4.6 Article

The swimming test is effective for evaluating spasticity after contusive spinal cord injury

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 12, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0171937

关键词

-

资金

  1. KAKENHI from the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology of Japan (MEXT) [24300197, 15H03048]
  2. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [16K16457, 15H03048] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Spasticity is a frequent chronic complication in individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI). However, the severity of spasticity varies in patients with SCI. Therefore, an evaluation method is needed to determine the severity of spasticity. We used a contusive SCI model that is suitable for clinical translation. In this study, we examined the feasibility of the swimming test and an EMG for evaluating spasticity in a contusive SCI rat model. Sprague-Dawley rats received an injury at the 8th thoracic vertebra. Swimming tests were performed 3 to 6 weeks after SCI induction. We placed the SCI rats into spasticity-strong or spasticity-weak groups based on the frequency of spastic behavior during the swimming test. Subsequently, we recorded the Hoffman reflex (H-reflex) and examined the immunoreactivity of serotonin (5HT) and its receptor (5-HT2A) in the spinal tissues of the SCI rats. The spasticity-strong group had significantly decreased rate-dependent depression of the H-reflex compared to the spasticity-weak group. The area of 5-HT2A receptor immunoreactivity was significantly increased in the spasticity-strong group. Thus, both electrophysiological and histological evaluations indicate that the spasticity-strong group presented with a more severe upper motor neuron syndrome. We also observed the groups in their cages for 20 hours. Our results suggest that the swimming test provides an accurate evaluation of spasticity in this contusive SCI model. We believe that the swimming test is an effective method for evaluating spastic behaviors and developing treatments targeting spasticity after SCI.

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