4.6 Article

In vivo near-infrared fluorescence imaging of matrix metalloproteinase activity after cerebral ischemia

期刊

JOURNAL OF CEREBRAL BLOOD FLOW AND METABOLISM
卷 29, 期 7, 页码 1284-1292

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1038/jcbfm.2009.51

关键词

cerebral ischemia; imaging; inflammation; metalloproteinases; near-infrared fluorescence imaging; stroke

资金

  1. European Community's Seventh Framework Programme [FP7/2007-2013]
  2. European Stroke Network [201024, 202213]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs) have been implicated in the pathophysiology of cerebral ischemia. In this study, we explored whether MMP activity can be visualized by noninvasive near-infrared fluorescence (NIRF) imaging using an MMP-activatable probe in a mouse model of stroke. C57BI6 mice were subjected to transient middle cerebral artery occlusion (MCAO) or sham operation. Noninvasive NIRF imaging was performed 24 h after probe injection, and target-to-background ratios (TBRs) between the two hemispheres were determined. TBRs were significantly higher in MCAO mice injected with the MMP-activatable probe than in sham-operated mice and in MCAO mice that were injected with the nonactivatable probe as controls. Treatment with an MMP inhibitor resulted in significantly lower TBRs and lesion volumes compared to injection of vehicle. To test the contribution of MMP-9 to the fluorescence signal, MMP9-deficient (MMP9(-/-)) mice and wild-type controls were subjected to MCAO of different durations to attain comparable lesion volumes. TBRs were significantly lower in MMP9(-/-) mice, suggesting a substantial contribution of MMP-9 activity to the signal. Our study shows that MMP activity after cerebral ischemia can be imaged noninvasively with NIRF using an MMP-activatable probe, which might be a useful tool to study MMP activity in the pathophysiology of the disease. Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow & Metabolism (2009) 29, 1284-1292; doi: 10.1038/jcbfm.2009.51; published online 6 May 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