4.5 Article

Protective effects of cold spinoplegia with fasudil against ischemic spinal cord injury in rabbits

期刊

JOURNAL OF VASCULAR SURGERY
卷 51, 期 2, 页码 445-452

出版社

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2009.10.081

关键词

-

资金

  1. Japanese Ministry of Education, Science, Sports, Culture, and Technology, Tokyo, Japan [20591650]
  2. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [20591650] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: Paraplegia remains a serious complication after surgical repair of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms. The aim of this study was to evaluate the neuroprotective efficacy of fasudil, a Rho kinase (ROCK) inhibitor, by reducing the number of infiltrating cells in the ventral horn and increasing the induction of eNOS against ischemic spinal cord injury in rabbits. Methods: Eighteen Japanese white rabbits were divided into three groups: saline (group 1, n = 7, VC) and fasudil (group 2, n = 6, VC) were immediately infused into the isolated segmental lumbar arteries over 30 seconds after aortic clamping. Group 3 (n = 5) was the sham-operated group. Hind limb function was evaluated 4 and 8 hours, and I and 2 days after 15 minutes of transient ischemia. Cell damage was analyzed by hematoxylin and eosin staining and temporal profiles of endothelial nitric oxide synthase immunoreactivity were performed. The number of intact motor neuron cells and infiltrating cells in the ventral horn were compared. Results: Two days after reperfusion, group 2 and group 3 showed better neurologic function, a greater number of intact motor neuron cells, and a smaller number of infiltrating cells in the ventral horn than group 1. The induction of endothelial nitric oxide synthase (eNOS) was prolonged tip to 2 days after reperfusion in group 2. Conclusion: These results indicate that fasudil has neuroprotective effects against ischemic spinal cord injury, in rabbits by reducing the number of infiltrating cells in the ventral horn and prolonging the expression of eNOS. (J Vasc Surg 2010; 51:445-52.)

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

4.5
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