4.4 Article

Myelinated Ah-type trigeminal ganglion neurons in female rats: neuroexcitability, chemosensitivity to histamine, and potential clinical impact

期刊

NEUROSCIENCE LETTERS
卷 567, 期 -, 页码 74-79

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.neulet.2014.03.039

关键词

Neuroexcitability; Myelination; Ion channel; Trigeminal ganglion neuron; Whole-cell patch

资金

  1. Natural Science Foundation of Heilongjiang Province of the people's Republic of China

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Migraine is a chronic neurological disorder characterized by recurrent moderate-to-severe headaches often associated with numerous autonomic nervous system symptoms, and it is more prevalent in women. To fully understand the underlying mechanism, standard electrophysiology was performed with trigeminal ganglion neurons (TGNs) isolated from adult rats of both genders using the whole-cell patch clamp technique to test the distribution, neuroexcitability, and chemosensitivity to histamine. In addition to traditionally classified A- and C-type TGNs, myelinated Ah-type TGNs were also observed in females. The electrophysiological features showed low firing threshold and the capability to fire repetitively upon stimulation. Ah-type neurons also functionally expressed persistent1TX-R Na+ channels with more hyperpolarized activating voltage. Iberiotoxin and NS11021 significantly altered the discharge profiles of Ah-type TGNs. Finally, Ah-type TGNs showed a more potent reaction to histamine, with relatively larger inward currents and membrane depolarization compared with C-types. These data provide evidence of the gender-specific distribution of myelinated Ah-type TGNs in adult female rats, characterized by a low threshold and high frequency of firing that are at least partially attributable to persistent TTX-R Na+ and BK-KCa channel expression and potent chemosensitivity to histamine, suggesting that Ah-type TGNs may play a key role in gender differences in migraine. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.4
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