4.3 Article

Pericontusion Axon Sprouting Is Spatially and Temporally Consistent With a Growth-Permissive Environment After Traumatic Brain Injury

期刊

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1097/NEN.0b013e3181cb5bee

关键词

Axon sprouting; Brain-derived neurotrophic factor; Brain trauma; Chondroitin sulfate proteoglycan; Fibronectin; GAP43; Neuroplasticity; Perineuronal nets

资金

  1. National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke [R01 NS055910]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We previously reported that pericontusional extracellular chondroitin Sulfate proteoglycans (CSPGs) are profoundly reduced for 3 weeks after experimental traumatic brain injury, indicating a potential growth-permissive window for plasticity. Here, we investigate the extracellular environment of sprouting neurons after controlled cortical impact injury in adult rats to determine the spatial and temporal arrangement of inhibitory and growth-promoting molecules in relation to growth-associated protein 43-positive (GAP43+) neurons. Spontaneous cortical sprouting was maximal in pericontused regions at 7 and 14 days after injury but absent by 28 days. Perineuronal nets containing CSPGs were reduced at 7 days after injury in the pericontused region (p < 0.05), which was commensurate with a reduction in extracellular CSPGs. Sprouting was restricted to the perineuronal nets and CSPG-deficient regions at 7 days, indicating that the pericontused region is temporarily and spatially permissive to new growth. At this time point, GAP43+ neurons were associated with brain regions containing cells positive for polysialic acid neural cell adhesion molecule but not with fibronectin-positive cells. Brain-derived neurotrophic factor was reduced in the immediate pericontused region at 7 days. Along with prior Western blot evidence, these data Suggest that a lowered intrinsic growth stimulus, together with a later return of growth-inhibitory CSPGs, may contribute to the ultimate disappearance of sprouting neurons after traumatic brain injury.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据