4.7 Article

Characterisation of GFAP-Expressing Glial Cells in the Dorsal Root Ganglion after Spared Nerve Injury

Journal

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijms242115559

Keywords

GFAP; satellite glial cells; non-myelinating Schwann cells; nerve injury; dorsal root ganglion; neuropathic pain

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study demonstrates an increased expression of GFAP in two subpopulations of glial cells within the DRG after nerve injury: GFAP+ FABP7+ SGCs and GFAP+ FABP7- nmSCs. This sheds light on the specificity of GFAP as an SGC marker after SNI.
Satellite glial cells (SGCs), enveloping primary sensory neurons' somas in the dorsal root ganglion (DRG), contribute to neuropathic pain upon nerve injury. Glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) serves as an SGC activation marker, though its DRG satellite cell specificity is debated. We employed the hGFAP-CFP transgenic mouse line, designed for astrocyte studies, to explore its expression within the peripheral nervous system (PNS) after spared nerve injury (SNI). We used diverse immunostaining techniques, Western blot analysis, and electrophysiology to evaluate GFAP+ cell changes. Post-SNI, GFAP+ cell numbers increased without proliferation, and were found near injured ATF3+ neurons. GFAP+ FABP7+ SGCs increased, yet 75.5% of DRG GFAP+ cells lacked FABP7 expression. This suggests a significant subset of GFAP+ cells are non-myelinating Schwann cells (nmSC), indicated by their presence in the dorsal root but not in the ventral root which lacks unmyelinated fibres. Additionally, patch clamp recordings from GFAP+ FABP7-cells lacked SGC-specific Kir4.1 currents, instead displaying outward Kv currents expressing Kv1.1 and Kv1.6 channels specific to nmSCs. In conclusion, this study demonstrates increased GFAP expression in two DRG glial cell subpopulations post-SNI: GFAP+ FABP7+ SGCs and GFAP+ FABP7- nmSCs, shedding light on GFAP's specificity as an SGC marker after SNI.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available