Human Research Program (HRP) identified SANS (then called VIIP) as a priority risk around 2011–2012, and FO provided the parabolic flight access these teams needed.

What Each Project Contributed

1. Wyle OCT — The Diagnostic Standard

What it did: Validated OCT hardware for retinal imaging in the altered-gravity environment of parabolic flight. OCT measures retinal nerve fiber layer thickness and optic disc morphology — the primary clinical signs of SANS.

Key result: OCT became the standard ISS crew health diagnostic for SANS monitoring (ISS Investigation #1146). Flight surgeons now routinely image astronaut retinas using equipment validated through this FO work.

Downstream pipeline: - FO parabolic flights (2013–2016) → ISS deployment (Investigation #1146) → Mini OCT project 157621 for Artemis (TRL 5→9, 2022–2029) - This is the clearest FO→ISS→Artemis pipeline in the entire portfolio - 6+ publications including Patel et al. JAMA Ophthalmology 2018, SANS-CNN ML detection (npj Microgravity 2024)

KB page: organizations/wyle-oct-sans.md

2. UT Southwestern ICP — The Paradigm Shift

What it did: Made the first direct invasive measurement of intracranial pressure in microgravity. PI Levine identified a unique volunteer population: cancer patients with implanted Ommaya reservoirs (ports drilled into the skull for chemotherapy delivery). These patients allowed real-time pressure measurement during parabolic flight maneuvers.

Key finding: ICP in microgravity ≈ ICP in the supine position on Earth. This contradicted NASA's working hypothesis that ICP rises dramatically in 0g. The real problem is not acute ICP elevation but the chronic inability to unload — astronauts never stand up, so they never get the gravitational ICP reduction that normally occurs ~16 hours/day.

Countermeasure developed: Lower Body Negative Pressure (LBNP) sleeping bag, developed with REI. Applied at ~20 mmHg during sleep, it simulates the gravitational unloading of standing. Validated in Hearon et al. JAMA Ophthalmology 2021.

Downstream impact: - Shifted NASA's SANS countermeasure strategy from "reduce pressure" to "enable unloading" - 4+ publications (J Physiol 2019, J Appl Physiol 2020, JAMA Ophthalmology 2021) - Terrestrial dual-use: LBNP for traumatic brain injury patients - International collaboration: Copenhagen, Innsbruck, Dallas, Melbourne, Seattle - FO-to-countermeasure gap: 7 years (2014 flight → 2021 validation)

KB page: organizations/ut-southwestern-icp.md

3. MGH NINscan — The Continuous Monitor

What it did: Validated NINscan 4a, a wearable near-infrared neuroimaging device that measures cerebral blood oxygenation and flow continuously at 250 Hz. Unlike OCT (a point-in-time snapshot) or ICP (invasive), NINscan provides ambulatory 24-hour monitoring.

Key result: +3 TRL gain (4→7) — among the highest for any FO health project. The device demonstrated reliable cerebral hemodynamic measurements through parabolic flight acceleration cycles.

Downstream impact: - 4+ peer-reviewed publications (J Applied Physiology 2017, J Biomedical Optics 2014, 2016); ~6 BRAIN-SANS manuscripts in preparation (expected late 2026) - BRAIN-SANS 8-modality ICP suite deployed at DLR :envihab — DPOAE, IJV/carotid ultrasound, NIRS, cerebrovascular pulsatility, sagittal sinus imaging, cerebral water/CSF, temporal artery tonometry, EEG. Most comprehensive non-invasive ICP platform in the field. - LBNP countermeasure arm included in BRAIN-SANS study (4 arms: HDT alone, seated CM, LBNP, exercise+VTC). Preliminary IWS2024 finding: LBNP significantly reduced chest blood volume. This parallels UTSW's LBNP sleeping bag work. - Related JSC/KBR papers (Marshall-Goebel, Lytle et al., 2024–2026) validate the IJV/ICP monitoring problem that NINscan addresses. - NINscan-SE listed in Epilepsy Foundation Device Wiki for seizure-related vascular monitoring - No commercial product — illustrates the "research adoption without commercialization" pattern common in medical devices

KB page: organizations/mgh-ninscan.md

4. Henry Ford Ultrasound — The Clinical Protocol

What it did: Tested 3 prototype devices for non-invasive IOP and brain pressure measurement in microgravity. PI Dulchavsky focused not on inventing new hardware but on developing protocols — procedures for non-physician crew to perform diagnostic ultrasound with remote physician guidance.

Key result: TRL 4→8 (+4 gain, highest in the SANS cluster). The ultrasound protocols were adopted for ISS crew health monitoring, enabling flight surgeons to remotely diagnose crew members.

Downstream impact: - ISS ultrasound protocols in operational use - Telemedicine/humanitarian extension: Dulchavsky's "NASA training" protocol deployed in sub-Saharan Africa surgical missions, remote communities, and disaster response - Described by NASA as "Ultrasound Scans in Space Transform Medicine on Earth" - No commercial spinoff, no SBIR lineage, no follow-on contracts — impact is purely through protocol adoption - This is the clearest FO → clinical impact (non-commercial) pathway in the portfolio

KB page: organizations/henry-ford-health.md

How the Four Projects Complement Each Other

Dimension Wyle OCT UTSW ICP MGH NINscan Henry Ford Ultrasound
What it measures Retinal structure (RNFL thickness, optic disc) Intracranial pressure (direct, invasive) Cerebral blood oxygenation/flow (continuous) Intraocular/brain pressure (non-invasive)
Measurement type Snapshot (clinic visit) Point measurement (invasive) Continuous ambulatory (24h) Operator-guided (remote)
Role in SANS Diagnosis (detect the symptoms) Mechanism (understand the cause) Monitoring (track changes over time) Screening (low-barrier crew health check)
TRL gain +2 (4→6) +1 (6→7) +3 (4→7) +4 (4→8)
ISS deployment? Yes — Investigation #1146 No (countermeasure in development) No (clinical adoption only) Yes — ultrasound protocols
Artemis path? Yes — Mini OCT [157621] Yes — LBNP sleeping bag Possible — if continuous monitoring needed Possible — protocol extension
Publications 6+ 4+ 4+ 1+
Commercial product? No (ISS infrastructure) No (research) No (research adoption) No (protocol adoption)

Key insight: No single project solved SANS. Together, they provide the diagnostic toolkit (OCT for detection, ultrasound for screening), the mechanistic understanding (ICP measurements), and the monitoring capability (NINscan) that NASA needs for Artemis. LBNP as a countermeasure is now tested by two FO-origin research programs — UTSW (sleeping bag, analog validation) and MGH (BRAIN-SANS LBNP arm, :envihab bedrest) — creating convergent evidence. Additionally, JSC/KBR's independent parabolic flight IJV studies (2024–2026) further validate the importance of the monitoring problem.

Cluster-Level Findings

1. FO as a Medical Research Platform

Parabolic flight is uniquely suited for acute microgravity medical studies: short 0g periods (~20 seconds) allow rapid before/during/after comparisons, healthy or patient volunteers can participate without spaceflight training, and the turnaround time from proposal to data is months rather than years. FO enabled all four teams to collect microgravity data that would have been impractical or impossible on ISS.

2. The Non-Commercial Impact Pattern

None of the four SANS projects produced a commercial product. Yet their collective impact is substantial: ISS operational diagnostics, a countermeasure approaching deployment, 15+ peer-reviewed publications, and a terrestrial humanitarian extension. This challenges portfolio evaluation approaches that equate "impact" with "commercialization."

3. Publication Density

The four SANS projects produced 15+ peer-reviewed publications — roughly 4 per project. For comparison, the typical FO industry project produces 0–1 publications. Health/biomedical FO projects are disproportionately paper-productive because the research community values journal publication, and parabolic flight data is genuinely novel.

4. The 50% Astronaut Incidence Problem

SANS affecting ~50% of long-duration astronauts makes it a mission-limiting risk for Artemis and Mars. The FO SANS cluster represents one of the few areas where FO directly addresses a top-priority human spaceflight risk. If LBNP sleeping bags or similar countermeasures prove effective, the FO→UTSW→operational chain will be one of the program's highest-impact stories.

5. Temporal Coordination

All four projects were funded in 2013–2014 and completed by 2017. This clustering suggests deliberate programmatic coordination — FO and HRP likely coordinated the call for proposals. The result was a multi-institutional, multi-approach attack on a single problem, which is unusual for FO (most technologies are isolated).

Open Questions

  1. LBNP sleeping bag ISS testing: Has the UTSW LBNP sleeping bag been tested on ISS? If so, what were the results? This would elevate the countermeasure from "validated in analog" to "validated in the target environment."
  2. Mini OCT timeline: The Artemis Mini OCT project [157621] targets TRL 9 by 2029. Is it on track?
  3. NINscan successor / BRAIN-SANS: Strangman's 8-modality suite (DPOAE + ultrasound + NIRS + LBNP + EEG + more) is the most comprehensive non-invasive ICP platform deployed. Will any of this be proposed for Artemis crew monitoring? HRP grant ended Mar 2026 — watch for follow-on.
  4. LBNP convergence: UTSW and MGH both include LBNP as a SANS countermeasure, with JSC/KBR providing independent parabolic flight validation. Are these teams collaborating, or working independently toward the same conclusion?
  5. Integration: Have any of these teams collaborated since their FO projects? A combined OCT + NINscan + ultrasound monitoring suite would be more powerful than any individual tool.
  6. NASA HRP priority ranking: Where does SANS currently stand in HRP's risk priority list? Has the FO cluster work changed the risk posture?

Cross-References

This page synthesizes findings from Sessions 3 (Henry Ford), 4 (MGH NINscan), 27 (Wyle OCT, UT Southwestern), 34 (UTSW refresh), and 84 (NINscan refresh — BRAIN-SANS 8-modality suite, HRP grant closeout, LBNP arm, JSC/KBR IJV papers). The cluster was identified as a connected research program in Session 34.