4.5 Article

HEIGHTENING OF THE STRESS RESPONSE DURING THE FIRST WEEKS AFTER A MILD TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY

期刊

NEUROSCIENCE
卷 178, 期 -, 页码 147-158

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2011.01.028

关键词

corticosterone; fluid percussion injury; dexamethasone; adrenocorticotropic hormone; traumatic brain injury and stress

资金

  1. NINDS award [NS6190]
  2. UCLA Brain Injury Research Center

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The effects of a mild traumatic brain injury range from white matter disruption to affective disorders. We set out to determine the response to restraint-induced stress after a mild fluid-percussion injury (FPI), an experimental model for brain injury. Hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis regulation of corticosterone (CORT) and adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) was determined during the first post-injury weeks, which corresponds to the same time period when rehabilitative exercise has been shown to be ineffective after a mild FPI. Adult male rats underwent either an FPI or sham injury. Additional rats were only exposed to anesthesia. HPA regulation was evaluated by measuring the effects of dexamethasone (DEX) treatment on CORT and ACTH. Tail vein blood was collected following 30-min restraint stress, at post-injury days (PID) 1, 7 and 14, prior to (0 min) and at 30, 60, 90 and 120 min after stress onset. Results from these studies indicate that the stress response was significantly more pronounced after FPI in that CORT and ACTH restraint-induced increases were more pronounced and longer lasting compared to controls. DEX suppression of CORT and ACTH was observed in all groups, suggesting that stress hyper-responsiveness after mild FPI is not attributable to reduced sensitivity of CORT feedback regulation. The increased sensitivity to stressful events in the first two post-injury weeks after a mild FPI may have a negative impact on early rehabilitative therapies. (c) 2011 IBRO. Published by Elsevier 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

4.5
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