4.6 Article

NNZ-2566, a glypromate analog, attenuates brain ischemia-induced non-convulsive seizures in rats

期刊

JOURNAL OF CEREBRAL BLOOD FLOW AND METABOLISM
卷 29, 期 12, 页码 1924-1932

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1038/jcbfm.2009.109

关键词

brain ischemia; EEG; NNZ-2566; rats; seizures

资金

  1. CRADA (Cooperative Research and Development Agreement) with Neuren Pharmaceuticals Ltd. [W81XWH-050074]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ischemic and traumatic brain injuries often induce non-convulsive seizures (NCSs), which likely contribute to the worsening of neurological outcomes. Here, we evaluated the effect of glycyl-L-methylprolyl-L-glutamic acid (NNZ-2566) to lessen the severity of NCSs caused by permanent middle cerebral artery occlusion (pMCAo). Continuous electroencephalographic recordings were performed in rats during pMCAo. Glycyl-L-methylprolyl-L-glutamic acid (3, 10, or 100 mg/kg bolus followed by an infusion of a fixed dose of 3 mg/kg per hour for 12 h) was delivered at 20 mins after pMCAo (before the first NCS event) or delayed until immediately after the first NCS event occurred. Control rats received pMCAo and saline treatment. The results revealed that 91% of the saline-treated animals had NCSs (23 episodes per rat and 1238 secs per rat) with an onset latency of 35 mins after injury. When NNZ-2566 was administered before the NCS events, it dose-dependently reduced the NCS incidence to 36%-80%, decreased NCS frequency to 5-16 episodes per rat, and shortened the total duration of NCS to 251-706 secs per rat. The two high doses significantly reduced the infarct volume by 28%-30%. Delayed treatment also attenuated NCS duration but had no effect on the infarct volume. Results indicate that NNZ-2566 possesses a unique therapeutic potential as a safe prophylactic agent that synergistically provides neuroprotection and reduces injury-induced seizures. Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow & Metabolism (2009) 29, 1924-1932; doi:10.1038/jcbfm.2009.109; published online 29 July 2009

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

4.6
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